sexist oppression

YES. Please get your terminology straight. Yeah prejudice happens against non oppressed groups but it doesn’t have a dangerous effect and it’s definitely not as severe as racism/sexism/homophobia.

It’s not okay to be prejudiced against anybody but please don’t act like you know what racism/sexism/homophobia is like if you’re white, straight or male. Cause you don’t.

groovyfunnightmare  asked:

Sorry, but I'm a bit confused. When you say "systematic oppression" what exactly do you mean and how do I as an individual male contribute to it?

…or you don’t necessarily.

This is important guys, because it seems to be the biggest misunderstanding (or intentional misunderstanding) that MRAs and anti-feminists seem to repeat over and over.

The feminists are saying we’re sexist assholes just because of our gender.

No. No, we’re not. IF you are a sexist asshole it’s because of your actions, but the main thing we are talking about is much bigger than that.

Systematic oppression is systematic. It is not some dude with a twirly mustache, it’s a series of laws, cultural assumptions, and societal expectations that privilege one group over another. But a series of laws, cultural assumptions, and societal expectations is not a good villain: it’s not sexy, it’s not simple, and you can’t just shoot it through the heart and be on your way. It’s hard to fight, and it’s hard to understand, and as a result people want to turn it into a simple us versus them, good versus bad. It’s not. Resist the urge to turn life into Star Wars. The real world is more complicated than that. And I’m not just talking to MRAs anymore here.

An example:

The American conception of what it means to have a full-time job and to be a hard worker is based on the assumption that the worker will (a) not become pregnant and have to stop working for several months, and (b) not be the primary caregiver for their children (let alone elderly or disabled relatives). In other words, you’re supposed to be a man with a wife at home or a single person with no responsibilities but work. It’s 2017, but our labor laws and our corporate culture still expect everyone to be fucking Don Draper.

What this means is that, because women are generally the ones who have uteri and are also societally expected to take care of children (or anyone else who needs taking care of), they are, by the definition of our labor system, perceived to be less hard-working, possibly even lazy. Just by virtue of being a woman in society, we are already labeled as bad workers. That’s systematic oppression. However, you will also notice that this hurts someone else: single fathers. Now, single fathers don’t have to cope with regressive attitudes towards pregnancy or gendered assumptions about whether they’re serious or in it for the long haul, but they do have to contend with expectations of overtime and the general assumption that to be a good worker you can’t have caregiving responsibilities. The people this benefits are married men (with or without children) and single men, unattached men, who will get hired and promoted over other candidates based on their “hard work.” And that’s not even getting into less concrete things, like how most people instinctively react more negatively to the same traits in a female boss, etc.

There are thousands of similar systems in hundreds of contexts that all privilege men, “masculine” traits, and male roles over women, “feminine” traits, and female roles. These sexist systems hurt a lot of people (most, but not all of them women) and only help a few people (almost all of them men). That’s what we’re talking about. That’s what we want to change.

It should be obvious by this point that none of this is your fault, @groovyfunnightmare. Groovyfunnightmare did not invent this system. Groovyfunnightmare doesn’t run the world, purposefully maintaining these systems and laughing maniacally. Groovyfunnightmare may not even have a mustache.

By using the words “systematic oppression” or discussing sexism in the culture, we are not talking about you. We have no earthly idea who you are. We are talking about a system that hurts us, just like people who talk about the electoral college or unfair tax laws. It’s not personal.

That’s not to say that you, as an individual man, can’t contribute to it if you agree with the system and take actions to support it, or if you just have a hankering for being an asshole I suppose. In the above example you could, if you were the boss, choose to consistently demote pregnant women or remove some of their duties or power, fire people with children for not being able to work large swaths of overtime, or just generally belittle women who work for you. But you, as a randomly chosen man, are statistically unlikely to be doing any of that. What you are almost certainly doing is nothing, just like most people. These systems were not set up by any one person, they stem from unquestioned cultural assumptions and are fueled by them. There is no intention behind them and there never was. They have no consciousness and do not wish good or ill on anyone. There do exist laws that somebody wrote explicitly because fuck women, but in modern America they are few and far between (and were, mostly, written in the past). Most laws that hurt women are written by people simply not questioning their assumptions or not thinking through the consequences of their actions.

However, these systems will continue to exist until we take them apart, so that doing nothing I mentioned earlier? While it doesn’t directly contribute to the system, it does help allow it to continue. What does directly contribute to these systems is people loudly and angrily attacking those who say “this system is wrong, we need to change it.” Make of that what you will.

