Sunday, April 20, 2014
Saturday, April 19, 2014
Things like racism are institutionalized. You might not know any bigots. You feel like “well I don’t hate black people so I’m not a racist,” but you benefit from racism. Just by the merit, the color of your skin. The opportunities that you have, you’re privileged in ways that you might not even realize because you haven’t been deprived of certain things. We need to talk about these things in order for them to change.
Dave Chappelle (via foxynonsense)
This is the Dave Chapelle white people don’t quote.
Friday, April 18, 2014
Searching for contributors
A Nameless Zine is searching for contributors and prose/ poetry submissions here.
More information here
The power of the The Vagina Monologues lies in its promotion of a ‘culture of vaginas’, its attempt to establish feelings of sisterhood based on a common biology. This biological reductivism is the distorted rationale behind Ensler’s belief that it is okay to speak for all women through her straight, white, American middle-class voice. The equation is simple: vagina=woman. But what is the broader definition of a woman? There are many ways to identify woman – chromosomes, breasts, uterus, clothing, pronouns, self-identification, a vagina. Yet, there is no consensus in the feminist and trans communities. The increased visibility of gender-variant subcultures has proved that having a vagina is not a prerequisite for being a woman. Intersexed women are born without vaginas, and women-born-men fight for their right to be identified as female. Not all cultures enact the Western gender binary. Sexual difference cannot always be reduced to anatomy. When viewing The vagina Monologues, it is essential for audience members to keep in mind that a woman is not defined by her vagina, or vice versa. Both are culturally constructed and historically specific institutions.
Alyssa Reiser, Our vaginas, not ourselves: A critical analysis of the Vagina Monologues
Wednesday, April 16, 2014
Tuesday, April 15, 2014
And the winner of most cultural appropriative at Coachella goes to… Vanessa Hudgens
Second Place: Kylie & Kendall Jenner
Honorable Mention: Selena Gomez
The liberal-pluralist multiculturalism that is often evident in women’s studies syllabi, with a week or two on ‘women of color’ and ‘sexuality’, testifies of this appropropriation of the work of women of color. Token inclusion of our texts without reconceptualizing the whole white, middle-class, gendered knowledge base effectively absorbs and silences us. This says, in effect, that our theories are plausible and carry explanatory weight only in relation to our specific experiences, but that they have no use value in relation to the rest of the world.
M. Jacqui Alexander and Chandra Talpade Mohanty, Genealogies, Legacies, Movements
My thoughts on “positive discrimination”
Meeting and getting to know new people is always a bit of a challenge when feminism/any social justice movement is that important in one’s life. When I’m asked what I study and I answer “women’s studies” I very often get the question “are you a feminist then?”. Nevermind the fact that it’s asked as if we were a rare species. I don’t see why you wouldn’t be one but let’s move on.
Most of the time, when my interlocutor is male I get challenged on several feminist/gender equality topics and recently it was on positive discrimination (encouraging women to hold positions on panels/governments by making it required that the panel is 50% female and 50% male). And everytime we get to that topic, it’s always seen and portrayed as a horrible thing to do. ‘Why not give those positions to those who deserve it’, ‘it should be based on ‘meritocracy”.
Well yes, I’m for positive discrimination for women, PoC, disabled people, LGBTQ people on panels, on the job market, at universities, because from experience, we know that if those panels/universities/companies were given a choice they wouldn’t pick an ‘oppressed minority’ even if it’s by vote (for governments). The system will not freely regulate itself in terms of social equality so very often you have to push it so that individuals get the same life chances/opportunities and even more so in politics. Representation is not true representation if you only get a bunch of (white) males speaking for a diverse people.
All parents damage their children. It cannot be helped. Youth, like pristine glass, absorbs the prints of its handlers. Some parents smudge, others crack, a few shatter childhoods completely into jagged little pieces, beyond repair.
Mitch Albom, The Five People You Meet in Heaven (via observando)
Monday, April 14, 2014
I hate axe but the hateful and racist comments are why we need ads like this.
The first comment is from a member of the U.S. military.
Notice his use of the islamophobic slur, h*ji. This is how the United States is able to carry out their destruction in the Middle East and everywhere else they decide to spread imperialism. By reducing other people to subhuman evil-doers and using slurs to perpetuate this outlook.
Our nation’s finest, though.
This is why representation matters.
this is disgusting, ugh.
Miles Jai saying what needs to be said.
"There was also a LGBT panel (at Playlist Live) that my friends were on. That was really fun to go to, and it was also very, um, enlightening. But the thing about having, like, an all gay cisgender white panel and calling it a "LGBT panel" even though there’s only gay white people on it isn’t really very accurate. And you know, I feel like a lot of people, even the panelists, have agreed that there should be more representation on the panel. I mean, who could they find that represent a different part of the LGBT spectrum? So yes, more represntation in the LGBT panels. Not just like, one lesbian and 4 white gay guys."
here’s to more diverse panels in the future! :)