Lights, Camera, Feminism!

[terffighter]

There’s a YouTube Red series coming out called “The Thinning”. The basic premise, for those who haven’t seen the trailer, is that overpopulation is an issue, so a standardized high school test is put in place to test the intellectual capabilities of the population. The ones who fail the test are put to death, and the ones who pass are allowed to live. My thoughts are a bit messy, but here they are.

There are already some pretty glaring problems with this. For one, a system like this would primarily target lower and middle class people, POC, and developmentally disabled people (much like standardized testing does in real life). This becomes especially problematic when you take into account the language they use to refer to the people who fail: specifically, they call them “parasites”. This language is commonly used to refer to marginalized people in real life, especially to justify why they should be killed (which is of course, the plot).

Now, they could have taken the above point and incorporated it into their plot, thereby making it an insightful commentary into our current social structures and how they could/should be changed. Instead, they chose to make the protagonists two white, conventionally attractive, upper class abled people, one of whom is the son of the President.

Honestly, at this point I’m not surprised YouTube is pulling this shit. There are probably a lot more problems with it, but these are the ones I gleaned from a two minute preview.

- Mod Òðinn.

@waluigitheanti @informative-feminist @heartandstride @socialjusticeolivia anything you guys want to add, I’m open to hearing, or just spread this around.

[lights-camera-feminism]

That's actually a really good point - I hadn't thought of that. While I'm (pretty) sure it wasn't intentional on the part of the producers, that's exactly the issue - unintentional things like this serve to perpetuate the already harmful stereotypes and beliefs society holds about marginalized people.

[lights-camera-feminism]

The Office’s Kelly Kapoor - “I was raped”

Today’s post is about The Office (Season 5, Episode 7, to be specific).

Let me preface this by saying that I love The Office. When I had surgery this fall, I was home for 6 weeks, and my whole life was essentially an Office marathon. However, like almost all media, there were some elements of this show that really, really, rubbed me the wrong way… Season 5, Episode 7 being one of them.

The episode in question features Kelly Kapoor, who has gotten herself in trouble by submitting a false report of Dwight and Jim’s customer service surveys. When Michael, Dwight, and Jim confront her about this, her go-to excuse is to blurt out, “I was raped!”

- Here’s the clip - 16:14 -

Whoa. Okay. Hold up.

If you’ve watched so much as one episode of The Office, you know that Kelly is an unreliable, gossipy character who makes up a lot of stuff.

But there’s definitely a line that gets crossed when the writers of the show (one of whom is Mindy Kaling herself) use presumable false rape accusations to further develop a character known for lying.

The writers portray rape accusations as a flimsy, easy excuse that women use to get out of “bigger problems”.

Really, this couldn’t be further from the truth. Accusing someone of rape - or even saying you were raped, without giving out names - is an incredibly harrowing process that is met with a lot of skepticism, victim blaming, and oftentimes straight-out harassment. Ironically, it is media portrayals like the one in The Office that perpetuate this notion in the first place.

For reference, 3 out of every 1000 rapists spend a day in jail. That’s .3%. Then let’s consider that only 1% of those are false reports (false also includes unfounded, which means they’re not all really false), which gets us to .003% of reported rapes end up with an innocent person in jail. Someone did the math on this once in response to a post on my main blog, and it came up that 6 out of 1,000,000 rapists who are in jail, are innocent.

It’s also important to note Michael’s reaction to Kelly’s statement. He immediately assumes she is lying, and goes so far as to tell her, “you cannot say ‘I was raped’ and expect all of your problems to go away, Kelly. Not again.”

Even though it might seem as though he has good reason to distrust Kelly, there is never a good reason to discredit or refuse to believe a person who comes forward and says they were raped. Although the scenario in The Office was indeed a false allegation, inserting such a narrative into an extremely popular television show, which rarely plays out like that in real life, is dangerous and damaging to sexual assault victims and the people they go to should they choose to tell what happened.

Rape accusations are an issue that is widely disputed, albeit for no good reason, but the Office Episode 7 of Season 5 does not do anything to close the gap with these misconceptions - rather, it further perpetuates them and aids in alienating victims from society and those who have the choice to believe them or not. 

[lights-camera-feminism]

How I feel about the American news the past few weeks. It’s so important to stay up with current events, but there is so much thrown at you constantly, It’s wearing. 

[lights-camera-feminism]

Trump uses the excuse of making the ban to protect from terrorism (a very broad, hateful incorrect generalization). Let’s set aside the terrorists that are home grown, and the ones from any other religion or region. This ban is still so very wrong. Trump even cites 9/11 attacks - but didn’t include the countries where the attackers originated in his ban. Not surprisingly, Trump has businesses in those countries.

[lights-camera-feminism]

Planned Parenthood is billed through government issued insurance the same way any other provider who accepts it does. I like this graphic personally, it gives a very helpful visual of how the process works.

[lights-camera-feminism]

This ad came across my twitter feed today. First things first - a lookup to see who is running the page (then we’ll get into their claim). Turns out it’s paid for by Energy Transfer Partners. Address listed is to a conference center called Travis Tower, and the guy listed is a “infrastructure principal specialist,” which from what I can tell is directly related to, well, building the tech needed to move products. So who is ETP? A natural gas and propane company, naturally. Specifically, one of the DAPL companies. That’s sketchy as hell at best.

Move onto the ad itself. First, it focuses on the Sioux. They’re not erased for once, but it ignores that the Sioux are were not consulted before their land was planned for outside use. Oh, and that it’ll destroy native burial grounds and sacred sites if constructed. Some of those sites are already purposefully destroyed - within 24 hours of the Sioux submitting proof of their sacred grounds, Dakota Access started construction in those areas. As it stands true to US history, the indigenous people are yet again having their culture destroyed and being used and stolen from for others benefit. 

I’m trying to keep this short and more readable, so I’ll add one last bit. If (when) this pipeline leaks, it’ll pollute the Mississippi River. That river is integral to many natives and a large (generally poor) swath of the US. It also feeds into the Gulf of Mexico. An oil leak would harm the river, it’s ecosystem, the people that rely on it, and continue into the ocean.

[lights-camera-feminism]

Paul Ryan Really Doesn't Care If Mexico Pays For Trump's Wall

"I’m not going to get into quibbling over whether they should or shouldn’t pay for it."

According to House Speaker Paul Ryan, it doesn’t matter what the president says. We are “are just going to have to get used to” President Trump promoting torture, racism, and making false promises (specifically mentioned as where it deals with the federal budget). 

“He also suggested people should take what Drumpf says less seriously." Talk about a dangerous precedent. What the President says should be scrutinized, considering the position of power which the office conveys. If nothing else, consider the many executive orders that have been signed into effect already. What Trump says matters, and Ryan dismissing it is both ignorant and dangerous at best.

-Mod Crow