1. In working on my book, I went to Rwanda in 2004 to interview women who had borne children of rape conceived during the genocide. …At the end of my final interview, I asked the woman I was interviewing whether she had any questions. She paused shyly for a moment. “Well,” she said, a little hesitantly. “You work in this field of psychology.” I nodded. She took a deep breath. “Can you tell me how to love my daughter more?” she asked. “I want to love her so much, and I try my best, but when I look at her I see what happened to me and it interferes.” A tear rolled down her cheek, but her tone turned almost fierce, challenging. “Can you tell me how to love my daughter more?” she repeated.

    Perhaps Todd Akin has an answer for her.


    “The Legitimate Children of Rape” - Andrew Solomon on the historical relationship between rape and pregnancy: http://nyr.kr/RsAKyQ (via newyorker)

    Andrew Solomon is fabulous so WOW I AM EXCITED FOR THIS BOOK

    (via saturniinae)

    (Source: newyorker.com)

  2. thepoliticalnotebook:

    Sex and Gender at the Olympics, Part Deux.

    Photos: Tunisia’s Habiba Ghribi reacts to her silver medal. AP. Jess Ennis, Team GB gold medalist in the heptathlon, celebrates after her long jump. Dylan Martinez/Reuters. Claressa Shields of Team USA vs. Sweden’s Anna Laurell. Patrick Semansky/AP. Team GB’s Yamile Aldama reacts after the triple jump. AP.  Megan Rapinoe and Alex Morgan celebrate soccer victory. Stanley Chou/AP.

  3. erosum:

    Rachel Maddow, to Republican pundits on Meet the Press (video)

  4. 02:20 14th Mar 2012

    Notes: 3180

    Reblogged from liquidiousfleshbag

    Tags: :cgenderfeminismqueue

    A popular exercise among High School creative writing teachers in America is to ask students to imagine they have been transformed, for a day, into someone of the opposite sex, and describe what that day might be like. The results, apparently, are uncannily uniform. The girls all write long and detailed essays that clearly show they have spent a great deal of time thinking about the subject. Half of the boys usually refuse to write the essay entirely. Those who do make it clear they have not the slightest conception what being a teenage girl might be like, and deeply resent having to think about it.

    David Graeber, “Beyond Power/Knowledge: An Exploration of Power, Ignorance and Stupidity” (pdf)

    He also says much the same thing in “Revolutions in Reverse,” an essay included in the book Revolutions in Reverse (which can be read in Scribd at the link). I’d been meaning to post a quote from the second source for a while, thanks to Aaron Brady for the actual excerpt above. That last link is a good essay on the recent Rush Limbaugh BS and how patriarchy works and how male privilege is defended by having men like Limbaugh around to keep women’s opinions out of the allowed discourse on the subject. To keep high school boys forever unable to write essays that could relate to the issue of needing hormonal birth control to control ovarian cysts.

    (via youthisastateofmind)

    We talked about this a lot this year in English. Girls are taught from a young age that we have to connect to what we read, so when we do excercises in class, everyone talks about how they connect to Huck Finn, or to Jay Gatsby, or to Julius Caesar. We connect to all the characters because we have to, because if we don’t then we won’t survive through the years of school.

    Boys don’t deal with this. Practically every book or story they encounter from the time they begin school is full of male characters and written by men. So when confronted with female characters of female authors, they don’t know what to do. They feel as if they can’t connect with these characters because of the gender boundaries. As one woman in my class pointed out, “girls have to connect to male characters, but boys don’t have to connect to female characters.” By the time they’re my age, it’s not even intentional: many honestly think that they won’t understand a female character because they have no shared experiences whatsoever.

    (via animehrmine)

  5. What is it about being laughed at by women that makes people like Ryking so uncomfortable that they lash out with such rage as to tell people they should be sexually assaulted and die? And then when confronted, these Ryking-ites lash out further and claim that their violence was the fault of the woman? No. Your reaction is never the fault of the other person. You and you alone control how you react and reacting with threats of violence and wishes of harm are never acceptable.

    Ryking and his minions are not victims of “female privilege.” They’re all victims of their own misguided sense of entitlement over everything, but especially an unearned feeling of ownership of any dialogue pertaining to women and privilege. We didn’t discuss sexism on their terms, so now they feel threatened.

