Dreams and Things
Ask me things!
It's me!
My face!
Tagged:Reference
Tagged:Quotes
Archive
Posted on 18th Sep at 1:24 AM, with 4,821 notes

for-the-other-shoe:

hobbitkaiju:

vrabia:

I lost it at The Backstreet Boys

why have I never heard of this person before

WHY DOESN’T THIS HAVE MORE NOTES

ENYAAAA AAAAAH THIS IS GREAT

Posted on 10th Sep at 3:39 AM, with 3,757 notes
protect women of color at all costs
Posted on 2nd Sep at 2:54 AM, with 58,194 notes

roachpatrol:

voxclara:

savanna:

roman-numerals:

yiffstrider:

amporeon:

terraparticle:

amporeon:

IMPORTANT: So they had these cards in the women’s restrooms at this doctor’s office that I was at. I’m really happy that they put them in there because it makes it easier for a woman to escape an abusive relationship without the abuser expecting anything. It gives me hope when I see things like this.

Oh yes, because women are never abusers.

I never said that they can’t/ aren’t. I’m well aware that some women are. I was just trying to talk about a positive thing that I found in a restroom. Don’t turn my post into something that it’s not. God fucking damn it, it’s like you can’t talk about something positive on this site without someone trying to ruin it or twist the original posters words.

Thank you so much for the positive post, and the VERY true words at the asshole commenting on your post. This is the exact reason why I don’t like this website sometimes. Christ.

If you have to qualify Situation A with “but Situation B happens, too,” do you actually give a shit about Situation B? Or are you looking for ways to derail Situation A?

^

40% of domestic violence is experienced by men, do you suppose they also put these cards in the men’s restroom?

Wouldn’t seeing these cards in the restroom alert abusers that there were probably the same cards in the other gender restroom, possibly making them more violent and cutting off their partner even more from resources that could help them?

This seems ill thought out. Unless, of course, they are only in the women’s restroom. In which case they are ignoring 40% of domestic violence victims. I wonder why.

getting really tired of this 40% myth and how frequently everyone scrambles to believe it because they want to look reasonable and fair.

While some people may believe that there is a higher reported incidence of women experiencing violence by their male partners due to men underreporting when they are victims, the reality is the opposite. In 2008, 72 percent of the intimate partner violence against males and 49 percent of the intimate partner violence against females was reported to police.Catalano, Smith, Snyder, & Rand (2009). Bureau of Justice Statistics Selected Findings: Female Victims of Domestic Violence. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, NCJ 228356.

Researcher Elspeth McInnes…  recounts some of her research that showed that when men talked about women’s violence against men, some cited abuse as not having a hot meal on the table, not having the children bathed before bed, or women spending money on gambling or shopping. At the more severe end of the spectrum, they nominated verbal and emotional violence as abuse. Then, a tiny minority documented physical abuse, and an even smaller minority named sexual abuse. 

“Women were talking about being run over, being drugged and raped at knifepoint, having their children dangled over high rise balconies till they did as they were told and of course you get verbal and emotional violence,” says McInnes. “When we were talking about physical violence against men, one of the worst examples was that she banged his head with the cupboard door – which isn’t good – but the sheer level of fear, harm and terror that women talked about was simply not present in what the men’s data showed.” 

The vast majority of domestic assaults are committed by men. Even when men are victimized, 10% are assaulted by another man. In contrast, only 2% of women who are victimized are assaulted by another woman.2

Two studies have found that at least 40% of police officer families experience domestic violence, (1, 2) in contrast to 10% of families in the general population.(3) A third study of older and more experienced officers found a rate of 24% (4), indicating that domestic violence is 2-4 times more common among police families than American families in general.

in conclusion while domestic abuse hotlines in men’s bathrooms would be great too, women are the majority of victims of violent, life-threatening domestic abuse by a lot more than 40%, and men are still the majority of perpetrators of violent, life threatening domestic abuse, even to other men and boys. this is not a remotely equivalent situation.

using abused men and boys to prop up the myth that women abuse men right back nearly as much is toxic, abhorrent nonsense. we need to cut it the fuck out. 

Posted on 26th Aug at 8:01 PM, with 156,629 notes

shoes-are-for-the-weak:

digg:

BREAKING: DISNEYLAND NO LONGER HAPPIEST PLACE ON EARTH

Let me be there!!