When people refer to things like the systematic oppression of women, they are not attacking you as a person, or indeed any one person. It’s about changing (a) the laws, (b) the culture, and ( c) how people think about gender. Systematic oppression is not about anything you personally did. It’s not about you at all. As a man you likely benefit from it in some ways (perhaps not in others), but you didn’t invent it, and you don’t have to like it.

honestly i want us all to start advocating against living with men until they stop demanding to be cared for like incapable babies, living with men is a nightmare and it needs to stop, every woman should be aware that living with a man will come as burden after burden, insult after insult, provocations and responsibilities and ridicule without end, with zero value given to her time and effort and energy and emotional labor, this is blatant and selfish exploitation and it needs to stop. Men wont learn basic shit until there’s no woman on the face of earth willing to put up with his crap. 

If I participate, knowingly or otherwise, in my sister’s oppression and she calls me on it, to answer her anger with my own only blankets the substance of our exchange with reaction. It wastes energy. And yes, it is very difficult to stand still and to listen to another woman’s voice delineate an agony I do not share, or one to which I myself have contributed.
—  Audre Lorde, Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches
Prophet - Draco Malfoy One Shot (Requested by Anon)

Originally posted by daisiesanddraco

Request - Could you write a Draco imagine where you’re a feminist and his friends make fun of you for it but he falls in love with you. But you are really quiet until someone says something sexist 

a/n - possible oppression trigger

And that’s what it means to have equal rights.’ I recited with the women talking on the latest issue of the prophet that just came in this morning during breakfast.

“(Y/N), look, I am up for the whole women are equal to men thing, but seriously, this essay is due next class period and I really need help. Do you mind?” asked Ron, lifting up his head from his textbook with an expression of complete exhaustion on his face. He was up until half past 3 in the morning playing with firecrackers with Harry and Seamus again, almost being caught by Umbridge when it was nearing four.

“Was I the one that told you to stay up late doing only what a moron would do?” I cocked an eyebrow up, reading through the article about the female speaker for the 3rd time that period.

“No, but still.” huffed Ron.

“I for one think that this equal rights thing is the best thing that’s ever happened in the wizarding world. It’s certainly a movement that cannot go unnoticed.” Hermione chimed in, a warm smile on her face.

‘See, ‘mione gets it! How about you Harry?” I ask, putting the paper down while Hermione glanced a few looks at it.

Keep reading

Feminism defined in political terms that stress collective as well as individual experience challenges women to enter a new domain- to leave behind the apolitical stance sexism decrees in our lot and develop political consciousness… By repudiating the popular notion that the focus of feminist movement should be social equality of the sexes and emphasizing eradicating the cultural basis of group oppression, our own analysis would require an exploration of all aspects of women’s political reality. This would mean that race and class oppression would be recognized as feminist issues with as much relevance as sexism.
—  bell hooks, “Feminism: A Movement to End Sexist Oppression”

Colonize This! Young Women Of Color On Today’s Feminism — Daisy Hernandez

“As young women of color, we have both a different and similar relationship to feminism as the women in our mothers’ generation…The difference is that now we talk about these issues in women’s studies classes, in classrooms that are multicultural but xenophobic and in a society that pretends to be racially integrated but remains racially profiled.”

Redefining Realness — Janet Mock

“When I think of identity, I think of our bodies and souls and the influences of family, culture, and community - the ingredients that make us. James Baldwin describes identity as ‘the garment with which one covers the nakedness of the self.’ The garment should be worn “loose,” he says, so we can always feel our nakedness. ‘This trust in one’s nakedness is all that gives one the power to change one’s robes.’ I’m still journeying toward that place where I’m comfortable in this nakedness, standing firmly in my interlocking identities.”

Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches — Audre Lorde

“Guilt is not a response to anger; it is a response to one’s own actions or lack of action. If it leads to change then it can be useful, since it is then no longer guilt but the beginning of knowledge. Yet all too often, guilt is just another name for impotence, for defensiveness destructive of communication; it becomes a device to protect ignorance and the continuation of things the way they are, the ultimate protection for changelessness.”

Feminism Is For Everybody — bell hooks

“Simply put, feminism is a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression…Practically, it is a definition which implies that all sexist thinking and action is the problem, whether those who perpetuate it are female or male, child or adult.”

This Bridge Called My Back: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment — Cherrie Moraga and Gloria Anzaldúa

“We are challenging white feminists to be accountable for their racism because at the base we still want to believe that they really want freedom for all of us.”

