Home   •   Inbox   •   Archive   •   tags   •   twitter   •   livejournal   •   AO3   •   Theme Credit
July 2014
18
Via   •   Source

socialnetworkhell:

"Consensual sex" is just sex. To say that implies that there is such a thing as "non consensual sex", which there isn’t. That’s rape. That is what it needs to be called. There is only sex or rape. Do not teach people that rape is just another type of sex. They are two very separate events. You wouldn’t say "breathing swimming" and "non breathing swimming", you say swimming and drowning.

July 2014
13
Via   •   Source

thotofficial:

White gays

July 2014
12
Via   •   Source

dinotrash:

it is really telling that when guys find out that a lot of women have sexual assault/rape experiences they think that the majority of them are LYING rather than thinking oh this is a huge issue that effects a large portion of women and makes a large group of men predators whoa

July 2014
09
Via   •   Source

ieatemokids:

The sad part is not only is this completely true, but domestic violence still rose by 26% even when the team won.

July 2014
04
Via   •   Source

mycatsneezeslikealot asked

if men and women should have equal rights then why are you against men wanting rights? feminism isn't about women being better then men is it?...

fuckyeahcourtneystodden:

im against men complaining about wanting ‘mens rights’ because it’s never about wanting anything other than to silence and talk over women.

if men’s rights activists worked to open crisis centers for male victims of abuse and survivors of sexual violence i would love that. if men’s rights activists worked toward support and parenting classes and education for single fathers that would be amazing. if men’s rights activists worked toward educating fellow men on practicing safe sex and consent i would be so on board. if men’s rights activists worked toward breaking down the chains of racism of their brothers of colour i would be so happy. if men’s rights activists advocated for anything of value i would be so down for it all.

instead men’s rights activists sit on the fucking internet talking over women and attempting to silence them and their oppression with arbitrary add-ons, bullshit about the friendzone, and useless fucking nonsense.

so no. i have zero use for men’s rights activists because it’s never about advocating for things men need and instead it’s always about making sure women shut up about what they need. they aren’t “men’s rights activists” they’re “anti women activists”. point blank.

finally feminism is not about women being better than men nor is it about being equal to men. feminism is about women being liberated from men. i have no desire to be considered “equal” to the system of power that allows men to abuse, murder, and rape us. i want liberation from patriarchy and men.

July 2014
03
Via   •   Source

foxtrotsky:

What men don’t understand is that women are FIERCELY PROTECTIVE of underage girls because we remember when we were young and some adult man made us uncomfortable or manipulated us or was inappropriate with us and we were powerless.

July 2014
02
Via   •   Source
coketalk:

"An Illustrated Guide to American Personhood" by Sarah Baker

coketalk:

"An Illustrated Guide to American Personhood" by Sarah Baker

July 2014
01
Via   •   Source
livingwithdisability:

Big congrats to Robert and Nathan from Glasgow. They were refused access to a bar in Glasgow because of disability. 
THEY TOOK THE CASE TO COURT AND WON
From the original tweets:
Robert: “Removed from the Polo Lounge, Glasgow tonight by POLICE because I am disabled. #outragedNathan: “Denied entry to Polo Lounge BECAUSE we are disabled. They sent two police vans to remove us. Their bouncer carried me out and left Robert crawling around the floor. Gutted.
Posted by Robert after winning the case from on facebook group:
"This was never about us. We didn’t do this for us. What happened that night has already had it’s impact on us and nothing can change that. We took this case in the hope that it would give people faith that discrimination law can work, that as disabled people we don’t just have to accept the treatment we receive. We took this case for that young LGBT disabled person whose first experience of trying to access their so called community is to be told that they’re not wanted. We took this case to show every company who thinks it can get away with treating disabled people like they are unworthy of using their services that they can’t. And today, a year after we tried to go for a celebratory drink in the Polo Lounge and were told we couldn’t go in, Glasgow Sheriff Court ruled that we were unlawfully discriminated against - we have won our case. We hope the fear of being litigated against and having to pay compensation will encourage other companies to be more proactive in providing for all their customers, including the disabled ones. Nathan and I know this won’t be the last time we’ll face discrimination. But for today, we won. We are so incredibly grateful to the unwavering support that everyone has given us. Without the Faculty of Advocates’ Free Legal Assistance Unit, and our amazing lawyer Russell Bradley, we couldn’t have done this. Tom French, who was with us that night has stood by us all the way through and was an amazing witness. Rachel Amey was there in court to support us, help maintain our sanity, and even brought a pack of straws so I could have a drink! And Nic brought Brownies! Our heartfelt thanks to everyone who has been there for us this year.”

livingwithdisability:

Big congrats to Robert and Nathan from Glasgow. They were refused access to a bar in Glasgow because of disability. 

