baubles of my mind's eye

(Source: feltlikethefabric, via neutralmilkhostel)

fydestinyhope:

thank you kurt, for summing up rape culture 

(Source: princessxserenity, via neutralmilkhostel)

(via damnitdisney)

(via dailymurf)

richarddivine:

feministslut:

warriorgrrrls:

“Eight percent of college men have either attempted or successfully raped. Thirty percent say they would rape if they could get away with it. When the wording was changed to “force a woman to have sex,” the number jumped to 58%. Worse still, 83.5% argue that “some women look like they are just asking to be raped.”

—Margo Paine, Ph.D. (Body Wars)

This is appalling, and one of many reasons why I publicly identify as a male feminist. 

(via pyrrhosrepublic)

^ same.

(via i-am-the-lighthouse)

THIS SHOULD MATTER TO YOU!

(via babygrandsingitloud)

This is unbelievable…

this is beyond disgusting.

Absolutely terrifying and horrifying. 

(Source: iuwaehfoaiuwhefoiaulfjqn, via dailymurf)

humorlessfeminist:

“No, not that rape, just RAPE rape” - The Republican Agenda to Minimize Rape Victims

stfusexists:

This has been all over Tumblr, so I’ll be surprised if anyone hasn’t heard about it, but this is the latest bullshit coming from the anti-woman Congress.

The GOP is seeking to limit the definition of rape so that only certain types of rape will qualify for taxpayer funds for abortion. Nevermind, of course, that this undermines the already constantly under fire. Nevermind, of course, that this attempts to strip victims of their own horrific experiences. Nevermind, of course, that women shouldn’t have to justify their access to a legal medical procedure to the satisfaction of some overwhelmingly male legislators.

What’s important is that a minuscule percentage of our tax dollars don’t go to helping women afford a necessary medical procedure. What’s important is that we can give a big “fuck you” to the members of our society with uteruses, and tell them that their rape wasn’t rape-y enough for us to give financial support towards their abortion.

Hopefully, by screwing over all those women who were raped when they were unconscious or children, we’ll save enough money to continue going to war all over the world. Because that’s what this country is all about.

Right?

(via feministrobot-deactivated201203)

rabbleprochoice:

sadydoyle:

Okay. So, for those unaware of context, here is what is going on. In the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” which is reprehensible on its surface, there’s a special surprise clause that seeks to limit the definition of rape and incest. In order to qualify for the exception to rape and incest cases, all rapes must be “forcible” and all incest cases must involve survivors under the age of 18. Since 1976, to quote the Mother Jones piece, “federal law has prohibited the use of taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions except in the cases of rape, incest, and when the pregnancy endangers the life of the woman.” In addition to being a serious attack on the rights of women, this is an unprecedented attack on the rights of survivors, and introduces a hierarchy of rape which would deprive the majority of pregnant rape and incest survivors from receiving coverage for their abortions. No more coverage for the mentally disabled, no more coverage for children, no more coverage for those who are drugged, unconscious, or coerced. Since many states do not HAVE a “forcible rape” law, those people might not be able to get funding because of the state they live in, and not just the specific circumstances of their rape. No more coverage for most survivors, basically. Seeking to minimize rape — to create a distinction between a few “real” rapes and the majority of “not rape enough” cases — and to pass this into law is unconscionable, and sets a terrifying precedent.

I wrote a post about this which got a lot of traffic. In a subsequent post, I suggested a Twitter campaign aimed primarily at John Boehner, something in the vein of #MooreandMe, to create consciousness around the issue. Some people have expressed a desire to participate, so it seems like a good idea.

HOWEVER. As I write this, it’s 7:30 PM on a Friday night. Getting this started now wouldn’t get us the eyeballs we’d need to create a decent amount of momentum. Fortunately, that gives us prep time. Which I, for one, didn’t have for my last Twitter campaign. Here’s what we’re going to need.

• We need a target. We have one. Boehner is on Twitter, he’s the Speaker, and he’s the one who called this bill a “top priority.” He has a long history of anti-choice activism. And, plus, he’s a recognizable media figure, who people love to cover, because he’s a goofy character: Orange, cries a lot, etc. That’s why this is #DearJohn. HOWEVER, we also need to make sure everyone knows who their representative is, and that the representatives who are on Twitter also get @’ed by the people in their districts, PARTICULARLY if they are instrumental in regard to this bill, or if they have supported it. We need to send a message, as clearly as we can, that they stand to lose votes and popularity if they stand behind this bill. Because, frankly, I don’t care how pro-life you are: Seeking to deprive necessary aid of any kind to rape victims is horrific and disgraceful, and anyone should be able to get behind that. More of them will get behind it if their disgrace is public, in addition to the necessary steps of writing to one’s representative. People should be encouraged, in fact, to write to their representatives, as a part of this. But when those letters come, we want them to be on the back of a wave of rightfully deserved public opposition. And we want the representatives with common sense to know that, when they oppose this act, they do so with substantial public support. Because then they will, and they won’t just compromise in the name of “bipartisanship” or act as if this is a “minor” issue in the grand scheme of things which they can afford to cave on. It’s not. It’s the welfare of rape and incest victims, including children and the disabled, and it’s the lives of women. They cannot cave on this. It’s unacceptable.