    And that’s really the key to all of this: they’re afraid. They’re afraid we’ll have our own discussions on our own terms and not lift them to the position of All Mighty Male. And they’re afraid because when they express their hurt over being treated like everyone else, we laugh at them because it’s ridiculous. That’s what frightens them most of all: that the women, the underlings, the peons, whoever else they’ve felt power over all their lives will laugh at them, and that humiliation will leave them feeling as powerless as the rest of us truly are. 

    So continue to laugh at the Ryking-ites, and like boggarts they will resist and lash out and threaten violence to find any way to scare us into submission. But you cannot let them. There are bigger, scarier, more dangerous creatures to worry about that can’t be subdued by our laughter. Ryking and his ilk aren’t Voldemort and the death eaters, hell they’re not even the real dementors. They’re just the boggart pretending to be. 

  6. Really, conservatives just hate women. They resent the fact that we work, go to school, vote, everything. Their entire stance on birth control, abortions and social programs is a thinly veiled attempt to take us back to a time when we had less rights. Take away our birth control and we get pregnant. Take away our abortions and we have to keep the baby (in their minds, anyway). Take away certain social programs to help support ourselves (mainly food stamps, WIC and housing assistance) and they think that will force us to get married to a man who can support us. Take away other social programs like daycare subsidies and then we have no choice but to stay at home and take care of the kids because the cost of daycare eats into any additional income. Men who have always relied on their male privilege to get them through life cannot handle seeing a women succeed, or even exist, without them. They figure if you keep kicking them back down, they’ll eventually give up and settle for some loser who doesn’t deserve them but has been given all the opportunities in the world to succeed because he possesses a penis.

    hunnichild (via brienne—of—tarth)

    inb4 someone changes this all to “uterus-bearers”

    (via unknowablewoman)

    (Source: mexicanprincessbrienne)

  7. downlo:

    My favorites:

    Bills Bills Bills: The Dual-Income Model and the Reshaping of the Domestic Sphere

    Crazy in Love: The Diagnosis and Treatment of “Female Hysteria” During the Late Nineteenth Century

    Independent Women: Girl I Didn’t Know You Could Get Down (to Business in the Public Sphere and Still Be Expected to Perform Domestic Labor During the “Second Shift”) Like That

  8. downlo:

    Psst: click through to read the whole thing!

  9. nom-chompsky:


    PETA is planning to start a porn site to advocate veganism. What does porn have to do with being vegan? Absolutely nothing, but PETA just has a long history of using sex and exploitation to send out their message because otherwise no one would give a fuck about anything these assholes had to say. 

    Like always, if you have to use fat shaming and the objectification of women to sell your ideas, your ideas aren’t any good. 

    Semen isn’t vegan, Sasha.

  10. image: Download

    (Source: )

  11. 15:01 29th Jun 2011

    Notes: 193

    Reblogged from thepoliticalnotebook

    Tags: xsfeminismIMF

    image: Download



Apropos of the news that Christine Lagarde has been appointed head of the IMF, journalist Laurie Penny sums up my feelings in 140 characters.

Wow. This tweet is dead on.
  12. The following day, I attended a workshop about preventing gender violence, facilitated by Katz. There, he posed a question to all of the men in the room: “Men, what things do you do to protect yourself from being raped or sexually assaulted?”

    Not one man, including myself, could quickly answer the question. Finally, one man raised his hand and said, “Nothing.” Then Katz asked the women, “What things do you do to protect yourself from being raped or sexually assaulted?” Nearly all of the women in the room raised their hand. One by one, each woman testified:

    “I don’t make eye contact with men when I walk down the street,” said one.
    “I don’t put my drink down at parties,” said another.
    “I use the buddy system when I go to parties.”
    “I cross the street when I see a group of guys walking in my direction.”
    “I use my keys as a potential weapon.”

    The women went on for several minutes, until their side of the blackboard was completely filled with responses. The men’s side of the blackboard was blank. I was stunned. I had never heard a group of women say these things before. I thought about all of the women in my life — including my mother, sister and girlfriend — and realized that I had a lot to learn about gender.

  13. On Ryking and Feminazis


    It’s difficult me to write this post, because, well, I like Ryking’s political commentary a lot of the time, but I also try to be a male feminist, not to mention I am one of the worst people I know when it comes to writing. That being said, I have encountered and am following a group of feminist on tumblr who I believe represent what feminism really stands for. I am, however, following a group of people who have to resort to debating what I would call extreme feminists.

