mcity: (Default)

An interesting video about the difference between objectification of men and women, double standards thereof, and the social pressures behind them. Here are the articles she refers to and links in the description.

Am I Sexist? - Common Sense Atheism

Why Shameless Objectification Can Be A Good Thing - Jezebel

Why men can't - and shouldn't - stop staring at women - Ian Brown for The Globe and Mail
mcity: (Default)

"The bees were in my ears. They were in my nose. They were in my mouth," he said Tuesday as he recounted his ordeal from the parking lot of Lone Mountain Park, at the west end of Craig Road. "I was in a hell of a mess."
That's...not how I'd describe it.
mcity: (exclamation mark)
Today I tumblred a picture of a woman in a pretty dress that I found from her blog which she linked to from her post on a website collecting fashions.

I'm pretty sure I should just turn in my Y chromosome right now and save the Man Marshals the trouble of hunting me down.
mcity: (Default)
Note that they specifically acknowledge that they knew Korra would never be gay.

It's also very sad that one's only interest in the show was that one thought it might have a lesbian in it. Or at least an asexual you can pretend is really lesbian. This is just as shallow as someone choosing not to watch a show because it has gay people in it. Heck, I'm a conservative Christian, and my default reaction to gay characters is "ehh", unless it reaches fanfic levels of the new guy being the morally ambiguous bisexual former lover/professional partner of the main character who finds his estranged (also evil) brother and wears a ridiculous coat with no shirt.

And that's why I don't watch Torchwood.
mcity: (Default)

[link] haniemohd:

“…Though no one would ever think of using the term honor violence (we reserve that descriptor for brown people who live somewhere else, motivated by religious something-or-other or tribal something-or-other), one-third of women murdered every year in the United States are killed by their intimate partners. In 2005 that amounted to 1,181 women, or three women every day. To put that in perspective, the UN estimates there are 5,000 honor killings every year in the entire world. 5,000 in a world of 6 billion versus nearly 1,200 in a single country of 300 million. In other words, a woman in America runs a greater risk of being killed by her husband or boyfriend than a woman in Pakistan. Those are scary numbers.”

- an excerpt from an extremely interesting and insightful article by one of my favourite comic artist and writer, G. Willow Wilson (which you can access by clicking the link above)

The logic is not sound.

Male on female relationship murders can be committed outside of honor killings. Wilson's questionable analysis assumes that those are the only ways women in the developing world are killed by their spouses, which is itself inherently...problematic, to put it nicely. Heck, honor killings are sometimes committed by other relatives. Ironic that Wilson snarks at imaginary people for thinking honor killings are just something done by "brown people" somewhere, and then exposes her own ignorance and faulty logic.

Statistics indicate that both men and women in the US abuse their SOs at about the same rate, and men are much less likely to report it or have it acted upon. In fact, if a man calls the police on his girlfriend or wife, he could end up arrested in some parts of the US. There's an entire TVTropes page about this. Guy kills his wife, he's a vicious killer, a woman kills her husband, he drove her to it; see Lifetime's "Snapped".

I also began to see, with frightening clarity, the malice. It would be too broad to say that men hate women, men are afraid of women, men desire power over women–though there are certainly men of whom all these things are true, there are many more men of whom none of these things are true. Yet there’s the malice. Creeping and ugly and everywhere, as though it has a life of its own.

Should I get a stake, or a silver bullet?

mcity: (Default)
Of course, like any site that thrives on pseudonymity, Reddit attracts its share of the sick and the deluded. There’s a subreddit, MensRights, “for people who believe that men are currently being disadvantaged by society,” and for years the site admins tolerated subreddits devoted to pictures of underage girls.
Men's Right's advocates are, far too often, misogynists. I'm not denying it. However, there is some gold in the muck, and anyone saying Internet Feminism should be thrown out because of the vast amount of misandry and double standards it has would have the sky come down on them. Ironically, such people are often accused of being MRAs merely for negatively criticizing Internet Feminism. I like how merely saying that men are disadvantaged by society is "sick and deluded" and comparable to distributing kiddie porn. Good job, Wired. Real good job.
mcity: (jawdrop)

This photo is from a reproductive rights protest in Virginia. It's been making the rounds of Tumblr stressing out that a)this was at a peaceful protest, and b)it was in Virginia, not, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, etc.

You may find this offensive. )
mcity: (Default)
Social justice advocates and outfits like NPR use the incident to make generalizations about white people and race.
The shooter is Hispanic.
mcity: (Default)
Question: I'm what you would call a cis man, and the thought that I'm complicit in any kind of comprehensive, systematic oppression doesn't sit well. I can't take responsibility for the actions of everyone who shares this place in the universe, but I can take full responsibility for my own actions. As a human, what specifically can I do in my daily life that will tangibly mitigate injustice against non-cis people?
The [gently caress] is this [poo poo]?

Systems. How the [gently caress] do they work? Your individual actions boost a system cuz they’re coupled with individual actions of other people like you. You perpetuate it. You ARE responsible for the system because you work for it for free, to keep it running.

And expecting us to be your vending machine of knowledge is yet another fucked up thing that perpetrates cissupremacy. Rediscover the fucking internet and do some research.
I've mentioned this transwoman transsexual activist before, specifically on the matter of Shakesville's inability to recognize its own flaws. And yet, she seems perfectly content to fall into the same rage-based rhetorical nonsense many social justice advocates like; raging at people who ask you for information for not knowing said information. It's a high-level passive-aggressive technique, and if it was used in a film about a domineering spouse, then the audience would declare that character a villain. Even her profile says

She swears a lot, isn’t an activist or here to [gently caressing] educate you, has no interest in justifying her continued existence to bigoted piles of excrement and really just doesn’t give any [gently caresses] about your precious privileged feelings.
"I am activist, hear me roar."

