Posts tagged sexism

feministhistorian:

[TW: rape culture]

You don’t have to step foot into a college women’s studies class to see that people use insults like “you throw like a girl,” “you are acting like a girl,” etc. You don’t have to follow social justice blogs to see a father yelling at his son for being interested in “girly things” or “girl toys.” You don’t have to take a class on women and politics to see women politicians are treated differently than men. You only have to turn on any new station to see them complaining about Hilary Clintons pant suits and not her opinions. You don’t have to step foot in a women’s studies class to know you are uncomfortable when someone calls you a “cunt,” “slut,” etc. You only have to have someone call you that. You don’t have to step in a women’s studies class to know you are uncomfortable when men get pissed off when you don’t give them the attention they demand from you. You don’t have to be well versed in feminism to know this. All you have to do is trust your gut (if you are a woman) or talk to your mothers, sisters, aunts, grandma, girl friends, etc. 

The only thing feminism does is connect you with other people who think that everything I mentioned is fucked up and want to change society. The only thing women’s studies classes do are put everything you know into perspective and show you other women care enough about women to create a whole field around their experiences. All taking women’s history classes does is show you how this is systematic and has been going on for a long ass time. While these things are great, they are not needed to know your experiences are valid and patriarchy exist. We see it every damn day. We understand that when we get creeped out by some guy not being able to take a fucking hint. We understand that when someone calls us a bitch. We understand that when we see people focusing on how female politicians look and not what they are saying. We see something every day that shows women being degraded. 

Every single thing I mentioned is fucked up. So fucked up a bunch of people have joined feminist movements, womanist movements, etc. to fight against sexism. Women’s centers are on college campuses. Women’s studies was created to show women’s experiences matter. There are kick ass women in politics, media, academics, the sciences, medicine, law, etc. doing kick ass work to change how society views women. There are kick ass parents who are raising their kids to be who they are and teaching them there is nothing wrong with who they are. There are amazing organizations working to end intimate partner violence, rape, sexual assault, and gendered violence. There are amazing people who are willing to actively change the fucked up notion that women are bad and change how society views women. 

So this post that ended up not really having a point was started by me asking myself “is it really that hard to understand patriarchy is rooted in a hatred of women and all things associated with women?” I don’t think it is. We see how people degrade women every single day. Whether it is something like someone making a rape joke, harassing women on the street/in school/etc, or just not taking a woman’s opinion seriously. If every single person things hard enough, they can think of a time when they have seen a woman be degraded. Women can think of times where they have been degraded. Then I started to realize that no, this is hard to understand because society does not value women’s opinions and experiences. Women can list every single instance they have been degraded and they will most likely be told they are over reacting and imagining things. Men wonder why women do not always trust them. When men tell us we are imagining sexism, we aren’t going to fucking trust you. Not all men do this but enough do for our experiences to be ignored. It is fucked up and needs to change. 

I’m going to stop because I have no hell of a clue where this is going…

(Source: historicalslut)

silentpunk:

Been seeing a lot of sexist shit about this acquitted woman Amanda Knox. As an attractive, young and female murder suspect she has been getting a lot of attention in the press apparently (I’m so out of touch).

It seems in Facebook and Twitter comments, like in many areas of society, commentators can openly join in with the sexual objectification of this woman while simultaneously slut-shaming and victim-blaming her for it. Whether this woman committed murder or not (the courts have now cleared her) she has been marked and demonised as sexual object and ‘media whore’ before she has even had a chance to do anything deemed ‘slutty’ or ‘money grabbing’.

A quick mental gender reverse and … yes I can confirm that a male former suspect would never be treated like this. In fact I don’t need to imagine; her ex-boyfriend who was convicted of the same crime, it has been pointed out, got far less coverage than she did and I would be quick to remind any sexists reading that this is the media’s doing, not hers.

What should be obvious is that the murder conviction is not a necessary element in the unwarranted (okay, it’s always unwarranted) slut-shaming, hounding and sexist demonisation of a woman targeted by the media. Just look at any of those odious annually compiled lists of ‘most annoying people’, overwhelmingly populated by women whose only crime appears to be living under a media microscope (rather than, say, murder). Yes many are sick of hearing about these women, but can we not have a point of self-awareness where we realise that venom should not be channeled into those sexist bon mots that just roll off the tongue (a little too easily) but into a critique of the industry and culture that funds those upskirt paparazzi shots (what a slut!), illegally placed bathroom cameras (OMG she’s on drugs? FOR SHAME!) and relentless tabloid slander…?