Literally anything by Kimberlé Crenshaw, who coined the term “intersectionality” in 1989. From her article “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence Against Women of Color”:

 “Contemporary feminist and antiracist discourses have failed to consider intersectional identities such as women of color…I consider how the experiences of women of color are frequently the product of intersecting patterns of racism and sexism, and how these experiences tend not to be represented within the discourses of either feminism or antiracism.”

Want more recs? Another Round host and glorious human Tracy Clayton compiled a list of 13 more books on feminism and intersectionality by women of color

Equity vs. Equality

Equity vs. Equality
Okay so I came up with a metaphor to explain power and privilege vs. oppression to privileged people.

We’re gonna use the scales as our metaphor. The left side of the scale has thousands of years of oppression in it, which has lowered it wayyyyy down. The right side of the scale is raised wayyyyy up high because of this.
There have been efforts made to remove the contents of the left scale, but it can never fully be emptied. But we can remove some of the contents if we work really hard. The efforts have made a dent in this problem, raising the left basket slightly and lowering the right basket slightly. But they are still completely out of balance (which many people like to ignore so that we don’t have to do the work to balance it out and so that we don’t have to lose our advantage.)

We may see the right basket lowering slightly and become alarmed, thinking this means we lose our rights. But it only means that we lose advantages like being able to sexually assault women and get away with it. Our rights are still very much there.

Some people suggest that we put equal amounts of weights into each basket, because that’s “equality”. But that doesn’t make sense since there’s already a bunch of weight in the left basket. So to add equal amounts of weights to each side will keep the scale as out of balance as it is now.

But if we work to remove the extra weight by promoting positivity and representation for marginalized groups, giving them extra help because of the weight they carry, giving them platforms to speak out and to raise their basket, we can raise their basket.

We’ll also need to transfer some of that weight from the left basket to the right basket. Not necessarily as a punishment, but just to equal things out. Because obviously it’s not right for some people to be able to do whatever they want and get away with it. So by putting some of the pressure into the right basket, we get a healthy balance where everyone is equal and accountable.

And lastly, we need to remember the history of the scale in order to understand the importance of balancing out the scale. If we forget the history, we’ll forget why it’s a big deal and we’ll let the left scale fall back down.

This is why it’s sometimes ok for marginalized people to do things that privileged groups cannot do. It might not seem fair and equal. But if we could get the perspective of the left scale, we’d understand why it is fair. Without understanding privilege and power, we cannot understand why something that appears “equal” is actually still favouring the right side of the scale. So don’t sweep oppression under the rug. Take the time to understand it. So that we can all push for true equality, and stop being so ignorant.

Pseudo-intellectual Pricks

He’s most likely educated, possibly a master’s degree in rhetoric. He could be a new atheist, possibly libertarian, most likely white. If you can’t smell his smugness, you can recognize him by the following tropes below.

Next time they use one of these on you, don’t waste your time. Copy and paste. Let them know they’re stereotyped.

The Pacifist

  • The guy who’s always making that bigoted comment on your thread, and always ends with, “Let’s agree to disagree.” He may follow up with a disingenuous attempt at finding common ground.
  • Example: I’m just saying, that if poor people worked harder, they wouldn’t have to depend on the government. You obviously don’t think so. No need to get upset. Let’s just agree to disagree. We can certainly find common ground with the fact that there are definitely some poor people that work very hard.

The Freedom Fighter

  • More indignant than the smug pacifist, he feels you’re taking away his right to have an opinion.
  • Example: I’m allowed to have an opinion about homosexuality. I’m allowed to express my beliefs. I’m allowed to disagree without being attacked. 

The Anecdotally Privileged

  • He’s white (and male) and he’s right. No matter what your experience is, his experience trumps it.
  • Example: Well, I lived in New York City for three years and the NYPD has always treated me with respect.

The Wounded

  • He responds with the old shock and awe routine about being misunderstood.
  • Example: You know who I am. I’m not a bad person. How can you call me a sexist?

The Oppression Authority

  • He married into oppression (or is friends with the oppressed or spent time working among the oppressed), so now his opinion should have gravitas.
  • Example: My wife’s family is Mexican, and they also think illegal immigrants should be deported.

The Call for Civility

  • He indirectly insults your racial, gender, sexual identity, spiritual beliefs, or simply your intelligence. When you call him out on his bigotry, he is (huff huff) insulted. Then he plays the “call for civility.”
  • Example: I haven’t called you any names, but you called me a bigot. If you want to persuade people, you need to treat people with civility.

The Logical Fallacist

  • His go-to is the ad hominem. When you point out that he may not understand a racial problem because he’s white, he screams, “ad hominem!” and runs around with his underwear on his head. Another favorite is the straw man, where he claims you’ve ignored his real argument and are attacking an incorrect version of his argument.
  • Example: You’ve misunderstood my main point. I was talking about the prison industrial complex, not racism. Straw man!

The Claim of Ignorance/Innocence

  • He claims that he’s confused about your opinion on a personal matter and wants to discuss it. Don’t be fooled. He knows exactly what he wants to say and is trying to lead you down a path where he can claim you’ve made a logical fallacy. Then he will claim innocence again–that he was simply trying to have a discussion. He will call for civility. You can’t win.
  • Example: I’m confused. It’s just not natural to be with someone of the same sex.

The Rational Male

  • He is calm, collected, and detached. He understands reason and logic. If you make it personal or emotional, that’s it. Conversation over.
  • Example: Simply put, I fail to see the logic of religion. All religions are the opiate of the masses. But there is one religion that kills people if you disagree with them. And that’s Islam. You don’t see Buddhist bombers, do you? Well, if you’re going to become emotional, then we can’t have this conversation. 

The Neutral Judge

  • He can view the situation from a neutral point of view, implying you cannot. Sure, he understands your POV. Because he’s neutral and wiser than you, he also understands the other side. Because of this ability to discern such (literally) black and white issues with no partiality, he is a better judge than you are.
  • Example: I followed the entire George Zimmerman case and listened to all the evidence presented. Though I find it all tragic, I have to agree with the jurors. You might have anecdotal evidence about racism in the law, but the law is the law.
All men support and perpetuate sexism and sexist oppression in one form or another … Like women, men have been socialized to passively accept sexist ideology. While they need not blame themselves for accepting sexism, they must assume responsibility for eliminating it.
—  bell hooks, Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center

“Call-Out Culture” is nothing but a modern day witch hunt.

People “calling you out” these days means someone doing anything in their power to bring you down for one misstep. You walk a very thin line when you’re dealing with social justice, you see? “Calling you out” means publicly shaming you for what you said and shunning you from their in-groups because you’re guilty of wrongthink. You make one mistake - or something they deem a mistake - and you’ll face the wrath of the righteous. But don’t worry, they’re just trying to help you… At least that’s what Franchesca Ramsey believes.

You’ll be “dragged” and “snatched” while they tag their friends to either chime in or laugh at you. They’ll threaten to dox you and taint your reputation by calling you every “ist” and “phobic” in the book. They’ll try to embarrass and humiliate you “for your own good” and you should listen. You should listen specially if the person “calling you out” happens to be on the lower end of the “privilege” scale. Mother knows best, right? The oppressed knows best. You wouldn’t be a very good cult member if your leaders couldn’t control you.

Sexist Reactions To When A Women Rejects a Man’s Advances

Random Guy at Bar: Wanna come back to my place?

Response One:
You: sorry, I’m not interested
Them: Come on Babbbby, I can change your mind 

Response Two:
You: Sorry, I have a girlfriend
Them: Maybe we can have a three way?

Response Three:
You: Sorry, you’re not my type
Them: Bitch

Response Four:
You: No thanks, maybe we can exchange numbers though?
Them: C’mon, you’ve been flirting with me all night, don’t be such a tease 

Response Five:
You: No thank you, I’m asexual. But maybe we can get coffee sometime?
Them: You’re only asexual because you haven’t met the right guy *winks*

Response Six:
You: Sorry, I have a boyfriend
Them: Okay, sorry for bothering you.

Because men respect the fact that another man is dating you more then they respect a women’s right to say no or to have a sexual orientation that isn’t straight. 

If white people tell me “your culture is sexist and oppresses women”, I’m not gonna deny that. It is sexist and it does oppress women. But that’s besides the point. The issues in my culture gives you no excuse to oppress me or harass me

if you believe using the word “woman” to refer to “(adult) female person” makes you a TERF, then hooks is a terf.  lorde is a terf.  steinem is a terf.  davis is a terf.  every significant anglophone feminist theorist of the past century is a terf. sojourner goddamn truth is a terf.  & if you really have the purity of your convictions, then you should just dissociate yourself from feminism completely, because bell “Big Time Terf” hooks said that feminism is “a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression”.  that movement requires the ability to describe sex, so if you think describing sex is oppressive, feminism is just…  not for you.  period.