hook up culture

Why did hook-up culture become normalized like why is having sex with strange men seen as something that should be fun and a good idea when men inflict so much violence on women? The whole thing is spectacularly unsafe, like a woman won’t even talk to a stranger on the subway (which she shouldn’t) but she’ll go to the home of a stranger and put herself in the most vulnerable position possible with him. But as usual, stupid sex positive people refuse to acknowledge any of the actual material risks of being a woman. Like I’m just going to state this blatantly: there are a lot of fucked up people out there, and men do not care about you, your safety, or your comfort. 

There is something sick and sorry about a world that endorses the consumption of other human beings as if they were no more than just another material thing—that teaches us it is OK to cycle through romances like they were the chamber of a revolver in a game of Russian roulette.
—  Beau TaplinC o n s u m e r   H o o k u p   C u l t u r e  
Me no gusta feminism

I used to be a feminist, back when I got into pro-life stuff and discovered pro-life feminists and their advocacy.

But, shortly after the birth of my first daughter, I decided to drop the label. It was months in the making, as the decision came about after being exposed to many issues I discovered within the movement.

Note that this is not any kind of attack on people who find that their use of the word “feminist” best describes and helps their cause. More power to you. But I am not you, and I have different ideals and standards when it comes to political movements. I am hoping that by sharing this – as terse as this will come off at times – feminists can get a better idea of why the whole world isn’t jumping onto the bandwagon.

Use it to improve your feminist work, to point out toxic behavior in fellow activists, think I am out of my mind and think I am wrong, whatever: I don’t care. I am just grateful that someone can listen patiently.

So what is up with my disapproval of feminism?:

1) Feminism is incoherent and unstable.

Look up the definition of feminism and you get the vague explanation of how it’s about women’s equal rights/welfare. Even in the earliest days, women activists had differing ideals concerning womanhood, equality, justice, and how to achieve it all. How you define fighting for women’s rights is all dependent on what you think is best for the gender. This can range from keeping them inside all day guarded by family to enforcing the independent working woman ideal.

“But that’s not REAL feminism!!!” is often cried out when these differing actions/opinions are pointed out, and it is a pointless accusation. Feminism is what you make of it! Literally anyone can be a feminist.

There is no central leader, only leaders of various, independent feminist groups big or small; there is no central manifesto, only early writings that may or may not be looked upon, and opinionated works of different feminist philosophers; and most importantly, every individual woman will have her own unique outlook to the welfare of her sex and for her own life.

I can’t get behind a mish mash of ideas. Nor can I pretend that I am speaking for ALL women when we are all so different from one another. I need something solid, sturdy, and with a strong, unshakable foundation. Feminism just doesn’t have that.

2) It has a shady past that I can’t get over: and yes, that includes the first/second wave feminists.

First wave: benefited largely upper class white women; anti-Catholic sentiments among some prominent figures; demanded equal rights but not equal responsibility (ex: getting the right to vote but not being required to sign up for the draft); some protesters WERE violent, if I remember correctly; they also played a large role in the medicalization of birth which involved smearing campaigns against midwives, sending many women to hospitals where they were treated terribly; this same smear campaign also lead to lower income women having difficulty affording prenatal care as the more affordable homebirth midwives were made illegal. Some also were apparently hypocritical even then, as is evidenced by the famous GK Chesterton quote: “It [feminism] is mixed up with a muddled idea that women are free when they serve their employers but slaves when they help their husbands.“

Second wave: Bought into the deliberate lies about mass deaths from “back alley abortions”; lied about Jane Roe and TO her in Roe vs Wade to legalize it; the lawyer downright calling Jane Roe white trash and ignorant; were convinced that they needed birth control to be dispensed everywhere, and didn’t seem to care very much that birth control had been tested on poor, POC women and that it would discriminate against women who wanted more than one or two kids/wanted to breastfeed while working; attacked religious faiths for “sexist practices” such as veiling and lied to women of faith about their religion to convince them to protest it; I could go on because I find out more all the time but I can stop.

third wave: I don’t even have to list here. Y’all know what I am talking about. While more religious/conservative feminists have popped up, they still buy into the myth of a patriarchy and many still talk over legitimate men’s issues, or even outright mock it. Or mock people who are more conservative/religiously devout. (Looking at you, New Wave Feminists :))) )

3) The members are dangerously guillable and buy into sexist/bigoted ideals far too easily.

A lot of this ties into the last point. Feminism easily falls for the latest so-called progressive ideals without thinking how it actually affects them and others in the following generations. (Thanks for the shitty state of women’s health care!) They do not thoroughly question anything, leading to blind acceptance of any misleading factoid that shows them how oppressed they are.

The biggest example of this, for me personally, is the outright acceptance of birth control. While some feminists are questioning it these days because of its adverse affects on women’s rights, health, and its sexist/racist undertones, many still try to tout it as some kind of Savior for Womankind. The health risks and social ramifications be damned: gimme my consequence free sex!!! Because men can get sex without pregnancy so this makes us “equal” somehow!!!

And then they try to make it sound like it’s the only way to space babies and allows women to work, but never considered other more natural options that don’t shut down our fertility and do a better job of respecting women’s rights (hint hint, NFP). And the ramifications of the hook up culture? Feminists demanded that women have the right to sleep around “just like men”, and then scrambled around to come up with overly-complicated consent etiquette when they realized women were being used and even raped.

4) No, feminism doesn’t care about men. It never did and it doesn’t have to!

Christina Hoff Summers is the closest I can think of a feminist who points out men’s issues, but I haven’t heard of her trying anything to change it either other than talking about it.

Things like circumcision, male abuse, male assault, workplace deaths, and more are brushed under the rug. Try and bring men’s issues to the table at your next feminist meeting, and see how far it takes you: and all without mentioning “toxic masculinity” or “it doesn’t happen as much with men as with women”.

There is nothing wrong with having a movement focused on only one part of the human race: but it is damning to use that label, focus only on one group of people, and then pretend you speak for ALL humans.

Feminism was never meant to be a human rights movement, only a women’s rights movement. There is no shame in that. Yet they continue to act as if its the end all be all of any advocacy group ever.

This may naturally lead into intersectional feminism, which jumps into other movements such as LGBTQ, childwelfare, etc. But it only shows how feminism MUST take a legit issue and twist it around to make it about women or the patriarchy. It’s ineffective and even back-peddles progress.

5) Feminism acts like it has the monopoly on women’s rights and that I owe it my “allegiance”.

It doesn’t. It never has. I am living proof of it. For the past three years since I have dropped the label, I am still passionate about how NFP can further women’s welfare in health and relationships, and beyond. It has even led me to issues such as birthing rights, issues of working mothers, and more!

But more importantly, it opened the door to issues faced by men, and children of both genders. I even gained a newer perspective on unique issues such as gender dysphoria and racism. When I took a step back and realized that the issues were just a shitty culture from the result of many different actions/people and not necessarily one power group, I gained a much more wholesome view of humanity and its downfalls. We’re in this together as a species!

Yet, I only learned all of this outside of feminism’s rose colored glasses. Leaving feminism freed me to truly understand all this. Maybe it was different for other women, but for me and others like me, it’s very enlightening.

6) There really isn’t a patriarchy. 

idk what to put here. I never felt the overbearingness of man push me down, and I’m not going to ignore my personal experience and that of my own female family members for the sake of an accepted theory of feminism. There are certainly sexist attitudes still hanging around, but hardly because of patriarchy (in fact, I would blame mainstream feminism for parts of that, see points #2 and #3). That, and this deadbeat patriarchy theory de-legitimizes the very real issues and their source problems that men face in society.

7) Much of feminism is inherently anti-Catholic.

Y’all know I am not perfect when it comes to being Catholic, but I would rather walk through the Amazon jungle barefoot than walk with a movement that has never liked nor respected the Church since its earliest developments in the early 20th Century. (This includes lowering the role and importance of Mother Mary because of her Perpetual Virginity being “offensive” to women. :))) )

Even with some Catholics saying they are feminist because of their beliefs, I know too well that being “feminist” is not a core tenet of Catholicism. That’s just an unnecessary add on. Not to mention, the Church has been very woman-friendly since, idk, the time of Jesus? So it’s not like throwing on a political label is really improving that.

(This doesn’t mean there aren’t issues to be discussed within the Church concerning womanhood in the past or present: only that I feel feminism is an intrusion that is unnecessary at best, and blinding to the mission of the Church at worse, and the mission being: spreading the Gospels to lost souls).

Also, there is no use ignoring that a grand majority of feminists today - as well as the loudest ones - simply support practices and ideals that go against Church Teaching. You can try and “take back feminism” if you wish, but it was never “ours” to begin with, nor will Catholicism improve this unbalanced movement by inserting rosaries and “girl power” saints.

Western women face legitimate issues in our society and I am all for tackling them!

We may not be “oppressed” as angry Anti-SJWs claim, but there is still so much improvement to be made. Things like childcare and work, abortion, healthcare, etc are hot topics for a reason. They affect ME and MY DAUGHTERS as much as any woman. I am going to be a part of the solution as much as I can be! I am sure that other active women, feminist or not, understand how I find these things important.

But I can not stand by a philosophy that is jumbled up, toxic, hypocritical, lacking sense, and downplaying or denying the very real issues that the other gender face. The majority are against my ideals/way of making things work and I don’t want any part of it.

Good has come from feminism in various ways but that doesn’t change that it has done plenty of bad that I am not comfortable with. And because it’s had issues from the very beginning, there really isn’t an “original” feminism that we can revert to: it’s always had problems and will continue to have them.

If you’re feminist then have fun with that, but I ask that you consider these points whenever you question people like me for not wanting to join in. Not all of us are hateful anti-feminist narks who think western women live life in a dreamland. We just don’t like many parts and histories of the feminist movement.

Thanks for taking the time to read, it really does mean a lot.

Hook up culture, sacred sensuality(sexuality), tantric sex, and womb healing.

The ‘marriage culture’ that we have come to know from our parents generation of failed partnerships, & no intimacy, is what was destructive. We know better now. We no longer have to marry out of cultural necessity, we actually get to CHOOSE now. That in itself is beautiful..

Hook up culture is the result of a psychologically afflicted generation, too bruised by the degradation of relationship values they’ve seen. We no longer honour the sanctity of union-ship. From music, to television, the marriage template is portrayed as stagnant, and Un-enjoyable. No sanctity of union ship, no desire to build a strong family unit = broken communities, weaker social ties & understanding of relationship (dynamics). We are heading toward a culture of several,'baby mothers’, and 'baby fathers’, with no family bonds, nor community practice. The fact that people come on Twitter and even make jokes/ memes, out of having, 'side chicks, and 'side guys’ is proof of desensitisation.

The holy trinity, mother + father + [=]child, (masculine and feminine energies combining to the highest essence of creation).. That’s love.

If people believed they would genuinely be loved, respected, and received if they entered a partnership, there would be no 'hook up culture’

Yes, (we) humanity may be collectively moving toward new ideals. But not ALL of these are progressive. Some are still born of trauma.

A generation that largely witnessed the break down of their parents marriages, (their mother’s lack of expression+ their fathers lack of enthusiasm), are inevitably going to view partnership with contempt, and something signifying entrapment, and passive acceptance.

The only true reason, you’ll want to be having sex with others without building emotional bonds, is because you are fearful of such intimacy. In your humble opinion, it is far easier to, 'mimic’ this form of closeness, as naturally, all humans require some level of social bonding. Sex, for many, is as close as it gets to love.

If you study sacred sexuality, you would know there can be no separation from intimacy, love and sex.

It has only become so, since those in power realised the manifestation power behind such sexual cultivation..
Keep people focused on the primal aspects of sex, and they remain trapped in ego consciousness.

You know you can actually cause trauma to a woman’s womb, and psyche, under the guise of a 'one night stand?’ Men awaken a portal within a woman after sexual intimacy. To then close that portal, or deny responsibility for all that awakens with it, is to prematurely stunt her energy formation. It causes trauma because it reduces her to her sexual organs, in terms of validity.

