anonymous asked:

its impossible to be racist towards white people lmao.

um no. it’s completely possible.
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.”
Hell. White people on Tumblr are racist against whites. “Cis White Males!!”
“White males need to die!!” “Cis White Males are the cause of every issue!!”
I laugh at everyones hate against cis white males when this is a so called “feminist” and “accepting loving community!”
the advocacy of women’s rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.”
Equality to men. EQUALITY TO MEN. fucking Tumblr Femnazis claim to be femminists and go and wish death upon *usually* their race. you all dont support *gender equality* either. all of you hate on CIS people and only care about the trans/genderqueer etc which i understand. BUT, I THOUGHT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO BE PROMOTING LOVE AND EQUALITY TO ALL GENDERS! GUESS WHAT! THAT INCLUDES MALES. ftm? NO. GUESS WHAT, NOT EVERYONE IS A FUCKING SPECIAL SNOWFLAKE, and agree with their assigned gender. hating cis, is not gender equality. hating males is not feminism, its sexism. hating whites is not racial equality, its racism. all of this is not promoting equality, its fucking endorsing it. WHY AM I NOT REBLOGGING A LOT OF FERGUSON? because most posts have some fucking unnecessary comment about cis white males. YOU ALL ARE FIGHTING FIRE WITH FIRE AND YOU DONT EVEN NOTICE.
Do i believe i should speak for the blacks of Ferguson?
Fuck no. I have no idea what it feels like to be black. i grew up in a “ghetto” neighborhood, barely making it by in lower middle class. But that is a universal thing, all races have to struggle with poverty. People think that because im white that i live in a huge house worth half a million dollars. Haha. I barely have money for food. Fuck you for making the assumption that because im White i get benefits. This is common, but not too common in a lot of places in America. In fact, my family gets denied for financial benefits because we are not immigrants, minorities, or have small children. Stop assuming that im a (race) that im (positive or negative adjective here)
You all are racist, sexist, and just really fucking stupid.

anonymous asked:

left-communist-feminist-as-fuck. okay . but js that communists are racist and sexist as fuck and my people suffered from these assholes and idk whats this communist trend on tumblr now but none of yall know what communism is - never lived under their opression,and your grandparents havent been murdered in cold blood or burried alive .

Communism: Community ownership of property, where the end goal is to create a completely equal society via economic equality

  • This is seen as a utopian and ideal society because there is no inequalitiy or disparities between people because it eliminates the upper/middle/lower class and the problem that arises from it
  • People associate communism with authoritarianism or totalitarianism in order to achieve this goal, but THIS IS NOT ADVOCATED BY TRUE COMMUNISTS. It is not a communist ideal, and it is obviously not something I advocate, and I definitely do not agree with past “communist” countries which were obviously ruled under such totalitarianism- *cough stalin cough*
  • Communism sees that an individual cannot be owned by another person, and all labor belongs to the individual laborer

I dunno what communists are racist and sexist as fuck, cause the actual idea behind communism, as written above, with the structure and running of society is not based upon ones gender or race, and is only based upon ownership of items and economic equality.

morsmorclre asked:

Hi! I read your tags under the picture of Emma Watson - Why do you think Emma Watson is a terrible example of a feminist? Just curious, you can answer privately if you want to. :)

kind of a long post under the cut

Read More

anonymous asked:

What are the differences between Socialism, Communism, Anarchism and Syndicalism?

This is always a tough question because there are so many interpretations, but I’ll do my best to make it short and correct. 

Communism - Equal distribution of property and complete economic equality: everybody is equal. 

Socialism - A transition stage between capitalism and Communism; the economy is co-owned by the people and there is mostly social equality. 

Anarchism - No state or government, creates vulnerability to warlords or military control. 

Syndicalism - Interpretation of Socialism, labor forces and industry are organized into factions

On Feminism, Westerncentrism, the Gender Binary and Generally Not Being a Shitty Human Being

             I recently read a blog post rather creatively titled “Feminism.” This seminal work of modern academia shares the author Genna’s opinions on “that hot topic” because apparently human rights are another fad like cutoffs or electricity. Genna opposes feminism on the basis that men and women somehow fulfill different roles in society and therefore operate under separate but equal standards. Her logic presents problems from the start, from incoherent progression of argumentation to simple factual errors. Most laughable, however, is her fundament misunderstanding of the issues mentioned in the title of this essay: feminism, Westerncentrism, the Gender Binary and generally not being a shitty Human Being. Genna discuses what she sees as the central tenants of the feminist movement in order, starting with “political, then “social,” and finally “economic equality.” Let’s do the same.

