this is the patriarchy

I am a queer feminist blogger. I can’t even count the number of times I’ve received rape threats. It takes it’s toll but what these men don’t realise is that it makes me a stronger feminist and a stronger woman. Bring it the fuck on. 🖕🖕🖕🖕

9

Jessica Williams takes down the patriarchy in ‘The Incredible Jessica James’ trailer

  • Jessica Williams has been on the brink of minor stardom for years. Now, after serving as a correspondent on The Daily Show and co-hosting the popular 2 Dope Queens podcast, it looks like she’s ready to make a major career leap with The Incredible Jessica James.
  • In a new trailer for the film, which hits Netflix July 28, Williams’ charismatic, happily single character attends a baby shower and presents an unborn baby with a book titled The ABCs of Subverting the Patriarchal Paradigm.Between this and her character’s takedown of manspreading in the show’s teaser trailer, it looks like The Incredible Jessica James will have a take-no-prisoners approach to sexism. Read more. (7/14/17, 5:04 PM)

in seventh grade i liked a girl. she had blonde hair and hazel eyes and i found it hard to breathe every time she stood near me.

now, i wasn’t the only person to like this girl. she was the most sought after girl in our grade, the one every guy would kill to call his.

they tripped over each other trying to ask her out, even though it was common knowledge she had a steady boyfriend in the year below. she had to reject boys practically every other day.

it would break my heart every time i witnessed the fallout when things got ugly. boys would call her a bitch, a slut, a cunt. once her nudes were even leaked, and half the school turned against her.

i was different. not once did i ask her out or flirt with her. half the time i didn’t dare let my eyes linger on her for too long.

for a while, i pondered this. why it was common behaviour for boys to abuse girls who didn’t like them, while girls who liked girls were wrong for liking them in the first place.

one day it came to me, and it felt like a punch in the chest:

boys who like girls feel they have the right to own them.
girls who like girls feel they don’t even have the right to look at them.

The new art is a big deal

First of all, this official art is absolutely stunning. 

But I couldn’t help but notice the white skates. And yes, I can see that tights are covering them, so the real colour of the actual skate can’t really be seen, but this also represents so much. 

Figure skating is a pretty homophobic and sexist sport. Particularly in the time when young Viktor would have been skating. Girls were meant to be flouncy and pretty and graceful (which is partially why Surya Bonaly had such a hard time and ended up doing the illegal backflip - it’s a really interesting story), and men athletic and manly. 

A huge point of this is that women have to wear white skates, and men have to wear black skates. So, young Viktor, who canonically says he used to play off his androgynous appearance, is wearing ‘white skates’, ladies skates, probably, I think, to make a point. We know from the extra information in one of the BD releases that he doesn’t have a particularly good relationship with the ISU, so maybe this is partly why. It’s pretty damn rebellious against the patriarchy for him to be doing this. 

And perhaps this is reaching, but…

Look at the two crowns. In his younger self, the flowers are smaller and are white like his skates, symbolising innocence and purity. But in his older self, with short hair and black skates, the flowers are golden and taller, representing his victory. We can also see a difference in the colouring of his clothing, his younger self with warm colours, and his older self with cold colours, blue, representing sadness. His colour’s been stripped away from his soul, and finds itself in his crown, in his success. 

I see a powerful message here, about a boy who tried to beat the system but tragically became a part of it once he started winning. 

Or maybe it’s just a really cute art… who knows… But with the amount of symbolism within the anime, some lowkey message put here intentionally like this wouldn’t be too far out of the realms of possibility. 

when scifi is written by women versus men

You can tell that the Vorkosigan Saga was created by a woman; because, it takes Lois McMaster Bujold a total of like two sentences to eliminate all real life pregnancy/childbirth problems in her world building. 