Women, and men experience sex a little differently.. Aside from tantric sex, and twin flame sex, that awakens awareness in both partners, generally, the process of sex is more physical for men, (unless they practice sacred sensuality), and the process for women, is largely emotional. During sex, a woman’s heart centre may be activated through stimulation of her breasts, (the heart centre/chakra sits right Inbetween), or through stimuli-station of the womb, which is thought to also ignite feelings of either safety/protection, or fear, and attack. It is not surprise that the womb is associated with feelings of love and comfort - this is the very place that houses in-coming souls.

The goal in tantric sex, is to allow both partners to transform their sexual energy, into creative, godly energy, (love). Through the pro-longing of the orgasm, the man trains himself to maintain this momentary glimpse of heaven, by involving not only his lower chakras, but moving from the lower centre, to the higher centres, therefore igniting kundalini awakening. - just think of the snake spiralling up the chakra system, making its way through to the top.
This process begins quite naturally in women after intercourse.. (Well, at least it tries to).

Woman, by nature is accustom to being nurturing and receptive. To making a home out of all she is given.
You cannot stir this process within her, and then force her to dismantle the alchemical transformation whilst it is in progress..
Biologically, at this point, she is awakening, (the true purpose of sex). Abandoning her afterward is equivalent to awakening a sleeping child,only to offer them a sleeping pill whilst they are finally adjusting to being awakened. The confusion of the natural process is damaging.

When you enter a woman, she has surrendered to you.. In turn, you owe her a duty, of succumbing to whatever arises within her.. Because at that point, it is an accumulation of both of your energies. She is experiencing not only her awakening, but stirring yours.

Her behaviour afterward will shine a light on all that you are. If she begins to act fearful, she is responding to a place of fear within you both. If she grows more loving and playful, she is reflecting this nature within yourself.. Listen and take heed.

Abstinence, and a prolonged period of celibacy is a good cure for women who have, in the past given their sexual power away in anyway. Sexual power can be given (taken)away in a magnitude of ways. People pleasers who use sex as a means to validate their desirability, are but one way sexual power may be given. In this case, the abuse is self inflicted, though very much as potent in its damaging effects.

In this absence, the woman should spend time honouring her womb, (rituals to celebrate moon cycles, and womb cycles), and learn of its divinity.

The self cleansing mechanisms of the vagina, will take care of the rest. Largely, it is a mental game of re-introducing harmony.

There are also forms of visualisation meditation that can see you through retrieving parts of your soul that were lost..

Take a Chance (Part 3)

Originally posted by imagining-in-the-mcu

Your name: submit What is this?

pairings: Reader x Steve Rogers
characters: Reader, Natasha Romanoff, Wanda Maximoff, Sam Wilson, Amora (Enchantress), Steve Rogers, Bucky Barnes (mention)
word count: 1,656
warnings: vomit, cussing, pregnancy talks
a/n: steve is a cutie 
summary: AU! After a one night stand at a friend’s wedding, you gain something that could possibly change your life and views on life for the better or worse.

Prev||All Parts||Next

You’re sitting on your bed, the three of you forming a circle as Wanda calls Amora on speaker and Natasha searches through Sam’s friend list on Facebook. You’re the only one not doing anything and it’s killing you to just wait! Why couldn’t you have been the one searching Sam’s facebook? You understand why you’re not the one speaking to Amora, but searching Sam’s facebook? You could totally do that!

“What do you want?” is how Amora greets Wanda when she answers the phone call. “I’m trying to enjoy the warm Hawaiian sun and you’re interrupting.”

Natasha rolls her eyes as she continues searching for the mysterious blonde, and you groan, not sure why her personality still surprises either of you at times.

Keep reading

Pornhub launching a ‘sex ed’ site is the logical extension of 21st century globalised neoliberal consumer capitalism. Sex is a consumer commodity and it has been now for some time. In the same way that the dollar menu at MacDonald’s - where the need for sustenance is turned into a quick fix solution with minimal benefit to the consumer, the workers and the environment (if not detrimental to all of the above.) 

Sex and intimacy have been transformed into a quick fix solution. We can see this in the rise of hook up culture and pornographic culture. It’s all about male ejaculation and the immediate satisfaction of this desire (reproduction is a need essential to the survival of the species, sex for pleasure is a want, not a need) at the expense of girls and women’s bodily autonomy, right to life free from violence and sexual violence, and sexual pleasure/expression.

