The Feminist Hub

This forum/gathering spot/place is an inclusive virtual meeting ground for everyone and anyone. FEMINISM IS FOR EVERYONE! It is a place to come if you have a question about feminism in general, or specifically, if you wanna give someone a shoutout or have a burning question/comment/concern about your life, your friends, or your friend's lives. Maybe you are questioning your sexuality and/or gender and want to know if anyone else feels the way you do. Please check out the contributor bios below to see who specializes in what area of feminism. Managed by these beautiful, inspirational and thought-provoking people: STFU, Conservatives Feministilicious glasses-kid rosietint Petite Feministe dazzleandoutshine moreapologies crystalsavestheday kungfucarrie rabbleprochoice well-behavedwoman transsexualferox Handing Out Stars annabunches Lipstick Feminists jaded16india

[thefeministhub]

The Hub is under construction

We haven't written here in a while mainly because what the Hub started out as isn't what we believe in anymore. We decided we need to change our entire outlook, theme, layout, style and purpose and such re-fashioning of ideas takes time!

We're shutting down for a while -- which means no asks or submissions till we fire back up. 

Hope to see you soon. 

~The Feminist Hub. 

[thefeministhub]

Wanna know what discourse is harming women's rights?

Trigger warning for mention of being raped and domestic violence

I see this rhetoric a lot within the blogging community. It is commonly used when discussing statistics and atrocitys that happen to the majorty of women, such as being raped or experiencing domestic violence. These are situations that, unfortunately, many women will find themselves experiencing in their lifetime. Although these heinous acts do not happen solely to women, they are experiences that are wholly associated with feminism and women's rights. When they are being discussed, I often see:

"how would you feel if this happened to your mother, sister, daughter?"

"treat her like you would treat your mother, sister, daughter"

"1 in 3 women [insert statistic here]. That could be your mother, sister, daughter."

This rhetoric encourages the idea that women are not their own human beings with their own thoughts and feelings on what they experience, but merely as relatives to men, and that when bad things are happening to women they only matter if the woman is related to a man.

I understand the point of this rhetoric, I really do. If you personify the victim of a bad action as someone who will be cared about (such as a mother, most mothers are cared about by their children), then you can evoke a much stronger physical and emotional response to a situation from a wider community. By turning the victim into someone that is already loved and cared for, you are more likely to get a larger response - a response that will be positive to the cause you are trying to promote (such as rape statistic awareness).

This would be all well and good (I mean, who doesn't want to raise a good response to their cause?) if women weren't already treat and viewed as belonging to men. It's common for a woman to take a man's surname in marriage - a practice that originates from the passing on a woman from father to husband. A common trope in Television is two men fighting over the rights to a woman, who she rightly "belongs" to. Women only mattering when they belong to or are owned by men is an all to real problem today and the rhetoric above only works to ingrain that thought even further.

Another problem with that discourse is the complete erasure of anyone who isn't a woman, or who doesn't identify as a woman. Men, gender neutral individuals and genderqueer individuals also suffer and experience the same atrocity's that are usually attributed to "women's rights". The rhetoric up there actively erases and ignore the experiences of people and will ultimatly discourage all those who do not identify under the labels "daughter", "sister" or "mother" to seek help, support and counselling for what they have unfortunately experienced. 

Ultimatly I think there is something inherently dangerous in teaching boys and men that women only deserve equal treatment and respect when they are related to them - either as a mother, a daughter or a wife. Woman are their own human beings, who are entitled to respect and their own experiences without that experience only being given meaning when a man can place his own relatives within it.

I mean, seriously, what does it say about men if the only way they can care about a woman is when she is related to him?

 -Gk

[thefeministhub]

jaded16india:

transsexualferox:

Hi everyone,

I held off as long as I could, but I finally put a donation button up on my Tumblr. Tomorrow I go in for what is probably going to amount to some serious dental work, all of which is necessary, but none of which I can afford right now. My housemate has offered to help out with that, but at some point I’m going to need to pay him back because he’s not rich either. Additionally, my unemployment benefits will be running out soon, and I’m worried about how I’m going to finance my HRT after that happens. Times are tough for everyone, I know, and I don’t expect anyone to donate anything, but I also know it can’t hurt to ask. Much love to all of you. <3

The link.