    Then I saw STFUFauxminists post about feminist extremist not existing.

    I agree, to a certain extent, that feminist extremist do not exist, when you think about the current feminist paradigm. However, there are people who march under the label of “feminist” but do not specifically march for the same causes. They do not wish for equality, but an inverted version of current society, with female privileges instead of male privileges, making males the oppressed and submissive group. And these people are, in my opinion, who Ryking were addressing. 

    (refer to their point of dreaming of a matriarchy).

    I also believe that Ryking brought up another point which “extreme feminist” seem to abuse, the use of the male privileges refutation. 

    Yes, male privileges exist. Yes, they do bias male’s views on certain issues.

    No, they do not instantly render all arguments and points males make moot and pointless/worthless.

    Just because one has male privileges does not suddenly make their argument worthless. Countless times I have seem such “extreme feminist” (I do not think it is correct to use the word feminazi) dismiss valid criticisms and points because the person who proposed such views and brought them into the discussion were male and therefore had male privileges. 

    It is undeniably true that there are certain members within the tumblr feminist community who will use the “male privilege” argument as an argument of its own, rather than use it as an explanation as to where it applies and to specifically what argument it thus renders incorrect due to the bias of male privileges. Rather, they will apply it to a person and then claim ALL their views are incorrect.

    One example I would like to point out is Anticapitalist’s post about the 3 things feminist don’t do. Although I disagree with some of the points within that post, one of them was something which I believe was true, the view of the draft and feminism.

    I’m not American, and I do not know how the draft system works in the US with great detail. However, I am Korean and I do know about the Korean system of mandatory military service for males. Never have I ever seen feminists claiming that only having males do military service mandatory for 2 years was sexist and that females should also be included within the service. I have seen feminists actually argue the opposite, saying that it equals out the playing field due to the fact that while males are doing their service, their female counterparts may graduate from college, or get a job and thus build up more experience, thus creating an argument contradictory from their stance of equality for all sexes. 

    One my disregard this point by saying, “It’s Korea, who gives a fuck?”. However, the fact that it’s Korea did not stop an international outcry on the rural practice of aborting a child if she’s female, which then caused the government to pass a law making it illegal for a doctor to tell a pregnant women if the fetus she is carrying’s sex is male or female.

    Nor has it stopped the international outcry against the cultural dish of dog meat soup, leading to a distortion of what actually happens, cultural stereotypes, and many bad glances at the words “I’m Korean.”

    The fact of the matter is, in my views, that there is a certain group, parading under the banner of “feminists” who are not, in the canon definition, exactly feminists, and I do believe that it is part of the job of the feminist to community to identify when someone fits said description, even if their stance benefits females as a whole. I was introduced to feminism by the stance that it was for the equality of males and females, not the beating down of males so that females could then be the dominant sex.

    /Ramblings and bad analysis with bad conclusion

    I’m going to tread lightly here, because I like you and your blog a lot.

    There was an excellent refutation of each and every point made by ryking by mirkwood. If you haven’t read it already, I highly recommend it. I’m not going to reiterate everything they said. I’m only going to refute your post.

    I need to start off by saying that, as a Jewish person who has personally experienced the pain associated with what the Nazis did –actually, fuck that. As a human being with a memory, the use of the term feminazi is never acceptable. The term Nazi being attached to anything other than the original term it came from (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei) is wrong in so many ways.

     I understand that you stated that in your post, but I think that should be the first thing from that post by ryking to be acknowledged and not the existence of extreme feminism.  No matter how extreme some people who claim to be feminists are, they have never systematically murdered, maimed, tortured, experimented on, degraded, dehumanized, and destroyed millions of people and their families. Using such a term minimizes those atrocities and minimizes the pain and suffering of anyone and everyone connected to those who experienced actual Nazis. The fact that anyone, no matter how witty or entertaining their blog is otherwise, can throw that term out so lightly, defend the use of it, and then make Hitler jokes in retaliation to criticism is absolutely and positively disgusting.

     Also, ya know who coined the term “feminazi?” Rush Limbaugh and his bff Tom Hazlett. So for someone (as ryking does) who claims to be a liberal and frequently uses Limbaugh as a figure to mock to use the very term Limbaugh coined in a misogynistic attempt to silence women is beyond hypocritical.