Posted on 25th Aug at 8:01 PM, with 54,213 notes

beeishappy:

Phillip Agnew of The Dream Defenders. The Dream Defenders is a human rights organization that’s building leadership and power among young people of colour to challenge racism in their communities.Phillip Agnew on All In

Posted on 24th Aug at 8:00 PM, with 59,268 notes
theroguefeminist:

elliedoh:

So when Miley Cyrus or Katy Perry bring black girls on stage, dance with them, acknowledge their figures- it’s offensive and appropriating. But, when Nicki Minaj makes an entire video focusing around black girl’s asses and asserts her power, reduces these women to objects and flaunts her authority it’s YAAASSSSS NICKI SERVE IT. Is that because she’s black? So it’s okay for people of the same race to dance with each other but someone who does not share the same levels of melanin enters the picture, they’re doing something wrong? …idgi 

You’re completely ignoring context. In Lily Allen’s Hard out Here video, she literally says, “I don’t shake my ass cause I have a brain” as Black women shake their asses in her video. She is literally degrading the Black women who shake their asses in the media. The song also uses references to Black rappers (i.e. the title of the song referencing the rap song “Hard out Here for a Pimp” and her lyric “bragging ‘bout my cars or talking ‘bout my chains”), suggesting that Black rappers are more sexist than white male musicians (which isn’t true, there’s lots of sexism in all music genres) and also suggest the source of sexism in the music industry is Black people (Black male rappers and twerking Black female dancers).
In contrast, Nicki Minaj is reclaiming a song (Baby Got Back) that was made by a Black male rapper who celebrated (but also objectified) Black female bodies. Throughout her song, Nicki raps like a man would, talking about her sexual conquests with men and the size of their dicks, almost as a way of doing to men what they have done to women (objectifying their dicks as Sir Mix A Lot objectified Black women’s asses and many other men objectify women’s vaginas). She also brags about her sexual prowess and stays in control and aggressive in the video (she goes as far as cutting a banana representing a dick and slapping Drake’s hand away—the video critiques the male gaze). The target of mockery and disparagement in Nicki’s video is men and the male gaze, and the video works to reclaim agency from it.
In what way is Nicki asserting power over her dancers? In her video, she twerks along side her back up dancers and dances with them and interacts with them on the same level. She is just as scantily clad as they are. Lily Allen, however, stays fully covered in her video, does not dance provocatively, and thus contrasts her own pure and respectable femininity with the Black women, using their twerking and scantily clad bodies as an example of “bad” female sexuality and femininity—of women “objectifying themselves.” This is racist because it frames Black female sexuality as lesser than white femininity and antithetical to feminism.
In summary: Nicki’s video is very much a celebration of female Black beauty and sexuality coming from a Black woman. Conversely, Lilly Allen’s is using Black women as props to frame them as a vile or bad form of sexuality or being too sexual to prop up her own feminism.
So you might say, “what about Miley Cyrus? she twerks along side her Black background dancers too!” But here’s the problem: Miley Cyrus continually appropriates Black culture and also uses Black women as props. It does matter that these artists are white because in these cases the point of including the Black women is either to, in Lily Allen’s case, offset Black sexuality/femininity as too sexual or bad in comparison with her white femininity/feminism, or, in the case of Miley Cyrus, to get “street cred” and exotify her own sexuality by appropriating Black culture and using Black people as props to do so. See this analysis of Lily Allen’s Hard Out Here video and this analysis of Miley Cyrus by Black people who know a lot more about this than I do.
I haven’t seen anything about Katy Perry using Black dancers. I’ve just seen criticisms of her appropriating AAVE and other PoC cultures. So I’m not sure why you brought her up, but maybe I just haven’t seen the videos in question.
Either way, it’s not like white artists having a diverse cast of back up dancers is a bad thing automatically. Here is an example of a white artist using back up dancers of other races without objectifying them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ilh1ewceco (notice this artist tackles the same issue as Lily Allen—sexism/objectification in the media—without being misogynist and racist toward other women). But the examples of Lily Allen and Miley Cyrus ARE racist and Nicki Minaj’s video isn’t the same as theirs.

theroguefeminist:

elliedoh:

So when Miley Cyrus or Katy Perry bring black girls on stage, dance with them, acknowledge their figures- it’s offensive and appropriating. But, when Nicki Minaj makes an entire video focusing around black girl’s asses and asserts her power, reduces these women to objects and flaunts her authority it’s YAAASSSSS NICKI SERVE IT. Is that because she’s black? So it’s okay for people of the same race to dance with each other but someone who does not share the same levels of melanin enters the picture, they’re doing something wrong? …idgi 

You’re completely ignoring context. In Lily Allen’s Hard out Here video, she literally says, “I don’t shake my ass cause I have a brain” as Black women shake their asses in her video. She is literally degrading the Black women who shake their asses in the media. The song also uses references to Black rappers (i.e. the title of the song referencing the rap song “Hard out Here for a Pimp” and her lyric “bragging ‘bout my cars or talking ‘bout my chains”), suggesting that Black rappers are more sexist than white male musicians (which isn’t true, there’s lots of sexism in all music genres) and also suggest the source of sexism in the music industry is Black people (Black male rappers and twerking Black female dancers).

