Posts tagged misogyny
Posts tagged misogyny
Pick up your bass guitar, your tambourine, and your mixing board— we’re about to make the hate rock the fuck out.
Today, a questionnaire has been roaming around the interwebs that originated from fraternity brothers at Sigma Phi Epsilon at the University of Vermont. Check out Sarah’s post about the incident on the SAFER blog.
SAFER was sent a copy of the questionnaire, which mostly consists of benign questions like name, birthday major, amount of time with SigEp and favorite SigEp memories, hobbies, future goals, and so on. But the last question is causing some outrage: “If you could rape someone, who would it be?”
This petition was started last night by “Feminists from UVM” and already has nearly 500 signatures. The petition description says the following:
This egregious expression of rape culture is only the most recent example of systemic sexism at UVM. The past year alone has witnessed rape, multiple sexual assaults, and anti-abortion chalking in public spaces. While the university administration has laid off long-time Women’s and Gender Studies faculty and supported sexist institutions like Sigma Phi Epsilon, it has refused to take concerted action to combat sexism and rape culture. We demand that instead of diverting resources into vast salaries for its administrators, UVM should launch an aggressive campaign against sexism and rape culture, and it should expand institutions such as Women’s and Gender Studies and the Women’s Center at UVM. Furthermore, UVM must immediately disband Sigma Phi Epsilon. An institution that discusses who it wants to rape has no place at UVM or in the Burlington community.
Sign the UVM petition and look for updates over at FedUp Vermont, a local grassroots feminist organization.
(Source: The SAFER Blog)
Middle aged men explain why middle aged men know more about women’s health than women. I lul’d.
I love Nick Offerman.
I’ve seen this goddam commercial for three years, and it pisses me off more and more each time.
The basic premise of the commercial is that the window tinting done by this business is so good that a straight man would mistake transwomen as “real” women. In the ad over-pumped dudebros in a large truck pull up to a car and start cat-calling at what they assume to be attractive women in the car next to them. When the women roll down the window it is revealed that they are in fact not women, but men in wigs. The dudebros then make disgusted faces.
This commercial is not only insulting and misogynistic, but it is also very hurtful. It continues a long tradition of making trans people a punch line.
Please, people of San Marcos and Central Texas, boycott this business for this hurtful commercial that they have gotten away with showing since 2008.
This is hormonal birth control.
As you can see on the box, you take exactly one pill per day. To make sure it works, you need to take one pill every day at the same time, or it stops working. You take only one pill, and you keep taking them regardless of what you are doing that day.
Hormonal birth control can be used to treat a lot of different diseases, like anemia caused by excessive menstruation. It is a prescription medication that can cost around $15-50 a month. Because it is a prescription medication, it should be covered by insurance, as it treats legitimate health problems.
This is Viagra.
It, too, can treat legitimate health problems like altitude sickness and pulmonary hypertension, but it is usually prescribed for erectile dysfunction. Unlike the Pill, Viagra is taken every time you want to have sex. A lot of health insurance companies cover Viagra, so it costs about as much as your co-pay.
This is a condom.
It is not a prescription medication, and has no health benefits (besides the prevention of STIs and pregnancy). Like Viagra, you must use one before you have sex: indeed, before each sex act. They cost about a dollar per condom.
This is Sandra Fluke.
She testified before a small, Democrat-led hearing after she was cut out of the actual birth control/insurance discussion. Her testimony was about a friend of hers who, because her insurance did not cover birth control, lost an ovary due to an ovarian cyst.
This somehow translates into “I, myself, personally, am having so much sex I can’t afford birth control, and so I want the government to pay for it.”
This is wrong for multiple reasons.
- It was about a friend, not her. To say her testimony was about her personally is factually incorrect.
- Sex had nothing to do with the testimony - her friend lost an ovary because of medical condition that was left untreated. A medical condition that was completely treatable, but wasn’t, because her insurance wouldn’t cover it. To say that her testimony was about her being “a slut” or “a prostitute” is factually incorrect.
- Even if she was having loads of sex, she would still only have one pill a day, not one pill per sex act, so to say “I’m having so much sex I can’t afford birth control” is completely erroneous. The Pill is not Viagra or condoms. To say that she is such “a slut” that she constantly needs more pills is factually incorrect.
- The current political debate is not “should the government pay for birth control?” The debate is “should insurance companies, that people and their employers pay for, on their own, be required to cover birth control?” To say that Sandra Fluke wants the government to pay for her birth control is factually incorrect.
- Religious organizations do not want to have birth control covered by their insurance, even for employees not of their faith, even if their employees never actually use their insurance to cover birth control. By this logic, they should also not pay their employees, because they could use that money to pay for birth control out of pocket. To say that this issue is about religious freedom and not about women’s health is disingenuous, as Ms. Fluke’s testimony demonstrates.
Hopefully this makes things a little clearer.
BBC America, blogging from the dr who convention (via vinegarwilliams)
Jesus, Whovians. I am not pleased.
Aaaaaaaaand here is the REAL reason why there’s never been a female Doctor, probably never will be, and why I’m not too inclined to watch this show
Melissa McEwan, of course, on the terrible bargain. My life as a woman, as a queer person, as a fat person, is not your thought experiment. (via sanitywatchers)
This really struck a chord. Even my boyfriend, feminist that he is, can have this reaction when I’m in tears after an NPR story. This is my fucking life. Excuse me if I can’t remove the personal.
I reblogged this before, but I like it a lot so I’m reblogging it again.
This whole thing is the reason why confrontations with people that I consider friends always leaves me crying. Like, I get so angry and so flustered because it’s not just some stupid game to me, like it is to them. It’s something that’s real and personal.
I will always reblog this.
Which is why I don’t argue with my family anymore. Same-sex marriage, abortion, reproductive rights, equal pay, etc. are not just some political talking point, they affect my life.
I am so sick of people (my parents) telling me that people won’t take me seriously if I get emotional, that I have to remain calm to be convincing.
Years of having my concerns dismissed because I’m emotional has led to an extreme aversion to any form of confrontation. Instead of arguing my point, I just shut down. I don’t even try. I get quiet and I can feel myself pulling inwards, trying to be as small as possible.
And then I go cry somewhere and hate everyone.
But, uh, Australian whites are still racist as fuck
Australian whites are still privileged as fuck
(noted by the room full of government officials who, I don’t know if you noticed, WERE ALL FUCKING WHITE)
So the whole time I look at her rant
I just can’t help but be like
because I bet she goes around sideeyeing non-white populations and does essentially the same thing she is berating this man for,
and yes, I’m a woman
but I’m still black
so she’s only considering half of my problems
I mean if you look her up, a lot of her viewpoints are highly problematic.
Not to mention she’s against marriage equality.
People should do their research.
Some examples of how “men’s rights activists” are threatening and intimidating feminists. There is absolutely no justification for this kind of behavior, and I urge all anti-feminist men (and anti-feminist others) to at the very least not stoop to the level of threatening atrocities or publishing someone’s personal information. I may not agree with your points of contention when it comes to the feminist movement, but that will never cause me to harm you or your family. AVFM and similar MRA groups need to be stopped, for the safety of society as a whole.
From “A Good Men’s Rights Movement is Hard to Find” by Jaclyn Friedman