THE PROFESSIONAL AMATEUR
RSSPosts tagged with "War on Women"
Fox News guest laments ‘mistake’ of letting women vote | The Raw Story
Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, a tea party activist that’s appeared several times on Fox News, and founder of an organization where Sean Hannity serves as an advisory board member, said in a sermon recently published to YouTube that America’s greatest mistake was allowing women the right to vote, adding that back in “the good old days, men knew that women are crazy and they knew how to deal with them.”
I can’t even.
Woooooooooooooooooooooooooooow.
(Source: reallyfoxnews)
(Source: ohdeargodwhy)
Keep it up, Pat.
Oh good, I was somewhat confused on what I was supposed to do. Thanks for clearing that up, Pat.
I am a feminist.
As long as women’s natural body hair is called disgusting and inappropriate while men’s isn’t, I am a feminist.
As long as I can’t watch an episode of a popular sitcom without having to sit through multiple sexist comments or “jokes”, I am a feminist.
As long as women have to face the rational fear of being sexually assaulted every time they walk home past dark while men don’t, I am a feminist.
As long as misogyny exists in any country in this world, I am a feminist.
As long as women are being raped, then stoned to death or forced to marry their rapist, I am a feminist.
As long as companies promote men to manager when there are women who are equally as or better qualified, because they find that men look more authoritative, I am a feminist.
As long as women (her choice of clothes, her friendly nature, her weakness, her choice to drink alcohol) get blamed when men rape them, I am a feminist.
As long women’s opinions on online social networks are dismissed with phrases like “tits or gtfo”, “get back to the kitchen”, “are you pms’ing?”, I am a feminist.
As long as dressing like a women is degrading for men and as long as men are insulted with phrases like “you throw like a woman”, clearly implying that being like a woman is shameful, I am a feminist.
As long as both men are women are expected to work, but taking care of children and the household are still largely considered a woman’s job, I am a feminist.
As long as boys and girls are treated differently, expected to act differently, and surrounded by different toys and colours from the day they are born, I am a feminist.
As long as topless women aren’t allowed in public unless they’re one the cover of a men’s magazine, I am a feminist.
As long as women who have sex frequently are generally told they are “sluts”, “lacking self-respect” and “lacking morals” by both men and women, while men who frequently have sex are “just being men” and it’s “natural for them”, I am a feminist.
As long as there are places where women have to pay more for health insurance than men, I am a feminist.
As long as men experience situations with equal gender representation as female-dominated, and don’t consider a group discussion equal unless there are significantly more men then women participants (as has been proven), I am a feminist.
As long as there are men who think it’s their wife or girlfriend’s duty to have sex with him whenever he wants, I am a feminist.
As long as the word feminism (“the movement aimed at equal rights for women”) has a negative connotation, I am a feminist.
As long as misogynist people exist, I am a feminist.
(Source: livefromplanetearth)
Gwen Moore Speech On Sexual Assault Against Women
Since the mid-March madness of those senate judiciary Republicans who voted no on reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) because it would extend a few more U-visas to abused immigrant women, cover people in same-sex relationships and enhance funding for community-based programs that directly address people of color, I’ve been suffering from an acute case of cognitive dissonance.
I don’t think any sane person could argue that since it passed in 1994, VAWA hasn’t done a lot of good. It has indeed funded and facilitated the work of thousands of people who shelter, counsel, advise and advocate for victims of intimate partner violence. Its most recent iteration addresses sexual violence, a necessary step given the prevalence of this form of harm. I also believe that VAWA represents and seeds a cultural shift away from the blatant acceptance of violence against women. Without a VAWA,Rep. Gwen Moore (D-WI) wouldn’t stand on the House floor and talk about how she’d been sexually abused, raped and beaten. She wouldn’t have declared that “violence against women in this country is not levied against just Democrats but Republicans as well. Not blacks or whites or Hispanics but against native people as well. Not just Christians or Muslims and Jews but non-religious people—atheists. Not just rich people or poor people but middle-class people. And not just against heterosexual women but homosexual couples. It knows no gender. It knows no ethnicity. It knows nothing. And I’ll tell you: violence against women is as American as apple pie.”