    Okay, now on to the issue of extreme feminism. Yes, there are some man-hating feminists out there. But guess what? They don’t adequately represent the cause that is feminism. They are actually anti-feminists in that their hatred of men ignores the ‘equality’ tenet at the basis of feminism, and erases people that do not identify as male or female. If you want to see an example of what feminism isn’t, watch “The Wicker Man.” I’m pretty sure that’s what people mean when they talk about extreme feminists. Even if these are the people that ryking was addressing, there is no need to call them feminazis.

     Also, them “dreaming of a matriarchy” who the fuck does ryking think he is? Can he really see into the minds of people and judge what they dream of? That’s some of the most privileged bullshit I’ve ever heard. I mean seriously, a privileged man telling women they dream of matriarchy is the same as a privileged white person telling a group of POC they dream of [insert name of reversely privileged society here]; it’s possible some do, but the majority likely does not and assuming that the ones who do are somehow similar to Nazis is despicable.

    No, just because one has male privilege doesn’t mean that their arguments are worthless. It makes them less valid because they aren’t coming from someone who has personally experienced anything other than that privilege. Men can and do still experience a form of sexism stemming from these gender binary roles society has created, about which men can form arguments because it is a form of oppression they have experienced. However the moment a man tries to tell a woman why it’s okay for her to be paid less on average than a male counterpart, or he tries to tell her (as ryking did) that she should be more than satisfied with the 19th amendment, his argument is worthless until he checks his privilege. There are always valid criticisms to be made of any position in any movement, but such criticisms should be made with respect and come from a perspective that takes into account the position of those not privileged.

    I’ve been involved in feminist causes since I was 16. So while that’s only 8 years and there are many other tumblrers who’ve undoubtedly been involved for far longer, I’m going off my own personal experience here when I say that feminists do vehemently oppose the draft. I believe STFU Fauxminists and STFU Sexists have made posts about this before that were excellent and I can’t write as well as them, so I’m just going to give my own short spiel here. I don’t give a shit if it’s the US, Korea, or Mars, forcing someone to join the military against their will is not right. I don’t know who these “feminists” are that are saying it evens out the playing field because I’ve never heard of such a thing. Real feminists advocate men’s liberation because the current gender roles are just as harmful to men as they are women, and completely disregard the existence of people not strictly binary. That whole “even out the playing field” argument from people who claim to be feminists sounds like people who claimed they weren’t racists when they advocated “separate makes it equal” for schools, bathrooms, and everything else: complete and utter bullshit.

     I’m guessing (not sure) why the female fetus thing got more attention is because there is also a strongly anti-choice undertone to religious Western culture; a strongly anti-choice undertone that also translates into further misogyny (do you see how it’s all connected?).

    Regardless of that, I don’t see how this is related to the use of the word “feminazi” because those people clearly aren’t feminists. They are something else who parade under that banner. Calling them feminazis does nothing other than, as I’ve addressed above, erase and minimize horrific history, combine these anti-feminists with feminists to create a ridiculous judgment from a position of privilege, and reinforce the popular notion that feminists are bad.

     Feminists are not bad. I know that you know that. I read your blog whenever I’m on tumblr. You wouldn’t be following me if you thought feminists were bad. I get that. I think you’re just mistaken. Anyone can claim to be a feminist just as anyone can claim to not be racist. That doesn’t make it true. People who claim to be feminists but want to “beat men down” are not feminists. They’re not feminazis.

    They’re just assholes.


  14. Their misunderstanding of feminist politics reflects the reality that most folks learn about feminism from patriarchal mass media.

    Bell Hooks, Feminism is for Everybody, page 1 (via bearbearpdx)

    YES. This definitely relates to the conversation yesterday about the mythical existence of “radical man-hating feminazis.”

    (via stfuconservatives)

    I hate the “feminists hate men” argument. No, we don’t hate men. We refuse to go along with the status quo that states men are emotionally stunted, single minded, baboons that are slaves to their penises. I want to lift men and women up and over a society that has placed us against one another and forced us into roles we do not want to play.

    (via the-madame-hatter)

    Bell Hooks knows whats up.

    (via bigassfemme)

  15. image: Download