In fact, judging by the latest post on her tumblr, Ms. Hope is not merely an activist--despite her claims--but a transsupremacist. In fact, she thinks all "privileged people" are "bigoted piles of excrement", and when someone points out she assumed they were privileged just because they disagreed with her, her response, not in so many words, was that they must be cisgendered because they disagreed with her and aren't explicitly saying they're trans. Apparently, only trans people--and cis people who agree with them--can hold valid opinions on what is, to say the least, a really complicated set of issues.

Speaking of which, Ms. Hope seems to have quite a lot of those. I mean, Melissa "Shakesville" McEwan-level, which is ironic considering how much she hates McEwan and her website.

Still, at least she hasn't reached Ginmar levels of crazy. Not quite.

The funny thing is that if you take the idea that cissexual people are responsible for the negative actions of other cissexuals, and change it to apply to, say, Black people, or Muslims, or women, it looks exactly like bigotry and prejudice.
mcity: (Default)
Blog: We shouldn't question the stories of female rape victims.
Rape victim: I recant. I wasn't raped.
Blog: How do we know she's telling the truth about not being raped? We don't really know what happened!

Also from that blog;
Moreover, innocent until proven guilty only applies to certain people.
So, if these guys were in fact falsely accused, they got a taste of how black men are treated EVERY DAY by the criminal justice system.
Speaking as a black man myself who had an encounter that may or may not have been racism on my way to church this morning; if it's so bad, why do you want anyone to go through it?

The funny thing is that in the Hofstra case, the same blog came down on the side of the defendant, even though the accused were black, and tried to soft-shoe around the whole "black men false accused of rape" with "we need to look at the bigger picture!" and "there are more reasons for someone to rape than to falsely accuse!" and "how will this affect future victims?". GOOD JERB WITH THE CONSISTENT MORAL STANDARDS THAR.
The whole “let’s look at the bigger picture here” glosses over such a huge component of this issue that it’s downright nuts. The fact that these guys were African American played a huge role in every step of this case.
It seems callous to try to go macro scale before looking at the micro. This kind of stuff matters to folks who are troubled by the fact that they’re perceived as sex-crazy beasts driven by lust, especially in the context of the legal system.

EDIT: Here's a more recent post, where the blogger seems actively offended by the discussion of bias against men who are accused of rape. She also thinks they should've mentioned rape right on the poster, which she would've doubtless decried as insensitive and a trigger. in fact, she specifically showed up just to hijack the topic, and wants backpatting and hugs for it. Ironically, as some commenters pointed out, she did the exact same thing as men who make it "all about the menz" in feminist discussions.
mcity: (Default)
I don't give a FUCK about being a bigot.

Again, not giving a fuck if I'm sexist. I'm right.

Yup, always the mother's fault! Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

I can tell you one thing. If it's between trusting my gut and giving into a bunch of internet bullies you can bet which one I'll choose.
The funny thing is that the statistics she used to support her point had been proved objectively wrong by this point in the conversation. She said 99% of child abusers were men, therefore, she was justified in not wanting a man to wipe her girl's behind at preschool. Then she admits she's being sexist, and she doesn't care. Then she deletes the post (backup) and apologizes (NSFW title). Note: Those are Men's Rights Advocates and their sites involved, so be prepared for the exact same sort of generalizations you'd see on, say, Shakesville, just in the other direction
mcity: (Default)

In France, Google stop charging 10,000 Euros and started giving away Google Maps to businesses (up to a certain amount of traffic), whereas competitors charge for theirs. They sued, and were fined 500,000 Euros in damages to the plaintiff, a competitor, for anti-competitive practices.

According to the comments, France does this sort of thing all the time. They try to limit foreign products while allowing French stuff free reign.

Here's an example of the competition, BTW. No, you have not actually been thrown back to 2001, it just looks that way. I'm betting the site's code is optimized for IE5 and Netscape Navigator.

Mind you, this is the same France that fined Google for accidentally collecting wi-fi info on its Street View vehicles. Specifically, accidentally collecting personal information. I'm not sure of the technical aspects, but the agency in question also asked for their Source Code, which is the equivalent of suing KFC over contaminants found in its food, and asking for the Secret Recipe.
mcity: (Default)

Rematch, part 3
by *Soviet-Superwoman

Connie stood on the second from the top floor of the parking garage and took a long drag on her cigarette. She had seen the procession of headlights far below moving in this direction that told her that her quarry was now entering the trap. It was going to be messy and it was going to be violent and that's exactly how she wanted it.

It always amuses me when I find these sorts of dA galleries devoted to a single character and/or fetish. Especially since I can't even decide whether the representation of me should wear glasses or not.
mcity: (amazing)

Hello! It's me! Wheatley, from Portal 2! I'd like to just point you in the direction of this fanfic, and it stars me! Wheatley! And if that weren't enough--can't imagine why it wouldn't be--it stars Chell, and GLaDOS, and, um, others, that's all I'm going to say right now. I'd tell you more, but it'd, well it'd be spoiling the fic and Portal 2, and I am fairly certain that would be a very bad idea. Just take my word for it, it's brilliant. Click the link up top there! Or if you'd rather--if you'd rather see the Livejournal version with some nice pictures, you could just click here instead! Just keep clicking "Next 10". You know, if you feel like it.

No pressure.

Nooo pressure.
mcity: (Default)

I Have the Worst Dog
by *hellcorpceo on deviantART

This is why I'm a cat person.

>implying cats don't do this

October 2012

  12 3456
21 2223242526 27


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 17th, 2017 08:29 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios