posts tagged "sexism"

clockworkgate:

biscuitsarenice:

We Can’t Get Out Of The Bedroom Now.

Shirley Maclaine on Parkinson in 1975

Holy crap.

(via lipstick-feminists)

jessicaisgray:

"When I got into the music industry a majority of female artists I’d seen were trying to regurgitate an ideal of the female image. They were trying to be almost a replica of what was popular. I just found that to be very boring and dishonest. I just wanted to be in control of my clothes. I wanted that choice. That’s the only things that I’m saying. Women should not be marginalized. We shouldn’t play into the sexism." - Janelle Monae [x[

oh this this this

(via feminishblog)

themarysue:

claudiaboleyn:

Really, though, how dare they take Queen Elizabeth 1 and turn her into another lovesick woman waiting for her beloved Doctor?

Queen Elizabeth 1 who did not marry because she considered herself married to her country. Queen Elizabeth 1 who did not marry because she had seen what became of her poor half sister Mary who lost the support of the people and almost suffered a rebellion when she married a Spanish royal. Queen Elizabeth 1 who did not marry because she believed that to be a fair and just leader, she could not let her heart rule her head. Queen Elizabeth 1 who did not marry because was abused by a man she was supposed to be able to trust in her early teens. Elizabeth 1 whose mother was brutally slaughtered by her husband and so did not trust in love.

It’s insulting and poor sexist writing to disregard that important choice on her behalf. It’s upsetting, and predictable, and everything I expected from Steven Moffat, who cannot seem to write a significant female character who isn’t in love, obsessed with, or entirely reliant on the Doctor.

image

Oh word. Don’t get me wrong, I loved the 50th anniversary special, but this did rub me the wrong way a bit.

Sexism in THE WAY, WAY BACK

Was struck by the casual commodification of young girls’ bodies in Jim Rash’s new film, The Way, Way Back, a film that portrays several very round female characters (seriously, Toni Collette, Allison Janney, and Maya Rudolph are in this film).

Our 14-year-old protagonist is being shown about his new workplace, the water park, when a lifeguard instructs a compliant girl in a bikini waiting to go down the waterslide to hold in place for at least half a minute. The lifeguard, the protagonist, and their boss (and the audience) all ogle the girl’s ass in the this time. She is nameless, and might as well be faceless. The joke is that she is unaware that is being used as a sexual object, yet is implicit in allowing it. Later on in the film, the protagonist is seen doing the same thing for laughs. The casual commodification of girl’s bodies is a rite of passage from geek to cool.

descentintotyranny:


2012: The year in sexism
Twelve months of disgraceful discrimination.
Dec. 30 2012
January. It is reported that on average a measly two out of ten speakers on the BBC’s Today programme are women. (Later in the year, John Humphrys is reduced to asking a man to “imagine” he is a woman in an all-male panel on breast cancer.)
February. The US radio-show host Rush Limbaugh calls the student Sandra Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute” for speaking in favour of contraceptive coverage in health insurance plans. But at least he finally provides a decisive answer to the question: “How much of a tool do you have to be to make 67 firms pledge never to advertise on your show again?”
March. The infamous Uni Lad website returns after a brief hiatus and promptly begins spewing the same misogynistic vitriol about “smashing wenches”. (Minus its previous advice that low rape reporting rates represent “good odds”. So that’s better.)
April. The Sunday Times TV critic and noted Adonis A A Gill claims that the classicist Mary Beard is “too ugly for TV” and “should be kept away from cameras”. She gently points out that he has accidentally “mistaken prejudice for being witty”.
May. Aishwarya Rai Bachchan in Gaining Weight While Pregnant Shocker. The media and thousands of fans lambast the Indian actress for failing to shed the extra pounds immediately post-partum. Special mention to those who accused her of “betraying her country”.
June. Two issues of Now magazine appear side by side on newsagents’ shelves. One reports that the model Abbey Clancy is “dangerously thin” and girls are starving themselves to look like her. The other offers diet tips to get her figure. Meanwhile, the European Commission launches a breathtakingly patronising video aimed at encouraging women into science: a masterpiece of dancing and giggling, with a pink background and make-up montages.
July. The blogger Anita Sarkeesian faces a viral hate campaign after merely proposing research into the tropes of women in video games. One geek feels so strongly that there is no problem with the portrayal of women in the medium that he creates an online game where players can punch Sarkeesian in the face.
August. In the US, the Republican science enthusiast Todd Akin proclaims that women’s bodies are magically able to ward off pregnancy in cases of “legitimate” rape. (To be fair, his research efforts were hampered because Mitt Romney had the binder full of women that day.)
September. “No More Page Three” campaigners are stunned into humiliated silence when the former Sun deputy editor Neil Wallis stymies them with the shock revelation that there are other problems in the world. Admirably, the Sun covers these important issues on page two, which incidentally doubles as the crucial buffer zone between the outraged anti-Jimmy Savile campaign on the front page and the teenage tits on page three.
October. Netmums pronounces feminism dead, on the somewhat amusing basis that only one in seven women self-defines as a feminist – giving it a nationwide “membership” numbering just under 4.5 million … more than ten times that of the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties combined.
November. PlayStation decides it’s a great idea to advertise its new Vita console using a picture of a woman with two sets of breasts and no head. I’ll just repeat that one. They advertise it using a picture of a woman. With two sets of breasts. And no head.
December. Just as I’m worrying that nobody will be noteworthily sexist enough in the first few days of December to meet my deadline, FHM rides to my rescue in spectacular style with its astounding, assault-normalising advice that readers shouldn’t borrow socks from their girlfriend/mother/victim. Cheers, FHM! Job done.

