Mal @mal1ntent - Tumblr Blog

Reblog if you're transmasc, support trans men, or want a chocolate chip cookie

MANIFESTING A GOOD JUNE MANIFESTING A GOOD JUNE MANIFESTING A GOOD JUNE MANIFESTING A GOOD JUNE MANIFESTING A GOOD JUNE MANIFESTING A GOOD JUNE MANIFESTING A GOOD JUNE MANIFESTING A GOOD JUNE MANIFESTING A GOOD JUNE MANIFESTING A GOOD JUNE MANIFESTING A GOOD JUNE MANIFESTING A GOOD JUNE

bauliya

so women are supposed to grin and bear the books, the comics, the movies, the plays, the tv shows, the stories, the sci-fi, the translated ancient poems, the fucking millennia of men writing about their self inserts torturing women and it being declared as High Art by other men, we’re supposed to read it in our free time, study it in classrooms, include their styles in our own writing, accept their cultural influence as natural, watch it in the cinema, write about it, talk about it, accept it, aspire it, but men can’t tolerate three seconds of female wish fulfilment of a woman snapping the wrist of a creep without feeling personally kicked in the balls.

darkshrimpemotions

This reminds me of something I observed in college while I was doing my honors thesis on women in modern horror films. I watched a LOT of horror during that time as part of my research, and sometimes that was done with my family around.

And my dad and brothers? Were deeply disturbed by the movie Jennifer’s Body. I was flabbergasted. It’s not scary! It’s not even that gory. But they were horrified by it. These men who grew up on 70s slashers were legitimately shook by 90 minutes of Megan Fox eating a few teenage boys, mostly off-screen.

Similarly, my all-male reading panel for my thesis? Were so disturbed by my synopsis of the film Teeth that they couldn’t even talk about it. One of them said he couldn’t look at his wife for a week after reading it.

Again, grown-ass men who study and teach media for a living. Who definitely watch and enjoy horror movies. One of whom was a huge Tarantino buff. We watched and read worse in his intro to mass media class! But one movie about a girl whose vag could bite was enough to haunt him.

Then of course you have things like the Gone Girl backlash–men yelling that Amy Dunne is evil and women clamoring to assure everyone that they know she is not someone to emulate–the backlash against Carol Danvers, and, more recently, the griping from MRAs against the upcoming film Hustlers, which is about strippers scamming their Wall Street clients.

My conclusion? Most men–at least most straight, cisgender men, who are both my sample population and most of the ones whining that Carol is a “villain”–are perfectly fine with, and desensitized to, media where men do violence to women (horror movies), or men do violence to men (horror and action movies). They’re even sort of fine when women do violence to women (“ooooo cat fight!”).

But they get intensely uncomfortable when women are depicted doing any kind of violence to men, especially in films that tilt the balance of power to the other side of the m/f gender binary beyond a single moment or scene.

So woman as flesh-eating monster with men as her preferred cuisine? Woman who responds to unwanted sexual contact by biting it off? Woman who frames her cheating husband for murder? Woman whose response to harassment–behavior that many of the loudest whiners know is both creepy and reflective of their own thoughts/actions–is to break something?

Too scary. Unacceptable. Disturbing. These men hate being presented with the idea, even in fiction, that their position of power is socially constructed, that it could easily be flipped the other way. It terrifies them.

In feeling that terror, they experience a tiny modicum of what living, existing, moving, being perceived as a woman in the world is like.

And they flinch every time.

tzikeh

Here have a newspaper comic from 1993

souplover13

image: five-panel comic showing a man reading the daily news. monday through thursday the headline is “Stalker Kills Woman” and the man is calm. on friday the headline is “Woman Kills Stalker” and he screams in fear. end ID.

ororium-z

Happy Pride!

rootbeergoddess

Every pride, you must reblog this. No exceptions

thesaltofcarthage

I love that four different people on my feed scheduled this joyous person to reblog by 8am on June 1. I look forward to seeing this a dozen more times today.

rainintheevening

Okay, we got a new one, boys.

stud-yawgmoth

My analysis of "Asimov's Tail:"

It's the inverse of Chekov's Gun ("If there's a gun on the table in act 1, it should go off in act 3" or someone like that). Asimov's Tail is like saying "If a gun goes off in act 3, it should be on the table in act 1."

You don't need that for guns because we all know what guns are. A character in a modern setting pulling out a gun to win a fight on page 120 isn't going to bother the reader. But a tail is unexpected: You need the reader to buy in to and expect the tail before it becomes plot-relevant, or it'll read like a deus ex machina.

(Another comparison is Chekov was talking about the stage, and Asimov is talking about books. Asimov's Tail may not be as applicable to the stage, where the audience can all clearly see the character's tail in his costume.)

Separately, Asimov doesn't just say "You have to describe the tail," but "Someone has to step on the tail." Your character's trait or ability that will help them in a critical moment later in the plot must also have downsides. This will make the character feel more real, even if they're fantastical and alien.

dreamingnemleria

dragon-in-a-fez

darklight-owl

Someone had fun making this

whatbigotspost

“It is troubling to see that attitudes towards gender equality are not more positive," said Julia Gillard of King’s College London.

innerchildabortionclinic

>Particularly among Gen Z, our data shows an interesting duality: they are both the group most likely to agree that women who have a successful career are more attractive to men but are simultaneously most likely to agree that a wife should always obey her husband and that a woman should never appear too self-sufficient or independent.

Incredibly stupid things are happening

cryptiddies

I know these two things seem contradictory, but there’s nothing a conservative man loves more than to tear off an angel’s wings. There are plenty of women that would willingly choose the obedient SAHM lifestyle, but these kinds of men always seem to go for the opposite. Why? Because it’s a power play. There’s no need to break a horse that’s already broken, and that would do nothing to validate that man, his ego, and his place in a world he sees as designed for him.

ifoundmybeatingheartagain

derinthescarletpescatarian

Another factor is that these men avoid dating conservative women who already want the lives they want them to have because those women's standards are too high. Specifically, such women expect to be the obedient stay at home mum, but they also expect their men to be the masculine ideal from the other half of the equation -- they tend to look down on their men if they cry, they expect them to be able to financially provide for the household, they want them to uphold their end of the bargain. You see this again and again in groups of conservative men who go out of their way to date liberal women; there is a power play, to tame someone untamed and bring her into line with his expectations, but there's also her lack of expectations of him. They want a woman who will do all the household and keep the home but ALSO will not reject him for not being able to afford to finance the family alone. They want a woman who'll respect and obey him but ALSO be fun and relaxed and let him show whatever emotions he wants. They want the Perfect Trad Wife who won't expect him to be the Perfect Trad Husband.

You see the same thing in conservatives who complain that all their leftie friends are abandoning them, but who won't just hang out with right wing friends instead. They don't want to hang out with other righties because a group of righties quickly becomes judgy and hateful and socially competitive, and is only fun to hang out with when they want to vent, whereas their leftie friends were more relaxed and fun. They want license to be unpleasant and expect unreasonable things of others, but want the people around them to be pleasant and not expect unreasonable things of them.

sunspotpony

We have some excellent commentary here, but I want you to keep in mind an adage that will serve you well on the modern internet.

"If something immediately makes me feel anger, repulsion, or joy, with even a simple blurb, it's probably manipulating me."

First off, Newsweek is hardly an unbiased source these days. The majority shareholder is Dev Pagrad, is exceptionally wealthy, and has been repeatedly pushing newsweek to be an arm of the right wing's propaganda machine. It is HARD LINE far-right, Anti-trans, anti-woman, anti-immigrant, anti-science To cite the Southern Poverty Law Center (by way of Wikipedia)

In November 2022, the Southern Poverty Law Center reported that Newsweek had "taken a marked radical right turn by buoying extremists and promoting authoritarian leaders" since it hired conservative political activist Josh Hammer as editor-at-large. It noted the magazine's elevation of conspiracy theorists, publication of conspiracy theories about COVID-19, views such as support for a ban on all legal immigration to the United States and denying adults access to trans-affirming medical care, and failure to disclose potential conflicts of interest in the content published on Hammer's opinion section and podcast. https://web.archive.org/web/20221106005834/https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2022/11/04/newsweek-embraces-anti-democracy-hard-right

Newsweek, when even linking to the study it cites, doesn't... actually link to the study. It just links to newsweek's "study" tab. It does MENTION the study, which allowed me to track it down. https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/almost-third-gen-z-men-globally-agree-wife-should-obey-her-husband IPSOS is a MARKETING FIRM, whose CEO Jean Laurent Poitou, was the former head of Accenture, under whose leadership, sure did a lot of fraud, engaging in tax avoidance, and other such conservative-leaning behaviors, and who generally is affiliated with the traditional right. Let's add another one. The group "Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at King’s Business School, King’s College London" just so happens to be at the school that the Current CEO of newsweek is not just an alum of, but is a major contributor to the funding for. It's always weird when something extremely polarizing comes from, a group that's directly funded by the CEO or owner of the conservative newspaper that's publishing it, as well as from research done by a Marketing firm in the pockets of wealthy conservatives! Funny how that always seems to happen! But if we actually look at IPSOS's study, you'll see that a lot of the numbers have been gently massaged and their methodology is EXTREMELY opaque. After all, they're not a scientific institution. They're a MARKETING FIRM. The biggest conclusion if you read their own paper, is ACTUALLY, that MOST PEOPLE seem to hold progressive views on women's autonomy, but think that THEIR COUNTRY still majority holds draconian views on women's autonomy. Things their own study says:

A Majority of Gen Z believes that women shouldn't "always obey" their husbands.

A Majority of Gen Z has concerns that their society holds draconian beliefs about women.

What the results of the SPIN on this facts, as well as how many in the comments are reacting, is actually perpetuating the Traditional Right's views on Gender and Marriage. I need you to understand that it actively benefits the traditional right when you lean into gender essentialism and believe that Men Are Evil. That Men Are Monsters. It makes the default assumption of men be that they will always be predators, meaning that when they DO do something predator, nobody's surprised; well that's just how men are; when he finds the RIGHT woman who can Tame Him, then he'll behave; that's the duty of a woman after all; to put up with men abusing her until she finds one who is the Right One, who she can handle. What this article ALSO does, is scare progressive women, scares queerfolk, scares young folk, and makes conservatives feel emboldened and empowered. You need to ALWAYS, ALWAYS, remind yourself: "If something immediately makes me feel anger, repulsion, or Joy, with even a simple blurb, it's probably manipulating me." And more than that, you need to remember the follow up:

WHO BENEFITS FROM MAKING ME FEEL THIS WAY?

tk421-afk

Reblog for OUT-FUCKING-STANDING follow through and critical examination!

This is what we need so much more of. Thank you @sunspotpony for taking the time to do this.

sunspotpony

It’s easy to fall for this shit. I fall for it all the time. I was lucky enough to remember the highlighted advice, given to me by many loved ones, and hammered home to me by one of my wonderful partners.

So i would emphasize — if you fell for this, if you let it lead you to despair or anger, do not feel shame. It’s designed to take advantage of very basic human impulses. It’s a weapon designed to target us when we are already scared and tired and hurting. We’re the target. It’s difficult to dodge a trap specifically tailor-made to catch us.

Just remember — if it makes you feel strongly, positive or negative, if your first instinct is a strong emotion, you’re probably walking into a trap. And one of the fastest ways to inoculate yourself against that trap is to ask yourself “who benefits from making me feel this way?”

Eventually, like it did with me above, you’ll get lucky, you’ll “remember your training” (lol), and one of us will manage to recognize a trap for what it is so that we can tell others “hey, it’s not what it seems.”

World be spooky. We’re all in this shit together. I love you, neighbors. 💪✨

mens-rights-activia

Anemone song

mens-rights-activia

Happy 9th birthday to Anemone song

kurtwagnermorelikekurtwagnerd

sickens me to my stomach. how dare this guy get to live my dream.

acutecoral

Some clarifications and an update

biglawbear

This person has more emotional intelligence and healthier skills in navigating relationships than most people

derinthescarletpescatarian

Stay out of the notes of this one guys.

shencomix

draconym

The eye doctor is the most fun doctor you can go to. They never steal your blood. They never make you get naked and put on a paper dress. They're just like, "Can you see these letters? It's fine if you can't, we can fix that." And they don't even spell anything.

draconym

orcboxer

Every time I go they put me in a chair and they say look into this machine there's a hot air balloon or a farmhouse in there and I do and I'm like you're right I see it and they're like yeah keep admiring that hot air balloon or farmhouse and I do and I'm like this shit's quaint as fuck and then do you know what happens next they attack me they jumpscare me with air directly into my eyeballs and i fall out the chair and they say sorryyyy but they're NOT they wanted this to happen they KNEW about the jumpscare well now I'm wise to it now I know better when I go in and they say look at this bodacious hot air balloon I'm like NO WAY DUDE that balloon wishes me harm have at thee and I attack them and push them on the ground and spit on them

aqueerkettleofish

For those who have missed it, a tourist in Hawaii decided it would be fun to chuck a rock (a BIG rock) at a monk seal. He missed, but he was captured on video, and when told it was illegal to interfere with them, said "I'm rich, I can pay the fine."

Is the best part that he got doxxed? No.

Is the best part that he got tracked down by a local and beaten? No.

Arrested on state at federal charges, looking at up to 5 years and 50K? Nope.

The best part is the local city council's reaction.

And the best part of that is the look on the attorney's face.

exxos-von-steamboldt

delicatefury

I just googled this and… yes, it’s absolutely real.

And there are so many articles and videos and discussions. Like, the scientific community is buzzing about this.

So much research will have to be redone because the data was absolutely compromised, off by orders of magnitude, by using standard lab gloves.

The world is probably not horrifically contaminated by microplastics. Sterile laboratories, however, are contaminated by latex and nitrile gloves.

Thank God someone bothered to check.

beardedmrbean

>I just googled this and… yes, it’s absolutely real.

Sources beyond dude just trust me, for the skeptics.

Scientists may have been unknowingly inflating microplastics pollution estimates, and the surprising source could be their own lab gloves. A

https://www.technologynetworks.com/applied-sciences/news/scientists-lab-gloves-may-be-causing-an-overestimation-of-microplastics-411138

Nitrile and latex gloves that scientists wear while they are measuring microplastics may lead to a potential overestimation of the tiny poll

Nitrile and latex gloves may cause overestimation of microplastics - Phys.org (it’s a pdf)

Researchers discovered a standard piece of lab equipment has added thousands of microplastic ‘false positives’ per each square-millimeter un

Ordinary Lab Gloves May Have Skewed Microplastic Data: That doesn’t mean microplastics aren’t a problem, though

That should be enough

ruthyless-deactivated20140511

when i was younger i had a really bad fear of danny devito when i was going to sleep so my older brother gave me a watch that he set to like 8 hours ahead so that it was always daytime on the watch when i was asleep and he told me it would confuse danny devito and he would think it was daytime and get scared of the sun and leave me alon