            We see Genna dismantle decades of discourse regarding Women’s position in the politics rather concisely, using a mere 37 words. Women gained the right to vote with the 19th Amendment and since then have seen full equality to men in the political arena. That’s why we have all those female Presidents and way more than 18.7% of the seats in the 133th Congress. Oh wait; we don’t have either of those things… We need to understand something right now: Being enfranchised does not mean that you hold political equality. A lot more goes into it than that. Women do not have political equality in this country for a whole host of reasons that seem to get glossed over by the author. (I’m assuming because she wanted to be as concise as possible here and her manifesto calling women to action in the world of politics just couldn’t quite fit in her self-imposed 37 word limit.) Women did not gain political equality “on August 26, 1920” (mostly because the 19th Amendment was ratified on August 18th). Obstacles still existed, and still do exist today to hinder Women in politics. Women are currently the most underrepresented group in the American political system (besides perhaps queer people and intersectional people like queer Women of Color, but that’s kind of splitting hairs). Like I mentioned before, no Presidents, less than 20% of people in Congress and only 3.6% of Supreme Court Justices ever (and only 4 of around 50 appointed after August 1920) have been Women. If political equality existed between the sexes, wouldn’t those numbers be a lot closer to 50/50? So, clearly political equality doesn’t exist the way Genna asserts. The question now becomes why; the answer lies in social issues.

            Women and men, Genna posits, “will never be [socially] equal.” This rash claim rests on that same logic that justified slavery in the colonial era, the Holocaust and just about every Human Rights abuse ever: “we have different biology.” A few things on this:

1). Humans share 99% of our genetic code with yeast, 99.5% with chimpanzees and ~99.99% with each other.

2). Being biologically different does not equate to inferiority, or for that matter dichotomization of any kind. That .01% difference in genes doesn’t really mean that much, but under this logic different races should be assigned different roles in society because they have differing allele frequencies that somehow justify segregation. That’s just bull.

3). Differing biology, insofar as it is an issue, only really shows in athletics, not social and academic situations. That’s why men and women compete in different leagues in the Olympics but not for the Pulitzer Prize.

            Now, for this little statement that “I don’t want to be socially equal to a man.” My first question would be why. What is wrong with social equality? Why shouldn’t men and women operate under the same social rules? Barring an explanation of this logic, I rest the issue.

            Next, we see a humble request from our author for “some examples” of the “negative stereotypes” that Women face. To name a few; slut shaming, strong-willed Women being labeled as “bitchy” or “aggressive,” “she was asking for it,” objectification culture (the constant treatment of Women as sex objects and not real people), arbitrary, unattainable and nonreciprocal standards of beauty… Just for starters. She is so kind as to offer us some examples of her own.

  • “husband bashing” and “gossip” This is a weak example to lead off with because its completely non-unique to Women. People of all genders and sexual orientations talk trash about their partners behind their back (and in many cases in front of them). Women do not do this more than men, and I see no evidence provided by the author to the contrary.
  • “all he does is sit around and play videogames all day” Really…? Really…? Aside from parents talking about their socially inept teenager, who says this? Oh, yeah. People who know someone who does this. Also, this is another example that could apply to anyone, it just so happens that social obstacles like lack of nonsexualized female (and complete lack of queer) visibility in videogames that this phrase more often employs the pronoun “he” and not “she” “they” “xe” etc.
  • “he is such a man-child” Well… Is he? (Helpful Hint: the answer is yes) Not really an example of misandry, more so just an observation on someone who needs to grow the fuck up already, move out of his parents’ basement and get a real job. (AKA this is only ever said about .0001% of the population so why is it even on this list at all?)
  • “men are dangerous and rapists” Fun Fact: 99% of rapists are men. So, yes. Statistically speaking, men are dangerous and they are rapists; women aren’t. That doesn’t mean that every man ever is a rapist, but it does mean that this isn’t some kind of wild accusation without basis. I in no way want to marginalize victims of domestic and sexual assault who’s attackers are female, but I think this essay makes it clear who in this situation is really marginalizing a traditionally (or nontraditionally) oppressed group. (Helpful Hint #2: It’s not me.)