Bring in the fascination our sexist society has with female murderers and this woman is going to be marked for life and in most people’s eyes she’ll deserve every bit of shit slung her way. Even when cleared by the courts, the idea of a female killer holds a lot of interest and she will never truly be redeemed.

  Having read somewhere that, in cases of violent crime, women often serve harsher sentences and are less likely to be granted parole than their male counterparts I turned to Google. Many of the top results are yahoo answers (or similar) discussions asking ‘why are women given lighter sentences than men?’, followed by a stream of utter ignorance taking the original question as fact revealing it was just another exercise in sexism rather than a fact-finding mission.

This article  by Rachel Thwaites from ‘The F Word’ has said it all before, so do check it out.

Women are not expected to commit violent crimes and this is because of the myth of some inherent ‘caring’ nature (as opposed to a man’s natural aggressive nature). Women are far less likely to commit violent crimes than men. This means that women on average commit less serious crimes, so they obviously, on average, serve shorter sentences as well as making up a smaller percentage of the prison population! But when they do commit these more serious crimes, why are the tabloid press so quick to invoke the outdated idea of ‘evil’ or ‘witchcraft’? How can it be more ‘evil’ for a woman to commit the same crime as a man? Why are they more harshly judged?

If Amanda Knox was a man, at the centre of this highly-publicised murder-mystery, would we be blaming and shaming him for a suspected million dollar book-deal? I reckon he’d be the venerated hero and we’d be eagerly awaiting his stoic or tearful exclusive on our favourite chat show. So shut up.

 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/03/amanda-knox-raffaele-sollecito-cleared-murder

(via boomvagynamite)

aim2misbehave:

The portrayal of female sexuality. 

[Trigger warning for discussion of: attempted rape, reproductive coercion, and domestic violence]

I mean, there was some acknowledgement of female sexuality in series 5 - directly with Amy not turning around when Eleven is finding his outfit, in an acknowledgement of the fangirls, and then more subtly with the shower scene in The Lodger that was obviously put in (and shot by one of the few female directors in the series, no less) for fanservice. Considering how sexual desire on TV is almost always based on the straight male gaze, this was kind of refreshing, at first.

But, then there are some massive problems. 

Like the scene where Amy kisses Eleven and tries to go further and is refusing to take “No” for an answer. That’s not empowered sexuality, that’s rape culture - just think of how the scenario would play if the genders were reversed and it was a male character forcibly kissing a female character and trying to have sex with her against her will? Almost nobody would interpret that as anything other than a rape attempt. 

And then Amy’s constant miniskirts or sexy police uniform and showing off her legs. Sure, there’s nothing wrong with women wearing short skirts if that’s what they find comfy or empowering or whatever, but at the same time, this is a TV show, and not the real world, so it’s possible to say that it’s her choice and/or fitting with her personality or whatever, and then still use other cues, like cinematography, or other characters’ reactions, to objectify her.

[Mild spoilers for A Good Man Goes to War and Let’s Kill Hitler from this point forward. Nothing about River’s identity, though]

And River. Where do I start with River? As a mysterious archaeologist, she was awesome. Even in The Big Bang/The Pandorica Opens, the scene with the Dalek kept her both badass and slightly chilling enough to be a great character. But in Let’s Kill Hitler - poison lipstick? I mean, aside from this being such a cliche, she is literally using her sexuality as a weapon. And that’s not only a wildly overused trope in media, but it’s also problematic when you look at the commonly-held misogynist belief that “women use sex to get what they want” that’s used to justify or spawn all sorts of other twisted things, including but not limited to violence against women. Now, I’m sure Moffat didn’t meant to directly imply that, and he didn’t seem to be at the top of his game in this episode, but it’s still wildly problematic. 

And then there’s the Amy pregnancy thing. Sure, maybe Amy wanted kids, maybe she even wanted them relatively soon, and that’s OK. But, there’s a world of difference between wanting a child, getting pregnant, and then choosing to carry the pregnancy to term, and being treated like a human incubator with apparently complete disregard for her own well-being, much less her agency and bodily autonomy? Remember, Amy didn’t know she was pregnant, she didn’t have the choice to carry it or not, or to make the best decisions for her unborn child, and they didn’t plan on waking her up for the birth and had gotten the Sontaran nurse which implied to me that they a) didn’t care that much for her well-being and b) they were probably planning to hide the pregnancy from her altogether. 

And on top of all that, Amy isn’t even upset by this? Her emotional reaction is just concern for her child, which is legitimate, but you don’t hear a word about how she was literally used for her body? On top of the fact that almost everyone with a uterus would be frightened by the prospect of being forced to carry a pregnancy to term, and that reproductive coercion is a very real issue and a very serious form of domestic abuse?