[ID: A picture of four similar posters. The first depicts the face of a white woman staring out at the viewer with top text in all caps reading “White women could not vote until.” A label silencing her mouth reads “1920″. The bottom text in all caps reads “Exercise your right November 6, 2018″. The following three posters follow the same pattern, depicting an African American, Asian American, and Native American woman with the years 1965, 1952, and 1957. End ID.]
call me ignorant but i genuinely don’t understand why sports have to be split up by gender.
@ everyone in the notes talking about physical performance: if that were the case, then sports would be divided by physical performance. that’s a thing you can measure. that’s a thing that varies by individual. a weak man and a strong man would be an unfair fight in boxing/wrestling/MMA, which is why they divide those sports up into weight groups based on physical performance. but they also further segregate them based on gender. chess is segregated by gender for no reason but sexism. if it’s actually about skill and physical ability, then measure those and separate people by those metrics. don’t do some bullshit gender segregation and pretend like men and women are inherently on different levels no matter their individual abilities.
💅
Remember that time a teenage girl struck out Babe Ruth? That’s fucking why. Men are afraid of being beaten by women.
is it time for frank cho and milo manara to die or what
That’s basically a naked woman I’m YELLING
What a pervert. What the FUCK does he not know how clothes work? What the hypothetical fuck is she wearing then if we can see all that?
It’s like how bath towels in comics miraculously wrap completely around breasts. Or how even when injured and dead on the ground women in comics have to be twisted into “sexy” poses. Or how women in comics walk like they’re in high heels even barefoot.
It’s the only way men know how to draw women, because to them female characters are only there to be sexy. They only think of “women” as exploitative costumes and camera angles, high heels and titillation. Sex objects to ogle, plot objects to further male heroes’ narratives and drama, not heroes to cheer for.
I’m sorry, I was labouring under the impression that this was the crowd that thought women should wear what they want..?
And that applies to fictional women who are depicted by men how? You can’t apply agency in the plot to something metatextual when it comes to fictional characters.
Come on, let’s not pretend this is a male exclusive thing.
We’re going to have this argument are we? Not to mention you’re deviating from the original point that attributing agency to fictional characters’ clothing is asinine.
What you have here are images of power, and do you really believe these characters are designed with titillating heterosexual women and bisexual and homosexual men in mind? Because I don’t think you do.
This is why the Hawkeye Initiative exists. Take common female poses in comics, put a man in the role, and see how “empowering” and “strong” it actually looks:
Also:
He got the painting for fighting against ‘censorship.’ Note that they handed him a gross design of a female being objectified, because at the end of the day, that is all they really want, to be allowed to objectify women. They don’t care about censorship in general it is about their ability to sexualise and degrade women without consequence.
You can see her butthole for chrissakes
I think the best imagery I’ve seen to explain the difference between what men think male objectification is vs what women actually want to see is the Hugh Jackman magazine covers.
Hugh Jackman on a men’s magazine. He’s shirtless and buff and angry. He’s imposing and aggressive. This is a male power fantasy, it’s what men want to be and aspire to – intense masculinity.
Hugh Jackman on a women’s magazine. He looks like a dad. He looks like he’s going to bake me a quiche and sit and watch Game of Thrones with me. He looks like he gives really good hugs.
Men think women want big hulking naked men in loin cloths which is why they always quote He-Man as male objectification – without realizing that He Man is naked and buff in a loin cloth because MEN WANT HIM TO BE. More women would be happy to see him in a pink apron cutting vegetables and singing off-key to 70s rock.
Men want objects. Women want PEOPLE.
This is the first time I have EVER seen this false equivalence articulated so well. Thank you.
one thing I don’t think people realize is that in arguments about human rights, it’s not about trying to persuade the other party. it’s not about them at all. they’ve already made up their mind.
it’s about persuading the audience.
if I call out my teacher on being homophobic I’m not trying to change his opinion. I’m trying to convince any closeted kids in the room that they’re not the monsters he’s made them out to be.
if I argue with my aunt about how racist she’s being it’s not because I expect to change her mind. it’s because I’m hoping to god my cousin’s kids hear and learn that maybe skin color doesn’t mean what she says it means.
people will try to hush you and say “they’re not going to change their minds, don’t bother” but it’s not about them. it was never about them.
This was a ride from start to finish, but one unexpected perk is that that typoed space in the middle of the word “deterioration” accidentally coined the excellent noun “deteriorati.” I’m torn whether to use it refer to Ameduri and those like him, or whether to reappropriate its use for myself and make some t-shirts.
Oh my sweet baby stars that response was a wonder to behold
So I dunno if y’all have seen this, but I’ve worked a lot of weddings in my life and there’s this super funny (/sarcasm/) thing where the groom will write “help me” on the soles of his shoes, so that when the couple kneel down at the altar, everyone will see it and laugh at the fact that this poor man has been trapped into the sanctity of marriage.
Sort of like those cake toppers where the groom is attempting to run away or is being forcibly dragged to the altar with words like game over on it cause he no longer gets to have fun with his life or something because he’s getting married:
Or quite literally, a ball and chain:
Basically the whole “help me” thing? Is a continuation of the idea that there are definite gender norms, and that those genders are in direct conflict with each other, and therefore predispositioned to eventual resentment and hatred.
It’s the snarky sitcom hetero snide comedy where the wife is always nagging the husband who is the put upon joe average who had life and dreams until he got married and had kids, who now wants to just be left alone to read the paper while his wife looks after his home, his kids, his general emotional well being, and is still cast as the shrew for wanting something more from him than his dispassionate resentment that she won’t coddle him like one of the offspring.
Cause haha, it’s so awful spending the rest of your life with the person you are profess to love and adore…imagine that…imagine losing your freedom, your individuality and quite possibly your own autonomy to another person through a societal convention… *everyone not born male and white looks into the camera like they’re on the office*
Also consider, if a woman knelt down at the altar and had “help me” on her shoes? How drastically unfunny that becomes because we know, we know the way marriage is set up to give one partner the advantage over the other…
It’s just icky. It’s an icky not funny joke which I wish would die out.
People who view marriage as something that shitty shouldn’t get married.
Beltainefaerie's Flights of Fancy 