• We need a goal. Otherwise we’re shouting, and getting ourselves all kind of triggered and worn out, for an indefinite period of time, and with no way to know when to disengage. Let’s say our goal is to rally opposition to this bill generally, which does a tremendous disservice to all low-income women, and to the right of choice, and to rally opposition to and awareness of this clause specifically. How do we measure that? No, seriously, I’m asking. Leave a Tumblr reply if you have an idea.

• We need a coherent message. There are a few ways to go here. One, we can point out how many other things are a “top priority,” that Boehner and the Republicans are ignoring in favor of “prioritizing” this bill. Two, we can speak specifically to the needs and experiences of rape and incest survivors — including and especially those who would be deprived of funding by this act — and how necessary both the ability to choose and the funding to do so is to them. These people already had their right to say “no” taken away when they were raped. What this bill wants to do is to take that right away from them, AGAIN. It wants to impose non-consensual pregnancy and childbirth. And by the way? An old friend of mine recently gave birth. To a lovely wanted baby, and I should say congratulations, but relevant factor? On Facebook, she listed the cost of her pregnancy and childbirth, and it was over $30,000.

• We need people who know this issue very well, and can speak on it persuasively. My key areas of focus, when it comes to feminism and activism generally, are media representation and sexual assault. I can debate these issues with a very sharp grasp of the facts on the ground and the arguments my opposition is going to oppose. That made me a really good point person for #MooreandMe, which was specifically about media representation and sexual assault. This also concerns sexual assault, so that part of it, I can speak to. I am not one of the many feminists who has extensively studied and debated reproductive rights. I know about as much as anyone, but the precise legal nuances are important here, and I don’t have the same instant or comprehensive recall that I would in the case of an issue that was specifically about sexual assault. Therefore, I need those feminists to take point as well. I know a few, including one who mounted a successful Twitter campaign, and I’m going to e-mail them after I finish writing this. But if you are, then I encourage you to use the reply function, my Ask function (no anonymous Asks any more, sorry) or my e-mail, tbd.ladybusiness@gmail.com, to both point out means of argument and to anticipate what the issues with our protest or message are going to be.

• If this thing takes off, we need a media contact. Part of the success of this, if it gets off the ground, will be the amount of media coverage we get, and the extent to which our perspective is represented therein. We need someone who is willing to represent that perspective accurately and well, in the event that they want to speak to us, rather than simply speaking about us. I was so goddamned busy last time that I missed a ton of shit. I might still be missing shit. I have no idea. If this takes off again, it still will not be me; I will be engaged on the ground, I will be engaged with fellow protesters, and I will be protesting, but I’m not going to be the interview girl. My preferred media contact would be someone with substantial amounts of experience talking to larger media outlets about reproductive rights and sexual assault issues; it’s a tricky business, and I don’t want anyone diving in there unprepared. So if someone reading this has that experience, and wants to speak up, THAT. WOULD. BE. AWESOME.

• Last but EXTREMELY importantly, we need rules. No violent or threatening language under any circumstances. I REPEAT: No violent or threatening language UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. Even if you don’t mean it or think that anyone could tell you were kidding, you are dealing with people who want and need to twist your words, so don’t do it. Stay on-point, don’t do anything that could let them discredit you or the protest. No engaging with trolls. I REPEAT: No engaging with trolls. They will escalate, they always escalate, and it may endanger people in real life. Critics are fine: Engage with critics. Not trolls. You’ll know who they are by their abusive language. We need someone to keep a list of trolls, or people who are known to be abusive, and to keep updating it as they emerge, so that people know who not to engage with. These are the rules I’ve got at the moment, and I think they’re the two golden ones.

Last but not least, something which is not about what the protest needs, but about what I specifically need? 

• I am happy to take point. But I need other people to take point, too. We can discuss shifts. I, personally, need to hold down my freakin’ job, which is running a website and researching and writing freelance articles, and all the other assorted business which goes along with that. And I do need to take some time for basic self-care, although I’m happy to keep that minimal. Other people will need to take time as they get triggered or have to run their own lives and keep their own jobs. So, yes. Once we have enough people, we will need a shift schedule, so that folks can keep it going without hurting themselves.

Thoughts? Replies? Other things you think we need? Hashtag sucks? Let me know, and hopefully we can get this started mid-morning tomorrow, at the earliest.

Followers, if you have a twitter and want to fight the bill that has been the subject of this blog today, please read through this. Reblog the hell out of it to get as many Twitter users into it as possible. WE CAN FIGHT THIS.