In contrast, Nicki Minaj is reclaiming a song (Baby Got Back) that was made by a Black male rapper who celebrated (but also objectified) Black female bodies. Throughout her song, Nicki raps like a man would, talking about her sexual conquests with men and the size of their dicks, almost as a way of doing to men what they have done to women (objectifying their dicks as Sir Mix A Lot objectified Black women’s asses and many other men objectify women’s vaginas). She also brags about her sexual prowess and stays in control and aggressive in the video (she goes as far as cutting a banana representing a dick and slapping Drake’s hand away—the video critiques the male gaze). The target of mockery and disparagement in Nicki’s video is men and the male gaze, and the video works to reclaim agency from it.

In what way is Nicki asserting power over her dancers? In her video, she twerks along side her back up dancers and dances with them and interacts with them on the same level. She is just as scantily clad as they are. Lily Allen, however, stays fully covered in her video, does not dance provocatively, and thus contrasts her own pure and respectable femininity with the Black women, using their twerking and scantily clad bodies as an example of “bad” female sexuality and femininity—of women “objectifying themselves.” This is racist because it frames Black female sexuality as lesser than white femininity and antithetical to feminism.

In summary: Nicki’s video is very much a celebration of female Black beauty and sexuality coming from a Black woman. Conversely, Lilly Allen’s is using Black women as props to frame them as a vile or bad form of sexuality or being too sexual to prop up her own feminism.

So you might say, “what about Miley Cyrus? she twerks along side her Black background dancers too!” But here’s the problem: Miley Cyrus continually appropriates Black culture and also uses Black women as props. It does matter that these artists are white because in these cases the point of including the Black women is either to, in Lily Allen’s case, offset Black sexuality/femininity as too sexual or bad in comparison with her white femininity/feminism, or, in the case of Miley Cyrus, to get “street cred” and exotify her own sexuality by appropriating Black culture and using Black people as props to do so. See this analysis of Lily Allen’s Hard Out Here video and this analysis of Miley Cyrus by Black people who know a lot more about this than I do.

I haven’t seen anything about Katy Perry using Black dancers. I’ve just seen criticisms of her appropriating AAVE and other PoC cultures. So I’m not sure why you brought her up, but maybe I just haven’t seen the videos in question.

Either way, it’s not like white artists having a diverse cast of back up dancers is a bad thing automatically. Here is an example of a white artist using back up dancers of other races without objectifying them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ilh1ewceco (notice this artist tackles the same issue as Lily Allen—sexism/objectification in the media—without being misogynist and racist toward other women). But the examples of Lily Allen and Miley Cyrus ARE racist and Nicki Minaj’s video isn’t the same as theirs.

Posted on 23rd Aug at 8:01 PM, with 6,532 notes
Words and concepts used in asexual communities

anagnori:

A reference for people who are confused. I’ve also included words from aromantic discourse because of the overlap between the two communities. If I forgot anything, or if a definition is wrong, let me know and I’ll add it to the list.

Read More

Posted on 22nd Aug at 9:07 PM, with 138,642 notes

paulamaf2013:

socialjusticekoolaid:

What they won’t show you on CNN tonight: Ferguson residents line a parade of roses down W Florissant, leading to where Mike Brown was taken from this world. #staywoke #powerful #insolidarity 

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOST

Posted on 22nd Aug at 8:01 PM, with 23,359 notes

roachpatrol:

3liza:

castromarketsfca:

Joseph Simons

excellent musculature reference in unusual poses

thank you

Posted on 21st Aug at 8:01 PM, with 38 notes

leighalanna:

thehowlingwolf:

So even though I consider myself a radical feminist, I’m still a little confused about what radfems think about legalizing prostitution?

I honestly have no opinion on this atm because I’m too uneducated.

I’ve heard people say it would be bad, that it would just be exploiting women further than they already are, but then I’ve heard people say that it would most likely eliminate abusive pimps and kidnappings….not sure how true those things are, again, just people’s opinions I’ve heard.