descentintotyranny:

2012: The year in sexism

Twelve months of disgraceful discrimination.

Dec. 30 2012

January. It is reported that on average a measly two out of ten speakers on the BBC’s Today programme are women. (Later in the year, John Humphrys is reduced to asking a man to “imagine” he is a woman in an all-male panel on breast cancer.)

February. The US radio-show host Rush Limbaugh calls the student Sandra Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute” for speaking in favour of contraceptive coverage in health insurance plans. But at least he finally provides a decisive answer to the question: “How much of a tool do you have to be to make 67 firms pledge never to advertise on your show again?”

March. The infamous Uni Lad website returns after a brief hiatus and promptly begins spewing the same misogynistic vitriol about “smashing wenches”. (Minus its previous advice that low rape reporting rates represent “good odds”. So that’s better.)

April. The Sunday Times TV critic and noted Adonis A A Gill claims that the classicist Mary Beard is “too ugly for TV” and “should be kept away from cameras”. She gently points out that he has accidentally “mistaken prejudice for being witty”.

May. Aishwarya Rai Bachchan in Gaining Weight While Pregnant Shocker. The media and thousands of fans lambast the Indian actress for failing to shed the extra pounds immediately post-partum. Special mention to those who accused her of “betraying her country”.

June. Two issues of Now magazine appear side by side on newsagents’ shelves. One reports that the model Abbey Clancy is “dangerously thin” and girls are starving themselves to look like her. The other offers diet tips to get her figure. Meanwhile, the European Commission launches a breathtakingly patronising video aimed at encouraging women into science: a masterpiece of dancing and giggling, with a pink background and make-up montages.

July. The blogger Anita Sarkeesian faces a viral hate campaign after merely proposing research into the tropes of women in video games. One geek feels so strongly that there is no problem with the portrayal of women in the medium that he creates an online game where players can punch Sarkeesian in the face.

August. In the US, the Republican science enthusiast Todd Akin proclaims that women’s bodies are magically able to ward off pregnancy in cases of “legitimate” rape. (To be fair, his research efforts were hampered because Mitt Romney had the binder full of women that day.)

September. “No More Page Three” campaigners are stunned into humiliated silence when the former Sun deputy editor Neil Wallis stymies them with the shock revelation that there are other problems in the world. Admirably, the Sun covers these important issues on page two, which incidentally doubles as the crucial buffer zone between the outraged anti-Jimmy Savile campaign on the front page and the teenage tits on page three.

October. Netmums pronounces feminism dead, on the somewhat amusing basis that only one in seven women self-defines as a feminist – giving it a nationwide “membership” numbering just under 4.5 million … more than ten times that of the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties combined.

