In this clip from the 2006 BBC documentary Lefties: Angry Wimmin

Second Wave Feminists mention the use of the feminist hand symbol representing the vulva or vagina and provide explanations for a form of feminist linguistic protest that was based on de-centering men from women resulting in alternative spellings such as wimmin, wombyn (in reference to women’s wombs), or womyn. They also mention the change behind history being altered into herstory and changes in expressions that turns, “Oh, God!” into “Oh, Goddess!”. The point is the removal of male-centeredness or androcentrism from everyday language.

Susan Hemmings: “There were women, at the time, who felt that the word ‘woman’ or ‘women’ actually contained the word ‘man’ and ‘men’ and therefore should be changed. They felt that the language was so male-dominated so they started to spell women differently: w-i-Double-M (mm)-i-n for example to completely get rid of the word ‘man’ inside that.”

Femi Otitoju: “The last thing you wanted right in the very core of your identity was the word ‘man’, excuse me, that just so completely had to go. So, we explored all kinds of exciting things. We talked about ourselves as ‘wimmin’ – w-i-Double-M (mm)-i-n, or ‘wombyn’ which is w-o-m-b-y-n. Sometimes we left the B out and it was w-o-m-y-n. But it was all about us, keep the focus here, keep the focus female. Keep the focus feminine.”

Kirsten Hearne: “[ - What was the B doing in there?] Womb. So, it was womb-yn. So, we turned ‘women’, w-o-m-e-n, into w-o-m-b, womb-yn, [womb]-y-n. I thought that was rather clever actually.” 

On Psychological Research and Race...

I dont pay attention to any published, empirical, research article that uses the phrase “regardless of race/ethnicity, all subjects/participants….”

There is no “regardless of race”.

There is no “regardless of ethnicity”.

If you did your statistical analysis correctly

If you actually paid attention to your target population,

maybe you wouldn’t miss out on the 13% of external and internal validity you seek.

(If you do research statistics, that’s A LOT keeping you from statistical significance)

That 13%* of the population is black diaspora alone (imagine the Latin, Hispanic, Native-American, and Asian* population statistics all co-opted into the white population)

*Of course, this number is not objective and does not take into account a third of this country’s population

thefuzziestofpeaches asked:

if there a word for like when the male characters just look like [whatever animal they are] but the female characters have boobs and long hair ad stuff?

You could call that a few things: Sexualization, androcentrism (appointing male as the default and female as the ‘other’ that must be distinguished with caricaturistic attributes) and sexism.

/rant: "wives, daughters, sisters"

Whenever I see some article or campaign appealing to “anyone with wives, daughters, sisters” I want to DELETE THE INTERNET; by appealing to “people with wives, daughters, sisters” you are making men active participants and relegating women to passive status. You are speaking TO MEN, because if you were speaking to women you would not have to remind them that they know women in their lives. The article/campaign would be directed at women themselves as active participants, not as people-who-know women.

“Why does that matter, though?”

You are saying that “people” means “men”, and “wife, daughter, sister” means “woman”. You are defining women in relation to men. This is shitty androcentrism and good god stop it immediately.

Flaming Black Love: On Black Queer Men's Sexual Politics

To the 2 Aries in My Life That Love and Complicate Me

This Flaming Black Love Between Us

This is not a love letter. Cause if it was, it’d be the first and the last like my payments on that new place of ours. You know the one, left of center of my chest.

From there, our Roots twist and grow and stretch towards life out from under the concrete in the urban jungle of Hotlanta.

At the intersection of Boulevard and…was it 10th and Piedmont? Yes. That Intersection.

Intersectionality. Intersexual. Not in the form of Gender politics. Or Body politics. But yes, bodies!

Flaming Black Bodies!

His, thick-boned with smooth honey-kissed skin and an unapologetic flame,


His, slim, with rough chocolate skin but a gentle fire.

Flaming Black bodies! So warm, so dark, so HOT!

Sorry! I meant to speak politely of love. To talk about connections and conversations first, and cocks and cute butts later.

Keep reading


I also chose to look at term phallocentrism. First and foremost, I just want to say that Tabiya Ahmed made a damn good video (shoutout!) and Ivy already made a really interesting post about this here on our blog (second shoutout!). While Ivy was intrigued by this term as it relates to men, the phallis, and androcentric sexuality, I was most interested in the anthrolinguistics of the term. Tabiya talks about how men make the mold when it comes to bodies, and how our language is set up to define everything as a foil against the male standard. The idea of a foil definition perpetuates a binary. Phallocentrism is not just the literal translation of a phallis focus, but that women are defined as they relate to men. Think of the conversation we had the other day in class about rape culture campaign, “what if she was your sister? your mother? your daughter?” Phallocentrism in action, binaries sucking, and post-structuralism reiterating language sucks. 

