HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » ismnotwasm » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Member since: Mon Aug 23, 2004, 10:18 PM
Number of posts: 39,362

About Me

Whiteness is a scourge on humanity. Voting for Obama that one time is not a get out of being a racist card

Journal Archives

Ten responses to the phrase "Man up"

Women Read Playboy For The First Time The Huffington Post (NSFW)

Sorry-- this just cracked me up-I've hidden a couple of threads about SI swimsuit issue, but then I ran into this. While this is not an in depth analysis of course, it's a pretty funny take on looking at a magazine that objectifies women. (Yes the women volunteer To be in the photos, but women can't "choose" to be objectified, we are born objectified)

Fun fact: Between pages of naked women, there are actual articles in Playboy.

BuzzFeed asked 10 women who had never read Playboy to read the magazine and give some feedback. The reactions ranged from hilarious to confused as the women flipped through Playboy issues from the 1960s through 2015.

The women made some interesting discoveries. They found that a full bush was definitely big in the 80s, and that when it comes to models, Playboy has a serious lack of diversity. Apparently, the mag hasn't quite figured out its image yet, since the content ranges from "porno mag" to Vanity Fair-esque, as one woman put it.

While the magazine has attempted to rebrand its image of late by discussing real issues such as feminism and rape culture, these ladies probably won't be subscribing any time soon. One woman joked about Playboy's readership: “They have the young men who really just want to look at the pictures, then there’s the like ‘I’m a little bit more sophisticated’ man I’m going to read the articles now. Then there’s ‘I’m old, I have to read the articles so that I don’t come off as a pervert.’"

Joss Whedon: 'Quiet Misogyny' Within Industry Prevents Growth Of Female Superheroes

Joss Whedon has never been shy about speaking out against misogyny within the entertainment industry. His latest shot across the bow of the patriarchy comes in an interview with Digital Spy conducted on the set of "Avengers: Age of Ultron" last summer.

"It's a phenomenon in the industry that we call 'stupid people,'" Whedon said when asked about the dearth of female-led superhero movies. "There is genuine, recalcitrant, intractable sexism, and old-fashioned quiet misogyny that goes on. [...] You hear, 'Oh, [female superheroes] don't work because of these two bad ones that were made eight years ago,' there's always an excuse."

This isn't the first time Whedon, who directed "Marvel's The Avengers" and its forthcoming sequel, weighed in on the topic. Speaking to The Daily Beast in 2013, Whedon also called the idea that female superhero movies couldn't work "stupid."

"I'm hoping 'The Hunger Games' will lead to a paradigm shift," he said at the time. "It's frustrating to me that I don't see anybody developing one of these movies. It actually pisses me off. My daughter watched 'The Avengers' and was like, 'My favorite characters were the Black Widow and Maria Hill,' and I thought, Yeah, of course they were. I read a beautiful thing Junot Diaz wrote: 'If you want to make a human being into a monster, deny them, at the cultural level, any reflection of themselves.'"

Since Whedon spoke to Digital Spy, both Marvel (with Captain Marvel) and DC Comics (with Wonder Woman) announced plans for standalone superhero films with females leads at the center. Speaking to BuzzFeed on Thursday, Whedon clarified his comments. "I just thought, 'I sounded very harsh,'" he said about the original comments. "And then [Marvel announced], 'We're going to make Captain Marvel. We're going to make Black Panther. We're going to shake it up.' I was just like, great! Now I just sound mean and bitter. But, you know, there's a lot to be mean and bitter about."


Rosa Parks' Other (Radical) Side

Definitely on my reading list

Rosa Parks' Other (Radical) Side
The flesh-and-blood Rosa Parks was a lot more interesting than the one we read about in history books. A new book details how she was a warrior for justice for black women who were brutally raped by white men in the segregated South.

Rosa Parks was a demure seamstress who defied a Montgomery, Ala., bus driver's order to give up her seat to a white man because -- on that particular day -- she was tired. Her spontaneous act sparked a 1955 bus boycott that launched the civil rights movement.

Sound familiar? It should. It's the tale told in history books. It's also just a tiny sliver of the truth. The flesh-and-blood Rosa Parks is a lot more interesting. "It's sad, I think," author Danielle L. McGuire told me. "We tend to like our heroes simple and meek."

"If we had a larger sense of who she was, a radical activist and warrior for human rights," instead of a powerless individual struck by chance, said McGuire, it would show the work and the time she put in over many years.