Love,

Rabble

tootsweet:

my latest flyer

(via izibear)

The Equality Illusion, Kat Banyard (via petitefeministe)

(via h0pelessnihilist-deactivated201)

Emily Maguire, Princesses & Pornstars: Sex, Power, Identity. (via starsgowaltzing)

(via bohemianarthouse)

Feminist Don McPherson, on rape culture and educating boys to not rape. (via inherhipstheresrevolutions)

(via inherhipstheresrevolutions)

nathanonline:

There are many things rape is not:

• consensual sex
• affectionate contact
• a bear hug
• a tackle
• eye contact
• an argument
• a surprise
• overburdening
• an athletic loss
• a neutral metaphor

There are only a few things rape is:

• forcing sex on a person
• despoiling a population or place
• [a mustard plant or grape residue]

No one rapes your Internet connection, or rapes you in a debate. No one rapes your ask box with spam. People don’t rape with their eyes, that’s called “eye-fucking.” You are not raped with a passionate hug. No one rapes you at basketball or rapes you with a tackle, playful or athletic. You don’t want someone to rape you, because then it isn’t rape. Wanting to rape does not mean wanting to have sex. You do not want to rape people to whom you’re attracted, unless you are a rapist.

As long as I’m talking about it, here are some misconceptions:

• Nonchalance toward rape does not combat the stigmatization attached to victims.
• The word rape does not give itself power. The power comes from the context of the word for victims.
• Rape victims are not asking you to be hypersensitive by asking you not to belittle or to trigger a trauma.
• I’m not violating your right to free speech by asking you to be considerate.

If you read this and felt attacked, ask yourself why. We don’t say “sexually abused” metaphorically, so why say rape? I’m not asking you to never use the word. I just believe it should only be used when you seriously mean rape. When we live in a world without millions of victims, we can talk about redefining or reclaiming it.

I even have alternatives, though there are obviously many more:

• ravish
• ravage
• exhaust
• overwork
• pulverize
• obliterate
• trash
• defile
• squash
• clobber
• pommel
• destroy
• burden
• defeat
• massacre
• trample
• vanquish
• overpower
• thwart

(via dailymurf)

bohemianarthouse:

7 Tips for How to Respond to Victim Blaming and Support an Anti-Rape Culture

omnivory:

Via genderviolence:

1. When someone says something which helps support an anti-rape culture, thank them and praise them to others.


2. When someone says, “Boys will be boys,” when they learn a boy has been accused of rape ask them, “Do you really believe all boys are rapists?”


3. When someone says, “The only way to prevent sexual violence is to teach girls and women how to avoid danger,” respond with, “And I suppose the only way to prevent gun crimes is to teach people how to dodge bullets.”


4. When you encounter someone who seems to be otherwise caring saying something which supports sexual violence, use the phrase, “Excuse me?” as if someone just said, “You should drink 5 glasses of vegetable oil every day if you don’t want to die next week.”


5. When someone says, “I don’t understand how a real rape victim could ___ (fill in the blank with any common stereotype) so I believe she’s not a real rape victim,” respond with a parallel statement such as “I don’t understand how a real human could walk on the moon so I believe no humans have ever walked on the moon.”


6. When someone calls a woman who is vocal against sexual violence a “man hater,” ask them, “Is that really the only reason you can think of for why a woman would find rape repulsive enough to speak up against it?”


7. When someone says rape is just illegal sex respond with “Yeah, and hitting a pedestrian with your car is just giving someone an illegal car ride.”

What would you add to this list?
The best ways to respond to these types of comments are seriously and genuinely. Remind people that victims are human beings with lives and emotions.

bibliofeminista:

According to several studies cited by Holly Kearl, author of the new book Stop Street Harassment: Making Public Places Safe and Welcoming for Women, between 80 and 99 percent of women have been the targets of aggressive, unwanted attention from male strangers. When she polled 800 women, Kearl found that 75 percent had been followed, and 57 percent had been sexually touched or grabbed in the street by male strangers, some when they were just ten years old.

This epidemic has serious consequences: University of Connecticut researchers found that “the experience of street harassment is directly related to greater preoccupation with physical appearance and body shame, and is indirectly related to heightened fears of rape.” In a country where one in three women is sexually assaulted in her lifetime, such fears are not unfounded.

Ten percent of women report quitting a job in order to avoid a harassment-heavy commute. Street harassment also decreases its victims’ workplace productivity, and it makes them limit their time in public spaces. Kearl argues in favor of creating laws against gender-based street harassment, the way there are laws against other forms of harassment.

(Source: crunkfeministcollective.wordpress.com, via feministrobot-deactivated201203)

Charlie Glickman, The Most Important Thing That Men Who Have Sex With Women Need to Know

This article is full of good stuff.

(via librarianinlittlecanada)

(via loveyourrebellion)