Signal boost. Renee is a wonderful friend and if you can help her in any way please do. Any help that you can give will be muchly appreciated. 

Signal boost.

[definitelynotpizza]

The Straw Feminist trope is a deliberately created, exaggerated caricature of a feminist that is used to undermine and ridicule feminist movements. This was probably one of the most difficult and longest videos I’ve made so far, partly because the Straw Feminist is a very complex and twisted representation. I actually cut out about 5 minutes of actual analysis to keep the video at a reasonable viewing time. The Straw Feminist trope has many more facets and MANY more examples but I hope I was able to provide a general overview.

[thefeministhub]

No matter how secure you think your relationship is, be careful. I was engaged to my partner of six years, we talked about having a threesome, he suggested a coworker that I hadn't even met, tried to get me and her to be friends/hang out/cuddle, and then I found out he was cheating on me with her. Thankfully I thought she was rather unattractive so the threesome never happened, but yeah, try online before suggesting anyone either of you know personally, especially if you see them at work/school

[thefeministhub]

For the anon; OkCupid is a great resource for finding casual hookups. I find Craigslist to be a little sketchy but I've been contacted to be a 3rd by numerous couples on OkCupid and they always felt respectful and safe. Upload some pictures of the two of you, fill out the profile in full, and send messages to any cute, open-minded girls you find. You'll be surprised how many there are!

[thefeministhub]

To your anon looking for threesome advice, Generally it's through the net (dating websites, craigslist is also a good place to advertise for that) Be clear on what you want, what your boundaries are. Be secure in your relationship. I have been the woman coming in a couple of times and it an be awkward if there is relationship concerns. Sometimes you can find the third through acquaintances but your best bet is to go to a specific website or community that is into that thing. Sex Shops!

[thefeministhub]

Hello. I wasn't sure where or who to ask about this, so maybe redirect me to someone else. My partner and I are thinking of maybe having a threesome, hes male and a man, I'm female and genderqueer, and we'd be looking for a female person. Any advice on how to go about finding someone?

I personally don't have any experience with this. 

Anyone who can help out anon?

[thefeministhub]

what happened to feministilicious?

She had some personal things she had to deal with so she removed herself from Tumblr sadly. :-(

[thatfeministwithglasses]

You aren't entitled to touch me.

[thefeministhub]

gkayy:

Two weeks ago I took the train from Leeds (where I study nursing) back to Cumbria (where I’m from). It’s my summer holidays, so I’d died my hair bright pink for going home. It’s 3 and a half hour long journey, so I had a couple of books with me and my Ipod charged full with Jurassic 5 on my ipod (I’m addicted to Quality Control at the moment). So I got my self settled in my seat reading my book and listening to my Ipod quite loud - I couldn’t have made it any clearer that I wanted to be left alone unless I had physically wrote a sign and hung it round my neck.

About half an hour into the journey (and I was pretty engrossed in my book by this point) something touched my hair. Not just brushed it, full on stroked my hair. And as my head whips up from inside my book, I notice a man sitting down opposite me on a mostly empty train. He was smiling at me (in quite a leery way) and started to talking to me. Remember, I’m wearing my headphones, I can’t hear him - why would he try and talk to me?

I removed my headphones and quite calmly (I thought) asked “did you touch my hair?”. He looked at me like I had 3 heads.

He replied “of course I did, it’s pink”. (Seriously, readers it took my all not to reply, “really, I didn’t notice”.)

So I just told him to not touch my hair and went to put my headphones back in and start reading my book again. As I pick up my book he says “why can’t I touch your hair, it’s pink. I’d be flattered if a girl started touching my hair”.

I mean how much fail can one person convey in a sentence? 

I just picked my stuff up and moved to another carriage - I had 2 an half hours of a train journey left, I wasn’t going to spent it sat with this fail. The icing on this cake? Was hearing “bitch” shouted at me as I walked away from him.Yes I was the bitch, for moving away from the man who touched me without permission, sat next to me in a nearly empty carriage and then tried to justify touching my hair.