Why I Reject The Idea Of Casual Hookups

Call it laziness or anxiety or being an introvert, but I came to the conclusion that drinking a lot of alcohol and staying up till the wee hours of the morning trying to get laid doesn’t exactly fit my vibe.

I’d much rather be comfortable in my bed drifting slowly to sleep to the sound of some slow indie song, or watching one of my favorite TV shows.

Getting your rocks off with someone you don’t want to see in the morning also seems particularly rude to me. It’s a waste of time and it shows that you don’t have much respect for your partner, let alone yourself.

And don’t get me started on double standards and slut-shaming because I don’t do that shit, if you wanna have sex with a lot of people go do it, I won’t think any differently of you.

I just personally want my hookups to be good and it don’t seem like they’d be very fun without a bit of laughter and the warmth of being comfortable with somebody.

If you feel personally victimised when someone says they don’t like drinking culture and avoid alcohol, that’s your insecurity. You think they are insinuating that they’re better than you? No they’re not, they just don’t like drinking! Even if they describe drinking culture as empty and fruitless because that’s how they personally perceive it, you’ve no right to tell them they aren’t allowed to have that opinion because it apparently hurts your feelings when what they are saying actually has nothing to do with you and does not infringe your basic civil liberties in any way. Also, stop accusing individuals who describe hook-up culture as empty and hollow of slut-shaming oh my god, you don’t realise that demisexuals exist? If you really were happy about your lifestyle, you would not feel bitter against anyone who doesn’t like it whilst not necessarily stopping you in any way.

i think hook-up culture and the whole attitude surrounding it is so ultimately damaging for young girls, even more so young girls who are still trying to figure out their sexuality, i think it’s so important to feel like you can own your sexuality but it’s not a radical idea to teach young girls that hook-up culture is the norm and they’re weird if they don’t fit into it? this is not a fully fleshed out post i’m just rambling right now, i’ve had a bunch of thoughts about it in the past few weeks 

1. Water Off A Lame Duck’s Back (Season 8 Episode 7)

In true politician form, RuPaul is never afraid to burn bridges! She is willing to call out racist “preferences” with a smile - even at the expense of guest judge Justin Roberts (NSFW).

So where did this sudden Courtney Activist come from anyway? RuPaul knew she was going to make some waves (and second-waves) with this week’s political-themed challenge, but she had no idea someone would actually tackle the prejudice in the gay hook-up community.

So, who took a stand against shady gays?

That’s right. Kim Chi. The same Kim Chi that thought left-wing and right-wing referred to pieces of chicken made the biggest political statement of the night.

In the midst of her campaign, Kim brings up the hypocrisy of various hook-up apps. “No fats, no femmes, no asians? Well, I’m all three of those.”  

She may have just given up that closeted Republican vote, but I think Kim’s sentiment here is powerful. Time and time again, we see hypermasculine gays list out their preferences like it’s not divisive. Why is there no masc4mascara section?

I won’t delve too deeply into the topic, but experiencing Kim (and RuPaul) call out hook-up culture is probably the best moment of the episode. Which problem in the gay community do you think they’ll tackle next? Coming out? Catfishing? Understanding a Cher tweet? Tune in tonight on LOGO 9/8 central to find out!

-5 Funniest Moments From RPDR Season 8 Episode 7

Film Theory Analysis - SKAM

Season 3: Ep. 1


Okay so this is a big thing I wrote using film theory to analyze the first episode of Isak’s season of SKAM. It goes in sequential order. I try to fill you in on where I am in the show, but I do skip some parts that don’t stand out as much. It contains spoilers galore, so don’t read if you aren’t caught up! I would also like to warn you that this is basically an essay. It’s long and probably repetitive. I also borrowed some thoughts of others on here and extrapolated from there! Thank you to those who started some of these discussions and theories! And I say it below but I’ll say it up here too, I am NOT from Norway and I’ve never been there. I have very little knowledge of the culture, so if I’m really wrong on anything, please come to me kindly and I’ll fix it! Thanks!

Keep reading