November. PlayStation decides it’s a great idea to advertise its new Vita console using a picture of a woman with two sets of breasts and no head. I’ll just repeat that one. They advertise it using a picture of a woman. With two sets of breasts. And no head.

December. Just as I’m worrying that nobody will be noteworthily sexist enough in the first few days of December to meet my deadline, FHM rides to my rescue in spectacular style with its astounding, assault-normalising advice that readers shouldn’t borrow socks from their girlfriend/mother/victim. Cheers, FHM! Job done.

(via woolfisms)

elizabitchtaylor:

7 Ways Women and Girls Are Stereotyped, Sexualized, and Underrepresented on Screen

(via slutgrrrlinternational)

chrisjeffery:

chrisjeffery:

A pattern I’ve noticed.

I am blown away at how popular this comic has been! Guess I needn’t be so hesitant to express my opinions through the comic.

chrisjeffery:

chrisjeffery:

A pattern I’ve noticed.

I am blown away at how popular this comic has been! Guess I needn’t be so hesitant to express my opinions through the comic.

(via takealookatyourlife)

sailorswayze:

AM I RIGHT LADIES

(via shojokahn)

timeofthedecade:

bigdaddyg-wil:

this guy pulled out his dick in front of like 5 billion feminist protestors holy shit

Some context for the idiots claiming the women are overreacting:
This occurred at a Slut Walk. For those not familiar with it, the Slut Walk is basically a peaceful protest seeking to eliminate the rape apologism so prevalent in society. The basis is that no woman is “asking for it,” with “it” being rape. It’s not a feminist protest; it’s a human rights protest.
Many of the protesters, as you can probably imagine, have dealt with sexual harassment or rape in their own lives. Many of them have structured their daily activities to avoid being raped. The gathering is supposed to be a place for them to feel empowered and able to recover in the company of those who understand what they’ve been through or who will not blame them.
Nobody at a Slut Walk will tell a survivor that it’s her fault. They will not ask what she was wearing to provoke her attacker. Nobody will say she had too much to drink. Nobody will tell the men in the group that they are inherently rapists themselves, and nobody will tell a male survivor that his experience “wasn’t really rape.”
Then, this fellow comes along. He sees this gathering of survivors and their supporters, and to him, it’s a joke. He sees feminazis. He sees girls who are taking “a bit of fun” too seriously. And what does he do? He exposes himself to this group of survivors and supporters - some of whom are, in fact, underage.
He sexually harasses literally hundreds of women in one act. Aside from public indecency, there was cruel intent in his actions. He wanted to make them uncomfortable. He wanted to “put them in their place.” Other photos from this event show him flipping the protesters off and laughing at their anger.
And there are still people defending his actions. There are those who still feel like these women were asking for itand that they deserved to be harassed for trying to claim they weren’t. There are those who feel that women should be taught a lesson this way, and they applaud this man’s actions.
So no, he didn’t pull out his dick in front of feminist protesters. He harassed dozens - if not hundreds - of rape survivors. The reaction to his actions alone outline the purpose of the Slut Walk.
For those of you still doubting whether what he did was wrong (and I do wonder if there’s something wrong with you, if you have doubts), let me give you an analogous situation. Imagine a gathering of black civil rights activists. Imagine Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, Rosa Parks, and all their colleagues gathered together to demonstrate that being black did not make them lesser people. That being black and living in the South did not mean they were “asking” to be the target of hate crimes.
And at this gathering, a white man decides he should teach them a lesson by pointedly hanging a noose from the nearest tree and laughing at their anger. And other white men, laughing along with him, commend him for taking these activists down a peg.
That’s what happened here. It’s not an “OMG, I can’t believe he did that!” moment. It’s an “OMG, there are people who think this is okay” moment. And the fact is, it’s not. It never will be. And that’s the take home message of this ridiculous rant I’ve written up.

timeofthedecade:

bigdaddyg-wil:

this guy pulled out his dick in front of like 5 billion feminist protestors holy shit

Some context for the idiots claiming the women are overreacting:

This occurred at a Slut Walk. For those not familiar with it, the Slut Walk is basically a peaceful protest seeking to eliminate the rape apologism so prevalent in society. The basis is that no woman is “asking for it,” with “it” being rape. It’s not a feminist protest; it’s a human rights protest.