McGuire, an assistant professor in the history department of Wayne State University in Detroit, tells the history of Parks' activism in her just-published book, At the Dark End of the Street: Black Women, Rape, and Resistance -- a New History of the Civil Rights Movement From Rosa Parks to the Rise of Black Power. She gives a name to a few of the many women who risked their lives by speaking about brutality and injustice. They claimed their dignity and womanhood in a society that refused to recognize either.


What happened when I confronted my cruellest troll

Thought provoking, well written piece

For the past three years or so, at least one stranger has sought me out pretty much every day to call me a fat bitch (or some pithy variation thereof). I’m a writer and a woman and a feminist, and I write about big, fat, bitchy things that make people uncomfortable. And because I choose to do that as a career, I’m told, a constant barrage of abuse is just part of my job. Shrug. Nothing we can do. I’m asking for it, apparently.

Being harassed on the internet is such a normal, common part of my life that I’m always surprised when other people find it surprising. You’re telling me you don’t have hundreds of men popping into your cubicle in the accounting department of your mid-sized, regional dry-goods distributor to inform you that – hmm – you’re too fat to rape, but perhaps they’ll saw you up with an electric knife? No? Just me? People who don’t spend much time on the internet are invariably shocked to discover the barbarism – the eager abandonment of the social contract – that so many of us face simply for doing our jobs.
Sometimes the hate trickles in slowly, just one or two messages a day. But other times, when I’ve written something particularly controversial (ie feminist) – like, say, my critique of men feeling entitled to women’s time and attention, or literally anything about rape – the harassment comes in a deluge. It floods my Twitter feed, my Facebook page, my email, so fast that I can’t even keep up (not that I want to).

It was in the middle of one of these deluges two summers ago when my dead father contacted me on Twitter.

At the time, I’d been writing a lot about the problem of misogyny (specifically jokes about rape) in the comedy world. My central point – which has been gleefully misconstrued as “pro-censorship” ever since – was that what we say affects the world we live in, that words are both a reflection of and a catalyst for the way our society operates. When you talk about rape, I said, you get to decide where you aim: are you making fun of rapists? Or their victims? Are you making the world better? Or worse? It’s not about censorship, it’s not about obligation, it’s not about forcibly limiting anyone’s speech – it’s about choice. Who are you? Choose.

Mindy Kaling is actually invisible, just like all minority women

Mindy Kaling is actually invisible, just like all minority women

I mean, America doesn't even care to address her by her real name. It's Vera Mindy Chokalingam. Go on, make a funny comment about how it's a mouthful and difficult to pronounce. I dare you.
If you haven't seen the ad yet, it starts off with Mindy Kaling trying and failing to catch a cab. The cab breezes right by her, then stops mere feet from her for a man. As Kaling stands in the street perplexed and watching the scene unfold, we hear, "After years of being treated like she was invisible, it occurred to Mindy: She might actually be invisible." You probably watched the ad and thought it was funny. It is funny. Because Mindy. But my first thought on seeing it for the first time was that it was a commentary on minority women being invisible in general.

More: http://www.sheknows.com/entertainment/articles/1071437/mindy-kaling-is-actually-invisible-just-like-all-minority-women

*NSFW* The Pervocracy gets through "50 Shades of Grey" chapter by chapter- hilarious

Let's Read Fifty Shades of Grey: Chapter 23!
The trailer for the FSoG movie is out, and here's my mini-review. (And one more thought on it.) I have a weird mix of glee and sorrow that they're making a movie out of this. I am looking forward to it being so-bad-it's-good, a Showgirls for our time--but I'm also terrified that it's going to give millions of people the idea that BDSM is "abuse but they're perverts so it's okay." I don't want that.

Based on the trailer, it seems like it will be very faithful to the book, which might work in my favor. The audience consensus might end up being "wow, when you see this stuff actually acted out it's miserable," and then the whole thing will sink beneath the murky waves from which it arose. I can hope.

Anyway, we still have four chapters left in this book. Let's get slogging. As a reminder, when we left off, THE EMAIL WAS COMING FROM INSIDE THE BAR!!!

Content warnings for this chapter: Emotional abuse, do I even have to say it? Stalking, bigtime. Weirdness around drinking. Child molestation, molestation apologism, and implied (?) physical child abuse. Period sex.

Also, this is another long-ass entry.
I glance nervously around the bar but cannot see him. “Ana, what is it? You look like you’ve seen a ghost.” “It’s Christian, he’s here.” “What? Really?” She glances around the bar too. I have neglected to mention Christian’s stalker tendencies to my mom.
"There are certain things about our relationship that sound like abuse, so I can't ever tell other people because they might think it was abuse, which it's not, but it's important I watch my words because if he thought I was calling him an abuser he might really do something awful." That's one of your classic warning signs.