Please inform me.

hi! consider me your helpful informo-pixie, here to guide you through “thinking about sex work as a feminist.” i’m here to help! 

a lot of your fellow radical feminists (although not all — there are certainly women who claim the label of radical feminist without subscribing to these ideas) will have a lot to say about how all sex work, but usually focusing on full service sex work and pornography especially, is inherently exploitative, damaging, and demeaning to the people who do it. And, they sort of have a point. It can be pretty horrible to wake in the morning and know that if you don’t go out to a job you hate, if you don’t put up with people for hours and hours who think you’re less than human and that they have a right to treat you any way they wish, that you’ll be denied a place to live, food to eat, and medical care you might need to survive. Demeaning is right. But while what I described does apply to sex work, it also applies to any waged labor while we live in a capitalist society that is more than all right with allowing people to literally die when plentiful resources are available. There’s nothing about that that is unique to sex work. And if you try to treat the “symptom” of specifically sex work being demeaning and inherently coercive by getting rid of it, without treating the illness of “dangerous and violent capitalism,” then all you are doing is a) stigmatizing sex workers by singling them out as somehow more responsible for this shitty system (as laborers!) than everyone else and b) driving sex workers in (or further in) to poverty by depriving them of work. Which, we’ve established, is necessary in order to obtain food

But let’s say, that you think that sex work is problematic for other reasons. Say, someone told you that the vast, vast majority of people in the sex trades are not there by choice (but not in the capitalism-is-inherently-coercive sort of way), and it is only a tiny privileged few who have an in any way tolerable experience. 

Well. The first thing you need to know is that your information? Is pretty much dead wrong. And collected by extremely unscrupulous people who have built careers profiting from the labor of (rescued) sex workers. (Sound familiar?) 

But, let’s pretend, for a second, that the basic premise is true — that sex work is unmitigatedly terrible for most of the people in it, and that most of us would leave if we were able. The absolutely best thing you can do for sex workers in those circumstances is to advocate for the decriminalization and destigmatization of sex work. Not regulation, not legalization, which end up being instruments of government violence, and a means to arbitrarily enforce regulatory laws only on workers the state feels like targeting (such as trans women, WOC, outdoor workers, etc).  Read up on the Contagious Diseases Acts if you want an example from the past, and check out the ridiculous restrictions on the people who work legally in Nevada brothels (not to mention how much money, precisely because of the regulations, goes into the manager’s pocket, not the worker’s). And certainly not end demand models (like the Swedish Model or the Nordic Model), which officially criminalize only the client and not the provider. These models might sound sort of good, but they serve, in practice, to increase violence against sex workers and to bar them from accessing necessary services. (You can check my “end demand” and “end demand model” tags for times when I’ve gone into the mechanics of this in more detail.) These models do not achieve their stated goals — they do not drive down the quantity of sex trade transactions that happen, and they make it more difficult for women to exit the industry that want to, not less, and they make working much less safe. This is true whether sex workers are working because they want to, or because they are being forced to — workers who fall under the definition of being trafficked are also benefited by decriminalization and harmed by criminalization. 

It’s also important to remember too, that, when people do choose sex work, they don’t always choose because it’s the best job they could ever think of having ever. A lot of people choose to do sex work because it is the best or only way to get their needs met, either because they can’t get hired working civilian jobs (because they’re working undocumented, or because racial or transmisogynistic oppression makes employers pass them over for opportunities), or because they have responsibilities or disabilities (or both!) that make the requirements of civilian jobs unmanageable (even if you don’t like sex work, it tends to have much lower barriers to entry than other work, can be much more flexible in terms of what and how many hours you need to work, and can get your expenses covered faster than most civilian jobs, so that you have time to meet your other responsibilities, like say, providing childcare).  And so when you work towards making the sex industry disappear before you make hostage-holding capitalism disappear, you are removing a source of necessary income from the sex workers who are already the most vulnerable. 

It’s a little late, and I know I haven’t covered everything, but I do think that educating people who are looking to get educated is an important task, so I would love it if you came back on this post with any questions or concerns you have about it. I’ll be happy to try and clear anything else up for you.

Posted on 20th Aug at 8:00 PM, with 88,719 notes

liz-pls:

I’m only sharing tweets for those who are not on twitter and can’t see how passionate and outraged journalists are as they tweet from #Ferguson.

If you are on Twitter, here’s a good roster of people to follow if you want to keep updated.

Start
00:00 AM