THEY TOOK THE CASE TO COURT AND WON

From the original tweets:

Robert: “Removed from the Polo Lounge, Glasgow tonight by POLICE because I am disabled. #outraged

Nathan: “Denied entry to Polo Lounge BECAUSE we are disabled. They sent two police vans to remove us. Their bouncer carried me out and left Robert crawling around the floor. Gutted.

Posted by Robert after winning the case from on facebook group:

"This was never about us. We didn’t do this for us. What happened that night has already had it’s impact on us and nothing can change that. We took this case in the hope that it would give people faith that discrimination law can work, that as disabled people we don’t just have to accept the treatment we receive. We took this case for that young LGBT disabled person whose first experience of trying to access their so called community is to be told that they’re not wanted. We took this case to show every company who thinks it can get away with treating disabled people like they are unworthy of using their services that they can’t. And today, a year after we tried to go for a celebratory drink in the Polo Lounge and were told we couldn’t go in, Glasgow Sheriff Court ruled that we were unlawfully discriminated against - we have won our case. We hope the fear of being litigated against and having to pay compensation will encourage other companies to be more proactive in providing for all their customers, including the disabled ones. Nathan and I know this won’t be the last time we’ll face discrimination. But for today, we won. 

We are so incredibly grateful to the unwavering support that everyone has given us. Without the Faculty of Advocates’ Free Legal Assistance Unit, and our amazing lawyer Russell Bradley, we couldn’t have done this. Tom French, who was with us that night has stood by us all the way through and was an amazing witness. Rachel Amey was there in court to support us, help maintain our sanity, and even brought a pack of straws so I could have a drink! And Nic brought Brownies! Our heartfelt thanks to everyone who has been there for us this year.”

June 2014
30
Via   •   Source

frauleinromanoff:

you know what

i wrote earlier about how i use birth control for health purposes and not necessarily to prevent pregnancy as an attempt to justify it. but then i realized that yeah, there are probably other people going through the same thing and it should be recognized but we shouldn’t have to explain why we use birth control pills. we shouldn’t have to justify it. if men can have vasectomies and viagra prescribed to them then i should be able to take a fucking pill no questions asked. 

June 2014
30
Via   •   Source

newwavefeminism:

Dear liberal bloggers,

Today’s SCOTUS ruling isn’t just about corporations being people, and religious beliefs - it’s about once again basic access to birth control and and sexual health being held back on an institutional level. It’s about sexism, hypocrisy and classism. It’s about resources and privilege.

It’s about setting a precedent that will continue to tear away access to sexual and reproductive health to the working class.

Sincerely,

Don’t just talk about the talking points that make you comfortable

June 2014
30
Via   •   Source

medievalpoc:singleactionjack reblogged your post yoursmiletakesmemiles: owning-my-trut… and added:

I’d ignore that commenter, their blog is full of white supremacy nonsense.

Unfortunately, ignoring white supremacy does literally nothing to fight it.

June 2014
28
Via   •   Source

timemachineyeah:

 

I’ve said this before and I’ll point it out again - 

Menstruation is caused by change in hormonal levels to stop the creation of a uterine lining and encourage the body to flush the lining out. The body does this by lowering estrogen levels and raising testosterone. 

Or, to put it more plainly “That time of the month” is when female hormones most closely resemble male hormones. So if (cis) women aren’t suited to office at “That time of the month” then (cis) men are NEVER suited to office.

If you are a dude and don’t dig the ladies around you at their time of the month, just think! That is you all of the time. 

And, on a final note, post-menopausal (cis) women are the most hormonally stable of all human demographics. They have fewer hormonal fluctuations of anyone, meaning older women like Hilary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren would theoretically be among the least likely candidates to make an irrational decision due to hormonal fluctuations, and if we were basing our leadership decisions on hormone levels, then only women over fifty should ever be allowed to hold office.

June 2014
26
Via   •   Source