Many of the protesters, as you can probably imagine, have dealt with sexual harassment or rape in their own lives. Many of them have structured their daily activities to avoid being raped. The gathering is supposed to be a place for them to feel empowered and able to recover in the company of those who understand what they’ve been through or who will not blame them.

Nobody at a Slut Walk will tell a survivor that it’s her fault. They will not ask what she was wearing to provoke her attacker. Nobody will say she had too much to drink. Nobody will tell the men in the group that they are inherently rapists themselves, and nobody will tell a male survivor that his experience “wasn’t really rape.”

Then, this fellow comes along. He sees this gathering of survivors and their supporters, and to him, it’s a joke. He sees feminazis. He sees girls who are taking “a bit of fun” too seriously. And what does he do? He exposes himself to this group of survivors and supporters - some of whom are, in fact, underage.

He sexually harasses literally hundreds of women in one act. Aside from public indecency, there was cruel intent in his actions. He wanted to make them uncomfortable. He wanted to “put them in their place.” Other photos from this event show him flipping the protesters off and laughing at their anger.

And there are still people defending his actions. There are those who still feel like these women were asking for itand that they deserved to be harassed for trying to claim they weren’t. There are those who feel that women should be taught a lesson this way, and they applaud this man’s actions.

So no, he didn’t pull out his dick in front of feminist protesters. He harassed dozens - if not hundreds - of rape survivors. The reaction to his actions alone outline the purpose of the Slut Walk.

For those of you still doubting whether what he did was wrong (and I do wonder if there’s something wrong with you, if you have doubts), let me give you an analogous situation. Imagine a gathering of black civil rights activists. Imagine Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, Rosa Parks, and all their colleagues gathered together to demonstrate that being black did not make them lesser people. That being black and living in the South did not mean they were “asking” to be the target of hate crimes.

And at this gathering, a white man decides he should teach them a lesson by pointedly hanging a noose from the nearest tree and laughing at their anger. And other white men, laughing along with him, commend him for taking these activists down a peg.

That’s what happened here. It’s not an “OMG, I can’t believe he did that!” moment. It’s an “OMG, there are people who think this is okay” moment. And the fact is, it’s not. It never will be. And that’s the take home message of this ridiculous rant I’ve written up.

(via lipstick-feminists)

takealookatyourlife:

muffinw:

cynicalxme:

ikana-canyon:

bloodredcandyapples:

timeturner:

Oh, please continue dictating how women should present themselves and take away the control they have over their own appearance. Please continue pressurising women to fit into one category when they should be able to do whatever the heck they want to do.

why are some people so duuuuuumb

yes because we totally wanted the D. Riiiight

Guys who say shit like this should prepare themselves for no V ever. 

I need feminism because…

hahahahahah fuuuuuuuuck you.

(via takealookatyourlife)

bigfatfeminist:

oswinstark:

saltbender:

itwasagraveyardsmash:

saltbender:

let’s think about how men never have to settle for the “geeky” and “nerdy girl” and how there are dozens of movies where the ugly little duckling is transformed to this gorgeous woman so that the male character can be with her

and how there are dozens of movies where women are taught to look past looks and see that those “nerdy” guys are actually really great

Did 21,000+ people really never see Shallow Hal? because that’s one of my favorite movies. Js.

wow sexism is over tbh

WOW SHALLOW HAL EXISTS

THAT EXCUSES EVERYTHING

THAT ONE MOVIE CLEARLY MAKES THE HUNDREDS OF OTHER AWFUL ROMANTIC COMEDIES OKAY

SEXISM IS OVER EVERYONE! WOO!!

Casual reminder that Shallow Hall involves an average-looking overweight dude refusing to date any woman who’s not “hot” and can’t be convinced of the worth of women who aren’t “hot” until he’s hypnotized so he CAN’T SEE HOW THEY ACTUALLY LOOK. The whole message of Shallow Hal is not that “all people are attractive” but is in fact “even ugly people can be loved sometimes.”

inflatedmoose:

coelasquid:

christophernolans:

Ryan Gosling on the MPAA’s decision to give Blue Valentine an NC-17 rating over its inclusion of an oral sex scene. (x)

The same thing happened in the movie Boys Don’t Cry, it was going to get an NC17 rating for an oral sex scene that ended up getting cut down but, you know, the “trans man being raped and murdered” thing was cool with the MPAA.