This is not a rare occurrence. I dye my hair different colours regularly; in the past 6 months alone it’s been blue, brown, black, pink, purple, green and red. I’m used to people staring, but I’m never going to be able to get used to people (and it’s nearly always men) touching me without my permission. 

It’s not just my hair either. I work as a nurse and the amount of patients and relatives who slap my bottom is ridiculous. I’m meant to be a professional and yet it’s deemed acceptable to humiliate and demean me in public, because someone feels entitled to touch me. This happens on nights out as well. It’s humiliating, embarrassing and infuriating. 

Why does this happen though?

The answer is actually right in front of our eyes. Women and people who are perceived as women (it’s ridiculous how much mis-gendering happens when people feel they are entitled to your body) do not own their body’s in any form of medium. Television, the internet, advertising, books, magazines, films - all of them will have a large dose of misogyny with women’s body’s being used to do something; to be sexy, to sell a product, usually a bit of both. Even women’s magazines - magazines for women - will regularly feature half naked women telling you that you to can look like the perfect white, hairless, skinny individual you need to be so someone else can appreciate your body.

Our body’s are our own. They are not commodities to be used, inspected and touched without express permission. We need to be boycotting advertising and mediums that thinks it’s perfectly acceptable to use women’s bodys for their own gains, because it just encourages the attitude that we don’t own our own body’s, that we don’t have autonomy over them.

Men, you need to stop touching women’s bottoms on nights out, or demanding their time and attention when they’re obviously busy with something else. Women are not their to entertain you, they are not “bitches” if they are not intersted in talking to you or indulging you. 

We are not obligated to interact with you. You are not entitled to touch us.

-GK

[thefeministhub]

I've seen a lot of people say that sexism, heterosexism, racism, cissexism, etc. in music/movies/TV/books shouldn't be criticized because it's "art" and the point of art is to "sometimes be offensive" and I was wondering what your opinion on that is? Something else I've read was that music, specifically, shouldn't be criticized because the artist is "putting forth a character" and it's not really THEM that's -ist. Thoughts?

I don't think I've actually heard this argument. I disagree with it.

You can absolutely make art that is intentionally offensive. Maybe to get attention (either personal or draw attention to a specific issue). Maybe just because you want to.

You can even 'put forth a character'. But if you're an artist - stand behind your work. Your art is supposed to be your statement. Why would you create a 'character' to put forth statements you don't agree with it?

-kungfucarrie

[thefeministhub]

A feminist blog that uses the word "retarded." It's an offensive, ableist word.

Sorry! That was spam - not sure how it got into this account but I've seen it on a few other folks' recently, too.

Just deleted the post. 

[thefeministhub]

yikes - looks like you've been trolled.

Thanks for the heads up! Just deleted the post 

[thefeministhub]

A ciscentric article on faith based abortion advice services. Although I am ashamed by the ciscentrism displayed here, there are some really good important points brought up, especially in light of Britain handing over it's care to independent charitys.

Women receiving advice from pregnancy counselling centres run by faith-based organisations are subjected to scaremongering, emotive language and inaccurate information about abortion, according to an undercover investigation by a pro-choice charity.

Hundreds of crisis pregnancy centres(CPCs) offer counselling independently of the NHS. They could take over work performed by abortion providers such as Marie Stopes and the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), after the government said it was consideringhanding the counselling role to "independent" organisations.

A survey of 10 centres operated by Christian and anti-abortion organisations found evidence in most of them of poor practice and factually incorrect advice, while the quality of counselling differs widely. Advice ranged from scaremongering – linking abortion with breast cancer, for example – to actions apparently designed to steer women away from abortion, such as showing them baby clothes and talking about "the child".

Researchers pretending to be young women in the early stages of pregnancy conducted the survey for Education for Choice, a pro-choice charity providing education and training on abortion.

Centres visited included those run by Life, recently appointed to a panel advising the government on sexual health. That appointment, as well as renewed pressure from socially conservative MPs to tighten abortion laws and strip abortion providers of their counselling role, has sparkedalarm among pro-choice supporters.