Kay Samuelson


So I started off joking about the machine that shaves everything and washes my hair, but then it turned into a huge sexism/feminism discussion. And the thing is, I consider my best friend a feminist as well as non-sexist. But what he kept bringing up where the issues society keeps placing on feminism, and in particular, men who identify as feminists. I feel as though he thinks I’m attacking him, but that isn’t the case. I’m bringing up actual point, and he’s quite defensive. :/
On Food Stamps and Elitism

So, as of last month, my parents are no longer paying for my rent. They just can’t. My older sister just had a beautiful baby boy but has some comlications from preganancy that all of my family needs to attend to. And they need to save up for my sister to go to college eventually. So Im paying my 400-500 dollar rent+utilities out of my 15-hr work week. Preemptively, my mom helped me apply for EBT/SNAP (Electronic Benefits Transfer/Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program)(no they don’t call em food stamps anymore). 

I was approved just last week because of my rent and luckily for the fact that my neuroscience internship is a work-study grant. I used the card at Costco for the first time and I felt so weird about it. Like, bad. I know there is a lot of class privilege to unpack there but I don’t feel like it right now. I just wanted to say that to anyone, college student, graduate student, graduate, artist, freelance worker, it’s okay to use your EBT at Trader Joe’s. It feels like you are cheating by buying health food and stuff but honestly, it’s not. I’ve done some research and I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s better for me to use my benefits on the foods that make me stronger than the crap that makes me too tired to work harder and excel.

if you have an opinion on this, go for it. I’d love to hear it.

Gerry Mak, mentioned in the above article, wrote this:

While organic and local foods seem like luxury items to many, it’s important to understand that cheap food is the result of government subsidies while local farmers get little to no assistance. Cheap food is the real extravagance. My interest in food stems from my having to care for a diabetic father, and good food is the only form of health care I have access to. Even when I was working full time for a publishing company, I received no benefits, and paid an average of $2500 to Uncle Sam every tax season despite wages that were meager by any American standard. Ultimately, though, this debate isn’t about my personal story, it’s about the shifting class boundaries in this country. The comments both attacking and defending people like me reflect the insecurities and fears we all harbor in a nation where, in a time of corporate bailouts and “Too Big To Fail,” even upper middle class people struggle to put food on the table.

Many people leaving comments have assumed that I am white, which I am not, though I would question the relevance of this fact unless you assume that race should be a criteria by which we decide who receives public assistance. In any case, the word “hipster” as a pejorative seems to imply “white,” and that reflects the larger race and class conflicts in this country — the underlying sentiment behind many people’s hatred towards artists is that art is purely the domain of the wealthy and the privileged. I can tell you that many of the artists I know in Baltimore work as dish washers, baby sitters, house cleaners, movers and dog walkers. They temp, sling coffee and freelance. They teach inner-city kids and counsel rape victims to make ends meet. They come from all walks of life and from all parts of the country, they are black, white, Asian and Latino, and all of them struggle to varying degrees. What makes them less deserving of assistance when they need it than anyone else who qualifies, and why is it such a travesty that food stamp recipients have access to quality, healthy food?

“I mean, we talk about educating people about how to value proper nutrition, and how to convince people to leave the junk alone. We also know that a lot of the poor only have access to junk. But what about those who don’t? Do we get mad at them because they refuse to settle for crap? Is it a case of “beggars can’t be choosers?” Or should we stop trying to apply a cliche to something as important as health and proper nourishment?”

There’s also this, which is of particular interest to me:

But there seems to be a special strain of ire reserved for those like the self-described “30-something, unemployed, ex-fashionista, EBT armed, post-hipster, downtown mom” from New York who, in January, drew nearly 500 comments on the Web site, many seething with fury at her for trying to maintain the trappings of a materialistic, cosmopolitan life while using an Electronic Benefit Transfer card — food stamps — to feed her family.

I’m not sure why it’s so interesting to me… but it is. There’s also one more comment that’s particularly interesting to me:

Let me get this straight. It’s wasteful and elitist to spend your food stamps on organic salmon and raw honey… but it’s OK to spend it on Pepsi, Little Debbie snack cakes, and Lay’s potato chips?

Liberal feminists stood for an equality based on the belief that can be described as ‘androcentrism’, women playing on the same field as men. As radical feminists later came to realise, this playing field was disadvantaged from the start, sculpted to support the interests of men and to further reproduce the patriarchal world.

In our internet-saturating, post-globalisation world I understand once unanimous perspectives will bleed out and scatter. It is important to take note of this, that feminists come in different forms.