Having presented these not-at-all-in-any-way-shaky examples, the author asserts that they harm men cause they hurt their feelings. Here’s the thing about that: men hold a position of privilege and power in society. When “negative stereotypes” “hurt” men all that happens is they feel sad for like 30 seconds. When these stereotypes are perpetuated against women, they see actual consequences. She ends this discussion by regurgitating some new-age reimagination of the cliché “actions may speak louder than words, but words damage the heart and soul of a person. Two things: 1). Kudos on the one use of nongendered language in this entire blog post. 2). Fuck you.

In regards to economic equality we see a lot of “analysis” on the statistic that women make $.77 for every dollar a man makes (and also a lot of incorrect information [“This part makes me laugh”]). To be clear, according to Harvard University’s Henry Lee Professor of Economics Claudia Goldin a wage gap (not earnings gap, which also exists and is just as much a legitimate issue) exists between men and women in the same position, with the same credentials and same work-ethic and performance and the gap rises at higher paying jobs like law and finance. It is not because men work longer hours, it’s because the Patriarchy favors men (surprise, I know). So, none of this stuff about “cotton candy” and “bricks.” This metaphor didn’t even really make sense. If there is a pound of each, they are the same weight, but they don’t have the same value. A pound of cotton candy would cost a whole lot more than a pound of bricks (mostly because a pound of brick is literally one brick). If anything it is a metaphor against the argument presented because the same weight (i.e. the same work) does not equal the same value (wage).

Now that we have settled the issues brought up explicitly by the author, we need to discuss those things that exist implicitly in her blog post; Westerncentrism and the gender binary. At this point, we are breaking away from mainstream feminism and branching into a more holistic, inclusive brand of the feminist tradition that has not really been explored in the academic (and non-academic) community but really should be.

Westerncentrism, like it sounds, refers to a focus entirely on Western ideas and values, without regard for other traditions and lifestyles. This post serves as a classic example hereof because there is not a single mention of a nonwestern value, nor any evidence presented that is not based on American and Western experiences. This means that the analysis is also entirely based on an assumption of Whiteness. Fun Fact #2: not everyone is White. Ignoring these groups in an analysis of feminism is detrimental to any argument because non-White and non-Western Women are the people who most need the feminist movement at this time. All these statistics I’ve given throughout this essay usually make this same mistake, but to rectify that all you have to do is imagine the problem, but 10 times worse. (Sometimes 100, and in other cases 1000.) Newsflash: being a Person of Color and a Woman is kind of a really shitty thing in the status quo and I sympathize with (and will never be able to fully understand the plight of) the people who do it everyday.

The Gender Binary. So, all those times I used the word “queer”? And that time the pronouns “they” and “xe” made an appearance? Yeah, those were critiques of the gender binary, or the idea that only two genders exist and everyone fits nicely into one of them. Fun Fact #3: Two genders do not exist. Fun Fact #4: There are thousands of people (trans, genderqueer, gender nonconforming, gender fluid, intersex etc.) who do not fit into the gender binary and are therefore very much in need of feminism. See, all that social equality that Genna wanted no part of? It puts a lot of pressure on people to fit into a box that says M or one that says F (it also gives preference to the M’s but only if they were born an M. And straight. And White.). Traditional gender roles hurt people who can check that M and feel comfortable doing so because they are told not to cry and to be a man and to play sports and not be a pussy and a million other things. They hurt the F’s cause… (if you read anything up to this point you know why). They hurt everyone else because these people are alienated. They are Otherized. They are dehumanized and humiliated. That fucking sucks. A lot.

In summation, feminism is not the new cutoff. In fact, it’s older than the women’s suffrage movement by several hundred years, non-Western feminism has been around for centuries and is sort of mind blowing. Men and Women, and nonbinary and trans and genderqueer and gender fluid and… and… and… are not politically, socially or economically equal. They should be. I want them to be. But they aren’t. Until that day, and after (because even if all of these things have been accomplished what’s the harm in identifying with them and wanting to maintain them) I will be a feminist.

H. Reece Thompson


Generally Not Shitty Human Being

P.S. RE: the comment on the author’s Facebook thread for this blog post “except for tech schools, F-M ratio at most universities is 60-40 and approaching 70-30 in some cases.”

Aside from Vassar, which was a women’s college until 1969, no elite college or university in the US has a gender distribution anywhere near 60/40 in favor of women. All college and universities in this country have an almost equal enrollment (i.e. within ~1-2%) or they favor men by around 5-10%.

Switzerland will vote to give all adults guaranteed $2,800 monthly income.

Grassroots organizers were able to collect the 100,000 signatures required to force a referendum on the proposed initiative. The move is the latest by Swiss grassroots activists who are pushing for reforms following the European financial crisis.

Activists dumped 8-million 5-cent coins on Oct. 4— one coin for each person living in Switzerland— in the center of the Federal Square outside of Switzerland’s parliament in Berne.

The assumed divide between mothers who work inside and outside the home is presented as a war of priorities. But in an economy of high debt and sinking wages, nearly all mothers live on the edge. Choices made out of fear are not really choices. The illusion of choice is a way to blame mothers for an economic system rigged against them. There are no “mommy wars”, only money wars - and almost everyone is losing.
—  Mothers are not ‘opting out’ - they are out of options: In the United States, mothers are increasingly finding themselves stuck between a rock and a hard place. by Sarah Kendzior for Al Jazeera English

Excerpts from column:

In the economic sense, raising the minimum wage would put more money into the pockets of those who now must be classified as the “working poor.” That phrase really should be an oxymoron; anyone who works full time ought to be able to earn a living. But just try to live on $7.25 an hour.

Conservatives complain about growing dependence on government benefits —the infamous “47 percent” theory that got Mitt Romney in such trouble. But if you force people to work for $7.25 an hour, you’re basically guaranteeing that they need a range of government help: food stamps, housing assistance, tax credits and so forth. Conservatives also say they worry about the weakening of family structure. I can think of nothing that would do more to strengthen low-income families than paying them a living wage.

The reason we have a problem with rising inequality and declining economic mobility is that low-end wages have stagnated while high-end compensation has soared. The standard Republican objection is that raising the minimum wage would hurt small businesses, but I believe that these businesses would adjust — and that many would thrive, since more people would be able to afford their goods and services.

President Obama should specify a number — at least $10 an hour — and go out on one of his barnstorming tours. Democrats should make the issue a central theme of the 2014 campaign. I believe the public would respond, which means that, ultimately, Republicans would respond.

The president has a long agenda. This is where he should start.

Read full column

The federal minimum wage was established in 1938, and set at 25 cents an hour. A quick calculation using the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ inflation calculator shows that this value, adjusted for inflation, would be $4.12 today. That means today’s minimum wage of $7.25 is actually 75 percent greater than its historical inflation-adjusted value.

Just found this website and it has some really good solid data on the subject.  Give it a glance if you have a chance.

Today is #EqualPayDay!

It’s no accident that this holiday is observed on April 8th. According to the National Committee on Pay Equity’s website, “this date symbolizes how far into 2013 women must work to earn what men earned in 2012.” This is bad as it is, but it gets worse. From the Huffington Post:

“For African-American and Hispanic women, the wage gap is worse, which means it takes even longer for their salaries to “equal” the salaries of their white male counterparts. White men are used as a benchmark because they are the largest demographic group in the labor force. African-American and Hispanic women are paid less than their white and Asian-American peers, even when they have the same educational credentials. Asian-American women’s salaries show the smallest pay gap, at 87 percent of white men’s salaries. Hispanic women’s salaries show the largest gap, at 53 percent of white men’s salaries.”

That’s just the tip of the iceberg. Economic inequality is a complicated and pressing issue, with pay equity leading the discussion. Today and every day, we stand as committed advocates for economic equality until the odds are in everyone’s favor. Join the movement using #EqualPayDay hashtag on twitter today and checking out the We Are the Districts blog.
If someone takes a dump on my desk the size of the dump is not the issue. I’m not going to ask, ‘how big of a dump it is, eight inches? Three inches?Oh, just three inches? Oh, that’s almost like you didn’t take a dump on my desk at all!’

John Oliver, ‘Last Week Tonight’, in response to the wage disparity defence of, women get paid 83 cents to that of a man’s dollar? Why, ‘round it up and it’s practically the same!’ 

I swear to god I’m more American than British, but you know what, that’s a fucking great analogy.


4 charts all companies run by men should read 

what are the implications of the lack of gender equality in corporate board rooms?

These charts  compare companies that have no women on their boards to those whose boards are comprised of at least 30% women (30% is the minimum standard advocated by the Thirty Percent Coalition, a nonprofit working to increase female representation in business leadership).

The result? Women help create stronger, more resilient companies, but you have to look beyond the company’s performance on Wall Street to see this.

Read more | Follow micdotcom