At a Life centre in Covent Garden, London, the undercover researcher was given a leaflet entitled Abortions – How they're Done, which said incorrectly that 85% of abortions are carried out using vacuum aspiration. It stated that "the unborn child is sucked down the tube" and that "the woman should wear some protection. She has to dispose of the corpse."

The counsellor was said to have focused on mental health issues that she associated with abortion, telling the researcher she was of a good age to have a child, showing her baby clothes and using terms such as "baby" and "grandchild" when referring to the pregnancy.

While a counsellor on Life's helpline was regarded as being "friendly and non-judgmental", she was unwilling to answer questions about physical aspects of abortion, saying she was not qualified to do so. When asked whom to talk to about arranging an abortion, the counsellor stated that the organisation was pro-life and could not recommend any service. She claimed not to know the names of abortion providers.

A counsellor at City Pregnancy Counselling and Psychotherapy (CPCP), London, which came under Life's auspices until the end of May, repeatedly suggested the client should wait two to three weeks before making her decision on abortion.

The counsellor said the embryo was a fully formed human life and that the client would have to grieve for her loss: "Abortion, whatever reason you might go for that, will become bereavement because this is a baby that's going to die, if you go down that route. That's the reality of it."

A counsellor at Choices Haringey in north London, part of a network overseen by Care Confidential, a Christian organisation, did not know the legal time limit for abortion, claimed that there were no statistics on the number of women who have terminations and had little idea about local services.

The counsellor frequently referred to "The Journey" – a training manual – and handed out photocopied pages from its 10-step "road to abortion recovery", including steps entitled "guilt and shame" and "forgiveness".

Other sections of the manual (which were not given to the researcher) state: "Part of the healing journey to post-abortion recovery involves repentance – the only remedy for guilt. If we are to walk this journey with a woman then we need to clearly see which boundaries she has crossed … immorality, coveting, lying, as well as taking innocent life."

A counsellor at Alternatives Pregnancy Choices Newham, a Care Confidential affiliate in east London, was said to have been friendly, well-informed and able to recommend abortion providers, including Marie Stopes and BPAS.

At Skylight Counselling, a Care Confidential affiliate in Coventry, the counsellor was said to have listed physical and psychological effects she linked to the "post-traumatic stress" of abortion. Literature suggesting risks such as "sub-fertility or infertility" and "increased risk of breast cancer" was given out.

Julia Acott, Care Confidential's counselling and support services manager, said the organisation was sorry the service provided at Haringey "fell below the standards expected". The adviser in question would be retrained.

She said Care Confidential became an independent charity on 1 July, adding: "One of the first actions we are implementing is a full review of quality control, training and support across the centres.

"Part of this will include a review of all the published materials, from websites to training manuals, including that for The Journey, where circumstances, thinking and language has moved on in the years since it was published. The training manuals will be updated and rewritten in language that reflects the diversity of people, of different faiths and none, who will use and benefit from it."

Life said: "We are wholeheartedly committed to offering the best service possible to women facing crisis pregnancies by providing them with non-judgmental, person-centred counselling and skilled listening in line with guidelines set out by the BACP [British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy], of which we are a member.

"The misinformation which allegedly a Life worker gave to a mystery client was apparently contained in a leaflet that was not produced by Life. We therefore can't comment on it but are investigating the overall complaint."

"If asked, we give factual information about abortion and, if the client wants to explore what is involved, we will help her to do so."

CPCP said its policy was that counselling should be non-directive and keep to BACP guidelines.

Lisa Hallgarten, director of education for Choice, said: "We investigated a range of CPCs because we are asked so regularly by commissioners whether this or that centre is OK to signpost young women to.

"We felt it was in the public interest to learn more about how these services operate. We chose to send in 'mystery shoppers' to use services as this is a tried and tested technique in mainstream sexual health provision - commonly used to test how young people friendly a service is and get a real sense of what it feels like to be a service-user.

"With the localism agenda, new health commissioning arrangements and the Department of Health considering changing abortion counselling regulations, we expect commissioners to come under increasing pressure to use CPCs."

"Only two of the 10 centres we looked at provided good quality information or support.

"We strongly urge the Department of Health to think carefully about removing women from the professional decision-making support currently offered by abortion providers while the current alternative is a network of unregulated individuals, many of whom are in breach of good practice."