What bothers me today though is the misused terminology of self proclaiming feminists. “Boss woman”, “alpha female”, “working girl” are androcentric phrases, perhaps empowering for some and perhaps subjugating for others; always must be understood as terms that are absolutely not feminist. You should not support women because they are like you, because they worked hard, because they have proved their worth. Women do not have to men to be worthy of anyone’s respect. The real, lasting supporting of women is about supporting all women with our different histories, ethnicities, objectives, goals and agendas. The careful examining of the world not as a fair playing field to distribute fair opportunity, but as an already disadvantaging structure that refuses to improve its conditions for its subordinates, for its women.

After Unity Conference
I had a great time this weekend at the Southeast Regional Unity Conference with my BlackOUT GSU crew and Alliance For Sexual and Gender Diversity. My workshop, “What’s The T?: Queer Cultural Appropriation”, was well received by a lot of folks (especially my Trans*folks! ♥), I made new friends, and my girls @catchthatfag, @queervomit, and I vogued the house DOWN at Legends Nightclub against some Chapel Hill queen. Great weekend of queerness. Now back to WERQ :P

We went to see Godspell last night at Circle on the Square, Dutch and I.  I’ve seen a few things in the round and it’s always an interesting experience, but this was fantastic.  They used the space well and in a way that helped you to forget that there was even another side of the audience.  The acting and singing from the entire cast was great, though Hunter Parrish made Jesus out to be a bit more of a happy-clappy goober than I think he likely was, but still, he’s got a surprisingly good voice and did well.  

Born in the 70’s, I’ve never before seen Godspell.  It was way better than I had expected.  They especially did a fantastic job of updating the parables to modern circumstances.  They used Donald Trump as the wealthy landowner who steps over Lazarus and then want’s Lazarus to go and warn his brothers.  They offered 9 different possibilities for who we might say Jesus is today…or who we might put our trust in as the messiah (including Presidential candidates Gingrich and Romney and the President Obama).  It was lively and fun with good music.  

It made me really think about the way we celebrate baptism solemnity as ‘jesus’ reached into the stream of water falling from the ceiling and flung it on people baptizing them with a joyful cackle and communion with dower reverence as the audience piled on the stage in a melee for tiny cups of juice while the band rocked out.  It made me think, why aren’t we doing this?  Why don’t we have a melee for communion?  Why don’t we fling water in baptism?  Why don’t we celebrate and innovate and make the church walls reverberate?

What I didn’t like was that, while they updated every parable to make it accessible, they didn’t bother to crack open and use a modern translation of the Bible to make it inclusive.  They were making everything seem so beautifully, amazingly current while archanely talking only about 'brothers’ and 'men’.  When telling stories about men, women actors were often used, but the gender of the story was not changed.  The high priest and the good samaritan were both women referred to as 'he’.  Another woman was referred to directly as male, while nothing about any of their appearances, mannerisms, or affects were intended to indicate that they were male.

Why, when they made so many other innovations, were they not willing to crack open the NRSV and put a 20 year-old translation to use instead of a 200 year-old one?  What is it about those masculine words that draws people back again and again into their androcentrism?  Jesus wasn’t androcentric.  He had women in his merry band of disciples.  It’s not his fault the gospel writers didn’t see it that way.  He spoke of a gospel for all people, and held up women and children as examples, so why were these modern story-tellers who were willing to break the mold in so many other ways (changing the script to include modern people and events, adapting music from former folk to modern rock), not willing to step into the 20th century…never mind the 21st when the bible was in use?  It is an almost unforgivable oversight on their part…almost.  

Even with their poor choice, I’ll highly recommend it to you.  It really was a great show.  Any skepticism I harbored about seeing the show was banished right from the start (they had me at 'Prepare Ye the Way’).  But if you have the ear of anyone who could make a difference (a producer, an actor, a sunday school teacher, or pastor), would you please ask them to use inclusive language?  It may not make a wit of difference for you or for them, but it could change the lives of the little girls who hear them.


C4SS Feed 44 presents T.J. Scholl‘s “Even Cops Should Have the Right to Make an Honest Living” read by Thomas J. Webb and edited by Nick Ford.

Radical feminists and other social critics often point out that the pressures of capitalist androcentrism blur the line between free choice and force, resulting in marginalized women being coerced into the sex industry against their will. This is a salient critique, especially in an era when queer homelessness, transantagonism, and misogynistic bigotry are ever-present and oft unrecognized problems. These issues are only exacerbated by the criminalization of sex work. By imprisoning already marginalized women, the state is adding weight to the already heavy burden of patriarchy. Not only must sex workers, especially women of color, contend with the oppressive forces of racism and misogyny, they must also fight to survive under a state that seeks to label them criminals for having the nerve to attempt to scrape together a simple living. This is doubly true for undocumented sex workers.

Feed 44:

Bitcoin tips welcome: