taylor price
Not today Justin
pixel skylines
Keni
Monterey Bay Aquarium
d e v o n
Xuebing Du
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her
dirt enthusiast
Show & Tell
titsay
roma★
Cosmic Funnies
YOU ARE THE REASON
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
we're not kids anymore.
shark vs the universe
🪼
tumblr dot com
styofa doing anything
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from Türkiye
seen from Argentina
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Philippines
seen from Australia
seen from United States
seen from Japan
seen from Guernsey
seen from United States
seen from Georgia
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Germany
seen from United States
@morteledraco
🌸 Cherry Blossom Moth Kittens 🌸
You can get this design on a t-shirt through Teezr for a limited time! Grab one now and help support an artist today! 🌸
This is my very first toe dip into t-shirts, a very long requested item from people who want to support my artworks. I hope everyone likes this design because if you do I hope to make more!
You can get one on Teezr now until the 19th of January!
i hate when people idolise the suffragettes and make them seem like they were liberal progressive icons, im not trying to deny the impact and significance they had on womans rights and suffrage but in the end they were racist classist white women who believed only educated rich married white woman should be able to vote
and what they accomplished is still important & should be celebrated. I don’t see people treating progressive men in history like this even if they owned slaves & thought women weren’t a full human. People understand that what they given us is still worthwhile.
the suffrage movement and anti-slavery movement were *born* together
the split happened later in fights over priorities (eg, Susan B Anthony not thinking Black men should be allowed to vote until White women were)
but if you scratched a woman’s rights campaigner in the 1800’s, you’d be making an abolitionist bleed. the same people were working on both fronts
now can you critique 1800’s feminism for not being intersectional? yes, and many have. Angela Davis has good analysis (Women Race and Class I want to say opens with a rather disastrous suffragette conference?)
but I can’t think of many suffragettes who I’d really characterize as being a “racist classist white woman who believed that only educated rich married white woman should be able to vote”
“racist classist white wom[e]n” for sure - but substantially less racist and classist than their contemporaries. (if you can find a white person in the 19th century who did not hold any form of racist or classist belief - share their name lol. remember that *science* itself had racism baked in)
it's very telling if a person says all suffragettes were just racist rich ladies presumably because they care about racism but then refuse to bring up women like Sojourner Truth or Frances Watkins Harper or any of the other black suffragettes. because yes, we can criticize Susan B Anthony, but if you actually care about black women, you'd follow that criticism up by talking about black women. if you just call suffragettes racist rich ladies to discredit them and that's it, you're probably not actually advocating against racism in the suffragette movement but just trying to discredit suffragettes.
Suffragists. "Suffragette" was a term made to discredit in the first place
More specifically, "suffragette" was a demeaning term reporters made to essentially infantalize these women. "-ette" is used for something small.
It is essentially like how women were called feminazi, and now TERF.
I have absolutely zero interest in the ‘critique’ of feminists from people who’ve made anti-feminism their whole deal. Fuck you, you don’t get to critique feminism when you can’t appreciate any of the good it’s done for you.
It's a popular factoid on tumblr that "in the past, most people ate street food rather than preparing their meals every day." This is supposed to reassure people that it's true that it's hard to cook every single goddamn day, and you shouldn't feel bad for ordering out.
This, of course, is kind of ridiculous if you think about it for a few seconds: even if we start counting from, say, ancient Mesopotamian Uruk, usually recognized as the oldest city, it was 2007 when the world's urban population surpassed the world's rural population. Throughout history, most people did not live in a setting when restaurants or street food made sense.
This is because "they went out to eat fast food" is a more palatable answer than the truth: throughout history, work was done by wives, children, servants, and slaves.
Ultimately, that is the answer. The people you learn about - the Roman senators, the Renaissance artists, the Aztec emperors, the ancient philosophers, the nineteenth century scholars - had the drudge work of life being done by their wives, their children, servants, or slaves. Even grad students spending all summer in the field and then writing their doctoral dissertations in the 1970s usually had their wives doing most of the work for them - and in fact, grad students to this day have workloads calibrated to the assumption you have a live-in housewife doing all your cooking and cleaning for you! It's not good!
(The other answer is that for a lot of people, for a lot of history, they owned maybe three outfits, and they ate the same thing every day. If you lived in The Past odds were good that 90% of your meals consisted of the staple grain of your region in a pot that could be left simmering over the fire for hours while you did other work.)
There's no easy answer for a world that believes in equality. A world that believes that whole classes of people shouldn't actually deserve to get relegated to maintenance work so that a few individuals can be brilliant. Because the answer in the past was wives, children, servants, and slaves. We need a better answer for the future.
Frankly their wives weren’t all that different from their servants and slaves,
But yeah the people of the past did not in fact, have more figured out than people who have had hundreds of years of social, ethical, and scientific progress.
Ladies if youve escaped an abusive relationship or suspect you may currently be in one and are searching for "proof", please read Boundaries (After a Pathological Relationship) by Adelyn Birch.
It's a 5mm thick instructional guide on identifying abuse, what boundaries are, what it feels like when they're crossed and how to make your own, strong boundaries to protect yourself in the future.
It's an absolute must for any survivors toolkit.
get the pdf here
“Honor Killing” needs to leave our lexicon, it’s the same as “revenge porn”. It should be called what it is: religiously motivated femicide.
honour killing religiously motivated femicide
revenge porn image-based sexual abuse
child porn child sexual abuse imagery
sex work prostitution / sexual exploitation
choked strangled
BDSM / kink sexual sadism
had sex with a minor raped a child
died by her partner murdered
Let’s stop using language that sanitises violence.
porn filmed sexual exploitation child bride enslaved girl mail order bride enslaved woman cam girl sexual exploitation cat calling sexual harassment gender sexism
I'm looking for another way to name "cosmetic surgery".
You don't need to add "sexual" in front of sadism btw, sadism is about sex by definition.
And "honor killings" are not really religiously motivated. It's about the family's reputation and men thinking they own women's bodies. Until she's married, they think her body belongs to them. Them being her father, uncle, brothers, cousins etc. If they suspect that her body is not under their control anymore, they destroy it. They think like pimps.
cosmetic surgery = body shaming surgery
"Honour killings are not religiously motivated"
Can we try a bit harder, please? Thinking caps on.
Can you explain your position better instead of being condescending because their explanation makes plenty of sense to me.
'reasons' for honour killings.
Renouncing faith, homosexuality, socialising with men, adopting behaviours outside of the religion, sex outside of marriage, being in a relationship with someone of the wrong religion.
Non religious reasons: being a victim of sexual assault, refusing an arranged marriage. These can arguably be connected back to religion.
Many will say that these are cultural reasons, but it's our job to be critical, challenge, and utilising information already established within radical feminism. Its not my postion. Radical feminism is critical of religion, and honour killings sit in that category.
Thanks for explaining. The thing I've experienced is that Christian and Muslim women who are faithful are told that they aren't even allowed to be included in radical feminism (for some reason cults like zionism get a pass). I get being critical of religion but to me it just seems obvious it's the same kind of power dynamic that has resulted in a woman being murdered by a family member every 10 minutes in the US. The details are "religious" but the subordination of girls and women is the same.
Agreed. Males are divided by boarders, religion, race, class, education, everything, but united by oppressing women.
stealing this from a larger post because i have thoughts about cults being a multi-person abusive relationship and many people on here do not know how to help people exit from either situation.
this applies to women who are deep into high control groups, including FTMs. i see people here react sometimes to FTMs who reach out for support from radical feminists by immediately unloading their own ideology like you're turning on a firehose and spraying your own thoughts and opinions directly into this person's face and trying to leap at the opportunity to replace their ideals with your own.
this is manipulative. i would have run screaming for the hills if a feminist did that to me when i was curious and trying to find my way out of a high control environment. someone coming from a situation where their own thoughts and feelings, even privately held thoughts and feelings, are policed and controlled by their peers is not going to feel there's much difference between you and their toxic community if you treat them the same way. you can't just cram your own ideals down their throat and expect them to swallow it, and even if they do swallow it, it's going to be a situation in which you coerced someone vulnerable into falling into line and parroting you.
the most instrumental thing in my escape from a high control group was being told: your mind is a safe place. your thoughts cannot hurt anyone, and new information cannot force you to become someone you're not. you know who you are and what you want. you are not a monster for being curious. you have freedom of thought, freedom to question, and freedom to draw your own conclusions. any group you join should permit you to leave or to question its doctrine without harmful pressure or punishment for doing so.
if FTMs reach out to you asking questions and the first thing you do is treat them to a lecture that focuses solely on your own opinions of dysphoria and your own opinions on medical transition you have not achieved anything. this person already knows what you think, our opinions are publicly available on our blogs. when someone in a high control group reaches out to you, in a vulnerable bid to make contact with the "other side", and the first thing you do is try to control them, you're not helping. that's not what this person needs. there's a time and place for soapboxing. lecturing people who are trying to think independently again is not the time or place.
Abusive relationships are like cults. The difference is scale and public perception. You can be in a two person cult and the other is your abuser. You can be in an abusive relationship at a large scale level in the form of a more classic cult. Both go hand in hand. They use the same technics to control people, and in this case women.
The Inside Story of South Korea's Feminist Movement and What It Means for Women's Rights Worldwide
Flowers of Fire: The Inside Story of South Korea's Feminist Movement and What It Means for Women's Rights Worldwide by Hawon Jung
An eye-opening firsthand account of the ongoing and trailblazing feminist movement in South Korea—one that the world should be watching.
Since the beginning of the #MeToo movement, tens of thousands of people in South Korea have taken to the street, and many more brave individuals took a stand, to end a decades-long abortion ban and bring down powerful men accused of sexual misconduct—including a popular presidential contender. South Korean feminists know that the revolution has been a long time coming, between battles against its own patriarchal society as well as challenging stereotypes of docile Asian women in the Western imagination.
Now, author Hawon Jung will show the rest of the world that these women are no delicate flowers—they are trailblazing flames. Flowers of Fire takes the reader into the trenches of this fight for equality, following along as South Korean activists march on the streets, navigate public and private spaces where spycam porn crimes are rampant, and share tips and tricks with each other as they learn how to protect themselves from harassment and how to push authorities to act.
Jung, the former Seoul correspondent for the AFP, draws on her on-the-ground reporting and interviews with many women who became activists and leaders, from the elite prosecutor who ignited the country’s #MeToo movement to the young women who led the war against non-consensual photography. Their stories, though long overlooked in the West, mirror realities that women across the world are all too familiar with: threats of defamation lawsuits to silence victims of assault, tech-based sexual abuse, and criminal justice systems where victims’ voices are often met with suspicion and abusers’ downfalls are met with sympathy. These are the issues at the heart of their #MeToo movement, and South Korean women have fought against them vigorously—and with extraordinary success. In Flowers of Fire, Jung illuminates the strength and tenacity of these women, too often sidelined in global conversations about feminism and gender equality.
THANK YOU
prev: #the system is broken if women in poverty have no other choice but to enter prostitution#what if there were cage fights for homeless men for other people’s entertainment that left them bruised and broken#and someone was like ‘we should get rid of this. it’s really fucked up they have to do this just to survive’#and the response was ‘so you want them to starve?’#no! I want them to be given housing and guided into employment so they can support themselves with dignity
it's bleak how most of the things people think will assuage and temper men are the things that embolden them. "prostitutes exist so men don't rape us" the human trafficking industry that is prostitution is an ever-growing industry that produces propaganda that enables men in society to rape MORE not less. by objectifying women and children, it puts all our heads on the chopping block. "he just needs to settle down and get married" most femicide, rape and domestic violence are committed by husbands/boyfriends. "if men just had daughters/sisters they'd see women as human" as a daughter and sister, i can confirm that we're extra caretakers of said men, and that our kindness is taken as proof that "good women" are subservient and domestic helpers.
if you want to de-radicalize men, you have to actually just stop tolerating misogyny in any form no matter what woman it's done against. stop trying to dialogue with men and start socioeconomically punishing them. people want to act like "separatism doesn't solve anything" when governments and companies only started paying attention when they saw birth and marriage rates drop. it is not women's job to save men from themselves and some feminists still don't get that. pandering to men always results in LESS rights for us. we have to become radically INTOLERANT.
🐈⬛🤍
Hello tumblr! I have 2 more spots open in my December commission queue and it would be amazing if I could get those filled. If you are interested, please send me an email!
✨Contact and Pricing Info Here✨
Commissions are my main source of income and they have been WAY down this year which has left me struggling a bit each month to cover bills. I know everyone is having a hard time right now, which makes any person willing to help support me through my art so much more special. Thank you for your time!
Artwork Examples:
If commissioning artwork is out of your price range right now I also have an Etsy Shop! I’m currently in the process of adding a bunch of new stickers and stationery to my selection.
keymonstershop on etsy
Here are a few new items being added to my shop:
Shares and reblogs are love. Thank you everyone! 💚
recollections
https://twitter.com/glosswitch/status/1379342266251239430
women are not a public resource
Any man who thinks he’s entitled to a woman’s body shouldn’t be allowed around kids at all, let alone get to raise kids.
ACCESS TO A BIRTHING PERSON. ACCESS. TO A BIRTHING PERSON. WTF????
This isn’t “inclusive language”, this is a method of attempting to shift people’s perspectives to feel more comfortable with considering women a natural resource used for sexual and reproductive purposes.
it’s called manufacturing consent. this fits the propaganda model of communication. the use of euphemisms to soften and normalize oppressive regimes and institutional violence is a well known tactic within the propaganda model. whoever controls the language, controls the narrative, controls the people. you see this as well in the use of the passive voice in headlines covering male violence: woman murdered, woman dies, woman raped. never man murders, man kills, man rapes.