[thefeministhub]

the hub's response to the person writing about gender brain differences. i just finished reading delusions of gender and it was totally incredible in the way it dismantled the whole idea of hard-wired "brain differences". there's a lot of discussion about stereotype threat and how badly people perform when a stereotype about their gender (or race or any other factor) is activated- oart of the reason women perform worse than men at tasks you mentioned is because they know the stereotypes about them. in studies where those stereotypes were combated with false data such as "in these studies, women frequently outperform men" or "past studies have shown no gender differences in these tasks" women perform just as good as the men do. i couldn't recommend "delusions of gender" any more highly. also, rebecca jordan-young came and spoke at my university and her book "brain storm: the flaws in the science of sex differences" looks and sounds awesome. though, to be honest, i haven't read it yet. but yeah! best wishes to anyone combating the crap stereotypes! i know i personally feel like i have a lot of "ammunition" for debates with my family members who believe in "hardwired" differences now. :)

Thanks for your input! :)

[thefeministhub]

Being a feminist, I often use the disappointing statistics about women in traditionally male dominated careers as evidence that women still have a while to go before becoming 'equal' in the workforce, especially in careers that rely heavily on intellect and intelligence and 'using our brains,' like the scientific fields for example.So I find it difficult when I have to combat the fact that, men and women's brains are anatomically different, and it's been scientifically proven that men's brains perform better than women's when faced analytical and mathematical type issues— and when people argue that THIS is the real reason why there are less women in particular fields, I'm not entirely sure how to reply. Any thoughts?

I am curious where you're getting the idea that "t's been scientifically proven that men's brains perform better than women's when faced analytical and mathematical type issues". 

People have different aptitudes regardless of sex or gender. Our society nurtures different aptitudes (sometimes consciously and often unconsciously) based solely on gender. 

Two books I recommend that deal with this research are: Pink Brain, Blue Brain by Lise Eliot and Delusions of Gender by Cordelia Fine

-kungfucarrie

[ladyaubade]

[thefeministhub]

the-madame-hatter:

mysteroo:

[Trigger warning] Nebraska - Miles Walser.

For years you hid your tampons between mattresses, cut your hair short, lowered your voice, collected ace bandages and baggy clothes. Small town talk stuck to your shoulders, you nervously shuffled around gas stations, never looked men in the eyes. We share unwanted wombs. While mine collects cobwebs, yours lies in a coffin in Nebraska.

This is the state that made you famous, handed movie scripts to Hilary Swank. Your murder was Oscar worthy. We are walking obituaries. Your hate crime headline already carved across my forehead, people look at me and see your delicate hands and absent adam’s apple.

Brother, I’m afraid to use the bathroom… (Walk in, head down, don’t look at another guy.) I’m afraid I’ll be discovered… (Don’t talk, dont stare, don’t piss too quickly.) Some thick armed man will call me a queer, tell me to show him my tits. Suddenly I’m thrown against faucets, spit in my face, workboot gutting my stomach. I see you on the movie screen and wonder if it’s my reflection. I watch them push you into the dirt and drag me into their car as they break our bodies in between our thighs.

Brother, did it hurt when you kissed her goodbye? Did you know you were breaking your promise when you told her you’d come back? Did your parents panic? Buy you a prom dress? Struggle over pronouns at family gatherings? And how long did it take your girlfriend to run her hands along your skin, soft as hers? Did she leave her eyes open?

We are carcasses. Untouched boxes of condoms. We are public secrets, playground jokes, and horror films. We are costumes, stuffing, binding and makeup. We aren’t real men to them. Invisible til we’re screaming. They don’t remember our names until they read them on our tombstones.

They exposed you. Decided you’re better off as splattered ink on newspaper. Used you as a warning for the rest of us. And there are days when it works. Sometimes I forget that sidewalks can be safe. Sometimes I confuse their shooting eyes for the bullet that met yours. Sometimes I imagine the phone call my mother would get. Can almost hear my sobbing friends. Smell the lillies on my casket. Touch my girlfriend’s black dress. But brother, I am trying to be brave.

whoa.