On the other hand, according to Star Trek, in their utopian world where medical miracles are routine, nothing about that process/burden/suffering has apparently changed or improved significantly.

anonymous asked:

pride and prejudice wasn't written as a resistance to the patriarchy djdjfhdhsj what

i mean i’ve been staring at this message for a solid minute now pondering how to reply, trying to figure out how ro reply, but honestly it boils down to one question: have you read it?

because literally the prevalent theme of pride & prejudice as well as other works of Austen—perhaps most visibly, sense & sensibility—is the ironic social commentary on the degraded role of women, as subjected and dependent on the way of whether they would marry well as they used to be?

like, honestly, what did you think it was about? sure it has a romance in it, but it’s probably one of the the most politically designed and carried out romantical arcs in literature, as it relies not so much on mutual affection, but rather darcy aknowledging his fault of diminishing elizabeth as an intelligent human being. at first, we see him as quite obviously set upon taking her for granted and applying stereotypes; startled with her outspoken attitude and clueless as to why she would reject him. because it IS surprising, that’s the point, given the context of Austen’s novel, the commonly praised choice would be to accept not only darcy, but mr collins without another thought. what do you think is the reason mrs bennet was so distraught all the time? there was no way of securing the future of her daughters other than marriage, we hear it being repeated over and over again—they cannot inherit their father’s fortune.

and—good grief. that’s the romantic ‘main plot’ concerning darcy and elizabeth alone, because the whole point is that he changes his beliefs and acknowledges elizabeth as an equal in the end. darcy isn’t exceptional for being surly and broody, he’s exceptional because he listens and learns.

but all the rest? the whole arc of charlotte, and her unhappy and dull marriage to mr collins, and the stark contrast with elizabeth. charlotte is not WRONG, she does the only thing she knows for certain will allow her to live in a respectful way without becoming ‘a burden to her parents’. the arc of lydia, basing off her portrayal against wickham? even with all his debt, infamy and faults, wickham’s opinion is at no point more blemished than lydia’s. that’s the point, that’s reiteraring the original notion of the disparity between men and women in regency England. the radiating, stinging paternalistic attitude of mr collins towards elizabeth when he marries charlotte and TELLS her that she would probably get no better chance. his absolute belief—corresponding with darcy’s, and contrasted with the latter’s rehabilitation later on—that elizabeth has no choice but accept him.

and elizabeth herself—for all the composition and impeccable manners, she IS a controversial figure in the novel. take the scene when she’s bashed by lady catherine de bourgh, the ongoing commentary on her being too forward with her opinions, the continuous bashing coming from her mother—the lingering threat that lizzy’s ‘stubbornness’ will cause her much trouble and, above all, prevent her from securing both her and the other sisters from absolute poverty when their father dies.

and, just … of course it’s written subtly, it’s conveyed in elizabeth’s wit, in austen’s slightly ironic narrative. the problem with the situation of women is not EXPLICITLY named and stated. it’s not modern times where we’re accustomed to forward addressing of feminist issues. no: it’s shown. it is not only the consistent theme in her works, it’s the prevalent theme of them. i mean, come on, there’s tonnes and tonnes of books that were NOT written with a purpose of targeting partiarchy. fuck, there are much MORE of such books than there is of the latter kind. But to choose Pride & Prejudice specifically, a novel which became one of the most famous books in the world, renowned for e x a c t l y t h i s … i cannot comprehend. please, at least consider this: do you really think the purpose of austen writing p&p was writing a romance? really? why would it become so much of a literature landmark, then?

i don’t mean to be nasty and honestly, go and have your opinion, you’re perfectly entitled to it, but it does make me sad that a novel that is a witty, outsanding and one of a kind social commentary on the plight of women in a specific time period written by a woman IN the time period is turned into something as common as a novel with a romantic plot. that’s all.

Wonder Woman spoilers. Hit J to skip. 

Got into a discussion about the implication that Diana finding love with a man was what saved the day and I thought I should go ahead and bring it over here. 

I can see the argument being made here. Diana has been around women all her life. That suddenly a man, and more specifically sex with a man, changes her and makes her a hero. That hetero-sex is what saves the day. 

