VEN♀️M @ovariation-from-the-norm - Tumblr Blog

I’m not happy with my insurance. It sucks.

Disgruntled and confused porn users demanded the hard research data, so I went into the basement to find my dusty copy of Zillmann and Bryant’s book. It will take me a while to screenshot, caption, and post it all.

The two photos above reference a 1982 experiment which measured the effects of prolonged pornography consumption on test subjects’ recommendations for rapist prison terms.

Male and female subjects were divided into three groups and exposed to either 6 regular films (control group), 3 regular films and 3 porn films (intermediate exposure), or 6 porn films (massive exposure).

Three weeks later, they took a variety of questionnaires and inventories. One asked them to recommend the prison sentence for a hypothetical rapist. The chart above shows the difference in what they recommended by group.

Conclusion: both men and women exposed to porn recommended reduced sentencing for rapists compared to those in the control group.

Consider that in 1982, watching 6 porn films was considered “massive exposure.“

Also consider whether the judge and or jury members deciding your rapist’s fate may have watched more than 6 or more porn films.

Source: Zillmann and Bryant, ”Pornography: Research Advances and Policy Considerations.“ 1989

Very difficult to make people aware of this because they think research studies that don’t link to pdfs are irrelevant.

falandosozin

research studies that are so old that you can’t find them online means that they are no longer viable lol your single source is from 82 😭

Fun fact, these guys and some of their colleagues in the 80s proved so conclusively that porn is harmful when used with research subjects that…wait for it…the research ethics boards wouldn’t let anyone replicate their studies. That’s why there aren’t any studies since the 80s where scientists purposely expose subjects to porn

What else you got?

impawsterf

I'm so repulsed by the blatant casual misogyny that comes out of teenage boys mouths. They talk about fucking each other's mothers and sisters, they compare them to animals, they dehumanise them and reduce them to sex objects instead of insulting each other directly. They use women as a means of attacking each other. They'll say "I'll fuck your mom" as if they're talking about damaging a piece of property, as if to break something that is owned by them. 'C*nt' and 'b*tch' and 'pussy' are the lowest insults you can make in their eyes because you're directly comparing them to women. When they're making fun of each other for being petty, they'll laugh and say "he's on his period". Being any way compared to a woman is the biggest insult to them because they see women as subhuman. And they're not ignorant or 'uneducated'. They know exactly what they're doing.

susansontag

the ‘prostitution is good because it means I and other unprostituted women don’t get assaulted as much’ is such a mask off opinion lol. and men have their own version of it, it’s just ‘it’s a place to direct sexual frustration that isn’t at their girlfriend or wife’ etc. it’s so obvious how they see those women

our-side-of-history

So why *can't* we have a word for, "adult human female?" Seems like a significant group with lots in common (and lots to talk about.) And why can't that word be "woman?"

mommyhorror

Thank u @taylovelinus

wyvern-of-the-evening

Confront yourself with the uncomfortable reality that gender, sex, and sexuality are all fuzzier than you want them to be.

You cannot hold the idea that gender is a social construct while also holding the idea that sex and sexuality are rigid, unchanging boxes. It's all just words and definitions we created to try to explain human experience and guess what! Human experience is messy and complex and not beholden to a dictionary!

Just like gender, sex and sexuality are also more complicated and complex than any lines you attempt to draw in sand around them. Do what you want forever.

And this is exactly why the TQ is in direct opposition to the LGB.

Yes actually, reality is rigid sometimes. A rock is not a tree even if you call it an oak. All you’ve done is render the word oak useless.

Gay and lesbian mean exclusive same sex attracted. Anything else is homophobia.

Crazy how you conveniently ignored the fact that this post is also about how sex is fluid and not rigid. Humans constructed our own definitions of sex when in reality, the nature of physical sex is complicated, layered, nuanced, and not easily defined by binary categories!

Even using your own example of rocks and trees - organic material like wood can become fossilized into rock. That's what petrified wood is. One day an oak tree could very well become a rock if the environmental conditions around it align! The natural world is fuzzy and not as neat and pretty and convenient as you want it to be.

Anyway kids, remember that anyone trying to sell you a convenient, rigid, explanation of anything is usually misguided at best and an actively bigoted grifter at worst!

Sex is binary. There is no third gamete. You people are trying to use fetal anomalies and other medical conditions to justify an entirely political agenda. You are male or female. Even if you have an intersex condition. And friendly reminder that the vast majority of trans people are perisex.

And bud? Petrified wood is still not a rock. It’s petrified wood.

Petrified wood is quartz crystal - which is a rock, that came from wood in this specific instance. You can read all about it here on the official website for the Petrified Forest in the Arizona National Park. Here's their handy FAQ all about petrified wood straight from the National Parks Service.

Here's a fun, at home, for kids science experiment sheet from the NPS about quartz rocks and petrified wood :)

It’s a fossil. Which I’d argue is a distinct category. But this nit picking at a metaphor is a distraction. A rock still isn’t a living oak tree and men still aren’t women.

This playing dumb isn’t cute. I know you all reblogged the “behold a man!” post and thought you ate but no one on earth doesn’t understand chickens aren’t people even if you pluck them.

If I tell you to turn left at the oak tree, you are not going to be confused whether or not I meant the living oak tree or the large boulder because sometimes wood fossilizes.

These little semantic tricks are the peak of faux intellectualism. The actual point of the “behold a man” story is a philosophical exploration of how a sufficiently motivated bad actor can be a pedantic prick about anything. It’s about the limitations of language to succinctly express reality.

And reality is that men cannot become women. They can adopt all the social markers of their culture’s standards for how women are supposed to look and act, but they will always be men.

Okay let's talk shop then. Who and what even defines what men and women even are?

I encourage you - as the intellectual feminist thinker you so clearly are - to explore María Lugones' concept of the coloniality of gender. It goes hand in hand with Anibal Quijano's concept of the coloniality of power.

Gender isn't just an identity - it's a tool for humanization and dehumanization that is directly tied to politics, culture, and race. For example, Black Men and Women were not legally "men" and "women" under The Constitution in the United States until the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments were added. Even still, they haven't been treated that way now have they? Just for example, Black Women have been systemically medically tortured (especially reproductively) in the nearly two centuries since because Black Women were seen and treated as a different sex of a different species due to medical misogynoir.

The idea that Black Women's bodies or their female identity are somehow different or medically wrong is still ever present in our society. I mean, you look at the way Michelle Obama was treated in the 2000's - the way Black Womanhood is treated as so manish she must have been a secret tranny. Or the way Caster Semenya has constantly had her sex questioned repeatedly over the last few years. Take a peek at the trend in women athletes who have their "femaleness" questioned - There's an astonishing number of Women of Color in there.

I wonder if it has to do with the long, well documented history of Women of Color, particularly Black Women, having their sex and gender questioned and stripped from them by White Supremacy? Which all begs the questions:

Who decides who is an adult human female and who is not? How is that decided? How has that definition shifted and changed and how is it still being shifted and changed as the goalposts move? What motivates the desire to define this and what other outside influences impact it?

I encourage you to read Lugones and Quijano's works as well as Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe and White Teeth by Zadie Smith - two contemporary (though one more modern) fictional explorations of the racialization and coloniality of gender and gender identity and the ways in which sex and gender are tools used to position People of Color under the feet of White Colonialism.

Women are adult human females. Female means of the sex that is built around the production of large gametes.

Men are adult human males. Male means of the sex that is built around the production of small gametes.

Disorders of secondary sex characteristics, disorders that create ambiguous genitals in newborns, and chromosomal anomalies do not constitute a third sex for the same reason Downs Syndrome does not constitute a new species.

99.99% of human beings are unambiguously male or female. Of that tiny minority, they are still male or female, they just have a DSD.

And no. I will base my world view on a fiction novel that posits POC were too stupid to know the difference between men and women before white people taught them. If I have to explain to you why that’s racist, you’re already too dishonest to reason with.

I have taken enough college level anthropology courses to understand that the malleability of gender roles does not change the material reality of sex. I’ve studied history and sociology enough to know that what 1st world modern academics are calling woke gender ideals from non white cultures are the misrepresentation of facts. Most “third genders” were dumping grounds for homosexual, GNC, and intersex people. “Two Spirit” is a 20th century creation wherein people homogenized a ton of diverse tribal perspectives on homosexuality and gender non conformity. Do I even need to tell you how these groups were treated?

POC are not enlightened monoliths. They are every bit as human, as intelligent, and as fallible as the west.

And get black people out of your mouth. They weren’t PEOPLE under original US law. How dare you compare their dehumanization under chattel slavery to compare it to “well they aren’t really men and women, so bio reality is fake”

And yeah, I imagine all the gynecological experiments done on black women was the dude just pointing at random slaves and being shocked when 50% of them didn’t have wombs to mutilate. Fuck you. Black people are not less male or female than white people. It’s not a sliding scale where whiteness defines gender you fucking RACIST.

Chinua Achebe was a Nigerian author and poet who wrote Things Fall Apart in response to White Christian Colonialism in Nigeria.

Zadie Smith is the English daughter of a Jamaican immigrant whose works directly reflect that experience and the conflict of her own identity.

María Lugones was an Argentine feminist philosopher and activist and Aníbal Quijano was a Peruvian sociologist and humanitarian thinker.

You've made so many assumptions here, it's a little ridiculous. Open your mind to actually learning about other people's experiences through both their artistic expressions and their academic theory maybe.

POC can be wrong sometimes! I know! It’s almost like they’re people!

I’m not interested in the artistic expression of people (regardless of their race, sex, religion, etc) who use the dishonest framing of anthropology and sociology and the trauma of colonialism and slavery to justify a political worldview that disempowers women and specifically women of color.

Guess what? People sure seem to know what a woman is when it’s time rape them, or marry them at 13, or impregnate them, or outlaw abortion, or punish broken hymens, or traffic them, or send them rape threats online, or slice off their clitoris and sew the wound shut. Doctors sure seem to know what a woman is when it’s time to ignore their concerns. Doctors know whose genitals to stitch up extra tight “for their husband” after giving birth.

This is why I don’t have any patience for “behold a man” and ivory tower navel gazing. Because people always ALWAYS manage to know exactly who is female and who is male when it’s time for abuse and discrimination.

Yes of course you're so right. I'm now sure it's the People of Color - especially the Women of Color - who are from colonized countries, writing about the colonization of their own communities, and their own personal experiences with colonization, whose works I shared who are the ones who are wrong here. Thanks so much random internet TERF for enlightening me.