Still, I have to say that in its funding and implementation, this (previously) bipartisan legislation has also made law enforcement its priority—a scary prospect for the systematically criminalized massive that includes black and brown, poor, undocumented and LGBT folks.
Back in 2000 before radical conservatives successfully soaked the media, public and legislative bodies in tea,Angela Davis laid out some still-essential, still-relevant theoretical questions about VAWA:
On the one hand, we should applaud the courageous efforts of the many activists who are responsible for a new popular consciousness of violence against women, for a range of legal remedies, and for a network of shelters, crisis centers, and other sites where survivors are able to find support. But on the other hand, uncritical reliance on the government has resulted in serious problems. I suggest that we focus our thinking on this contradiction: Can a state that is thoroughly infused with racism, male dominance, class-bias, and homophobia and that constructs itself in and through violence act to minimize violence in the lives of women? Should we rely on the state as the answer to the problem of violence against women? …
The major strategy relied on by the women’s anti-violence movement of criminalizing violence against women will not put an end to violence against women—just as imprisonment has not put an end to “crime” in general.
I should say that this is one of the most vexing issues confronting feminists today. On the one hand, it is necessary to create legal remedies for women who are survivors of violence. But on the other hand, when the remedies rely on punishment within institutions that further promote violence—against women and men, how do we work with this contradiction?
(Source: comedycentral)
I really like the way this is phrased. It’s so easy for people to dismiss “rape jokes” when they’re referred to as “rape jokes” because it makes rape sound like nothing more than a subject, like there aren’t even any people involved.
“Joke about raping someone” sounds so much more accurate to what people do when they make a “rape joke.” You’re not just joking about some sort of comedic subject. You are joking about one of the most horrific experiences that can happen to someone.
More people need to realise this.
^ word.
(Source: whoneedsfeminism)
(Source: sansastone)
As usual, Republicans think women are unintelligent creatures who need to be regulated like common livestock being bred to increase the herd. They’ll make up any excuse to create anti-abortion legislation, even if science and the medical community refutes their claims and they’ll always seek to violate the privacy and personal liberty of women that the Constitution protects. Forcing women to do things against their will is what criminals such as rapists and kidnappers do. So by forcing women to not use contraception, or to undergo ultrasounds, or to view an abortion, or to carry a pregnancy to term, Republicans are turning the state government of Arizona into a criminal organization that has total disregard for the freedoms, liberties, and rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
- Stephen D. Foster, http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/03/22/arizona-republican-wants-to-force-women-to-witness-an-abortion-before-having-one/ (via savetheteaboy)
(Source: pardonmysarcasm)
Hi, there.
I’m wearing a shirt that reads “Kill Me”.
If you saw me at a party or on the street would you promptly murder me?
What about if I had a few drinks? What if I was walking alone at night?
I’m guessing that you wouldn’t if you’re a sane individual.
The cops wouldn’t overlook your crime because of what I’m wearing because that’s silly. I wasn’t literally asking for you to kill me based on my choice of clothing. Who would take that defense seriously?My friends wouldn’t blame me for being murdered and my killer would be behind bars almost instantly.
So, why is it okay to rape someone because they’re wearing promiscuous clothes? Why does THEIR choice of clothing excuse THEIR attacker?
It doesn’t. You’re silly if you think otherwise.
The less guilt on the attacker. The more guilt on victim.
Stop. Victim. Blaming.
About THE PROFESSIONAL AMATEUR
You're going to see a lot of content from films I like or am excited for, personal pictures, liberal politics, quotes, content from my oh-so-talented friends, and a little bit of Mass Effect.
Twitter: @snacpack
Instagram: @savannahrodgers
|