I have a couple objections to this theory, but let me start by saying I can see why you would feel that way, particularly for those of you who are lesbians. I don’t, and I recognize it’s largely because of who I am and my own views.

What I won’t agree with is the implication that Amazons are all straight. It’s just not true. When Antiope was killed, three women came to her side- her sister, Diana, and a third grief-sticken and screaming who got the camera’s attention for an extended shot even though nobody knew who she was. That was her wife. Fight me. 

Additionally, when Steve and Diana are having their boat sex talk, she says she knows of sex. She knows the pleasures of the flesh. Men are unnecessary for pleasure. She’s either talking about lady love or masturbation (both of which are still pretty taboo to talk about as women today let alone in 1918). I choose to believe it’s the former. She’s had at least one Amazon lover in the comics- Mala in Earth One. 

On to my objections:

Diana’s not a lesbian. She’s bisexual. Bisexuals are allowed to love men. We’re allowed to like men. Steve Trevor, whether romantic or platonic, is a big part of Wonder Woman’s story. He is the Lois to Diana’s Superman. For those of you who say Steve was too much or Steve was intolerable or the het love story ruined it, I ask you to accept that you might have some biases based in your preference for a queer Diana who doesn’t like men. Again, I understand why you feel that way, especially for those of you who are lesbians. But to constantly hear ‘het love’ and ‘het sex’ is annoying at best and erasure at worst. Diana is bisexual. She is queer. Of course I’d like it to be more explicit in the movies, whether through her expressing attraction to women or outright saying it, but the point still stands. This is the most powerful canonically queer character in media. 

Nothing she does is heterosexual. 

Another point is about the love saves the day. It wasn’t just Steve’s love. It wasn’t just Diana’s love for Steve. (And yes, I can see why it might seem rushed, especially for those who aren’t aware of the “Diana’s Lois” history of the ship, but how often do we see the woman falling head over heels for the hero of other movies and why can’t we allow the script to be flipped here? Steve Trevor is very much a counter to most macho action movie stars full of toxic masculinity which is a whole post on its own.)

Love saved the day, but it wasn’t just romantic love. It certainly wasn’t just sexual love. It was also platonic love between the men themselves. When she sees the men embracing each other in the face of certain death, what does she see?

She sees three men who could have gone home when the money ran out. Three men who continued into a suicide mission, following Steve because they loved him too. When Steve gave them the option to go home, they say “she can handle herself, but what would you do without us?” They follow him because they love him. They’d deny it, of course, but it’s there. That brotherhood. She sees that. She recognizes it from the way the Amazons loved those they fought with. That’s how she recognizes that there is good in men. That’s why she believes they can choose good. They aren’t fighting for the anger and the bloodshed. They are fighting because they love. 

Just like she does. 

What frightens me about the men I know is that I know men are so good at compartmentalizing and creating public and private selves. I don’t think there’s a single man I know, including gay men, including men I love, including men in my own family, who I don’t fear might secretly be doing some horrific shit on the internet. I’ve just read too many stories about women who were happily married for years before they found out their husbands’ abusive online habits.

I’ve often joked with my friends about how me using the internet in front of other people (like in a class) is “taking a walk on the wild side” because the might see my search history, but I just want to clarify: when I say that my search history is private and might be embarassing, I meant, “I look up geeky, uncool things like fanfiction and I spend too much time reading celebrity gossip blogs and looking at Pinterest shit,” not embarassing as in the male sense of “My search history would reveal that I send violent, abusive threats to women online and watch rape porn.” My private self is maybe less cool than my public self, but it isn’t so dramatically different that my ethics would be called into question if my search history were to be made public.

At church today I saw a man very awkwardly have to enter the women’s restroom to change his kid’s diaper.

Seriously. It’s 2017. Why don’t we have changing tables in both bathrooms? This is exactly why we need feminism. “Women should stay with the children” is very much alive and well.

This is patriarchy, and while it primarily affects women, it hurts men as well.

Petition for changing tables in ALL bathrooms.

//terfs stay away//