Huh.

yo you think the mpaa might be hella sexist?

(via catastrofries)

What unites creepshots, the Middleton photographs, the revenge porn websites, is that they all feature the same fetishisation of non-consensual sexual activity with women who either you don’t have any access to, or have been denied future access to. And it’s really this product of rage and entitlement.

Mary Anne Franks, associate professor of law at the University of Miami, Guardian article about creepshots. (via ladonnapietra)

This is a very good article about why Reddit’s anti-woman subreddits, leaked photos of Kate Middleton and other invasions of privacy matter. It’s not just gross, but rather indicative of a huge, visible burst of people honestly thinking that it is their right to invade and de-humanize women, women’s bodies and women’s lives. The posters on subreddits like (the late) creepshots honestly believe that free speech means they can do what they want and shouldn’t have to deal with any repercussion… I think this is an early battle in what will be a huge fight both on what internet anonymity means as well as being a pretty clear example of what ingrained, institutionalized sexism looks like in 2012.

Found on downlo

(via ferniecommaalex)

(via wilwheaton)

doe-eyes:

fucknosexisthalloweencostumes:

Oscar the Grouch(Sesame Street)

*VOMITING*

(via fsufeministalumna)

Vaginas Are Sperm Depositories and Other Scary Things About the State of New York’s Sex Ed Curricula

fuckyeahsexeducation:

rhrealitycheck:

Written by Martha Kempner for RH Reality Check. This diary is cross-posted; commenters wishing to engage directly with the author should do so at the original post.

Along with many others children, teens, and adults, this week I went back to school, too. I started teaching Introduction to Human Sexuality at a local college, something I haven’t done in about six years. In an effort to gauge what my students had already learned and what they wanted to know, I gave them an anonymous questionnaire which, in part, asked them to describe their sexuality education up until this point. At least five of them said that they’d had the “standard” or “usual” high school sex education. Unfortunately, this wasn’t particularly enlightening to me because as a new report from the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) highlights: when it comes to sex ed there is no such thing as standard; every district or even every classroom is different.

A survey of school systems across New York was conducted by NYCLU to determine what, if anything, they were teaching students about sex. Schools in the state are not required to teach comprehensive sexuality education, and while they are required to teach about HIV and certain other health topics, most of the lessons do not address sexuality or relationships. Schools do have to teach about alcohol, drugs, and tobacco; the prevention and detection of certain cancers; child development and parenting skills; and interpersonal violence. They do not, according to the new report, Birds, Bees, and Bias, How Absent Sex Ed Standards Fail New York Students, have to teach about “healthy relationship skills, STI and pregnancy prevention, puberty, [and] anatomy” or “other core aspects of effective, comprehensive sex education.” In 2005, the Department of Education issued state standards for health education, which included many topics related to sexual health. However, these standards are voluntary, and school districts do not have to comply with them. The authors also mention the National Sex Education Standards, which were released early this year by a number of national organizations. These set minimum content requirements for concepts in sex education but are also not binding. The report concludes: 

“The current legal and policy climate permits schools in New York to decide what, if any, sex education they will teach beyond the mandated HIV education. As a result, whether New York’s teens graduate from high school with the information and skills crucial to making lifelong healthy and informed decisions about sex and relationships rests in the hands of each individual school district, principal and health education teacher, with little guidance and even less oversight.”

To determine what students are learning, NYCLU sent questionnaires to a sample of school districts across the state making sure to include small, medium, and large districts. New York City was excluded in part for efficiency purposes. Since the surveys were sent out, however, the city passed a sex education mandate that went into during the 2011-2012 school year. NYCLU says: “We look forward to reviewing New York City data and instruction at a future date.” In total, 108 school districts were included, representing 542,955 students or nearly half of all students enrolled in districts outside New York City. In addition, the authors reviewed the most commonly used textbooks in the state.

The study found major gaps in the education young people should have been receiving, as well as numerous factual errors and biases in the information they were actually given.  

Read the rest here.

I’m sure most of you have already heard about this, but this is exactly why we need to change our sex education system.

1 2 3