Why 2015’s Pop Music Scene Looks a Lot Like 1995’s

Why 2015’s Pop Music Scene Looks a Lot Like 1995’s
Sleater-Kinney, Bjork and PJ Harvey are back. And they have something to teach the new wave of ‘feminist’ artists.
According to just about every reputable source, we live in a golden age of feminist music. TIME magazine declared 2014 “the year of pop feminism”; Carl Wilson, in Billboard, called 2014 “Pop Music’s ‘End of Men’ Moment”; VICE, meanwhile, has dubbed 2014 “The Year Feminism Reclaimed Pop.” This is all well-deserved. Beyoncé’s choice to sample a feminist lecture by Chimamanda Ngozie Adichie—complete with definition of the term—was a watershed moment even before the pop star stood in front of a gigantic, glaring “FEMINIST” sign at the VMAs.

Beyoncé made feminism fashionable. Lorde, Charli XCX, Miley Cyrus and Taylor Swift have since claimed the term; even the nominally apolitical Meghan Trainor made her name with a song about fat-shaming and Photoshop abuse, topics that used to be the exclusive province of feminist blogs.

All of this—coupled with pop culture's 20-year nostalgia cycle—has created the perfect climate for legacy feminist musicians to get more serious attention than they have in years. We’re only a month into 2015 and already, Sleater-Kinney has released its first album in ten years, Björk unexpectedly dropped a new album, and PJ Harvey began recording a new album as a live exhibit in Somerset House, a London art space.

But feminism's dominance can be a precarious thing. The very names Sleater-Kinney and Björk ought to remind us that—in the immortal words of Battlestar Galactica—all of this has happened before, and it will happen again. Feminism “reclaimed” mainstream music two decades ago and was hailed as a conquering force, only to be wiped off the map by the next hot trend. Musically, 2015 looks a lot like 1995.


All Black Women Interviewed for STEM Study Experienced Gender Bias

All. 100%. Every single woman of color.

(On the good news front, I'm seeing more and more AA women in their residency as Physicians, although I don't have the stats, so it's strictly an anecdotal observation, but includes our first AA female Fellow in transplant surgery)

According to a new University of California Hastings study, women of color who work in science, technology, engineering and mathematic (STEM) fields face "a double jeopardy" in the workplace.

After surveying 557 women (both white women and women of color) and interviewing 60 women of color, researchers found that 100 percent of the women of color said they have encountered gender bias, compared to 93 percent of white women. However, in addition to gender bias, women of color also reported experiencing racial and ethnic stereotypes, the study's lead researcher, professor Joan Williams, told Fortune magazine.
Williams, who has been researching gender for more than 20 years, reportedly began adding a racial component to her studies after receiving several requests.

“If you study gender, it’s typically about white women,” she told Fortune. “If you study race, it’s typically about men of color. Women of color get lost in the shuffle.”

Some of the findings from "Double Jeopardy?: Gender Bias Against Women of Color in Science" include:

Black women (76.9 percent) were more likely than other women to report having to provide more evidence of competence than others to prove themselves to colleagues (Latinas: 64.5 percent; Asian-Americans: 63.6 percent; white women: 62.7 percent).

Latinas (35.5 percent) were far more likely to report finding it difficult to get administrative support personnel to support them. In interviews, Black women also reported many instances of conflict with administrative staff.

Asian-American scientists were more likely than other women to report workplace pressures to fulfill traditionally feminine roles — and push back if they didn’t.

Latinas who behave assertively risk being seen as “angry” or “emotional” — and they shoulder large loads of office housework for both colleagues and students.

Black women are allowed more leeway than other groups of women to behave in dominant ways — so long as they aren’t seen as “angry Black women.”

About one-third of both Black women and Asian-Americans reported tokenism — that women in their environments were forced to compete with each other for the one “woman’s spot” — as compared with roughly one-fifth of Latinas and white women.

Latinas and Black women also often reported being mistaken for janitors — something Williams has never heard in her interviews

Fighting the Wikipedia boys’ club

Looking into the Wiki matter further, I found this interesting article.

Artist Doris Porter Caesar chose sculpture for her medium because “it’s big and fights against you all the time.” She could have been talking about the patriarchal presence on allegedly unbiased knowledge source, Wikipedia. The mid-century sculptor’s own presence on the world’s most-visited encyclopaedia only came into being a year ago; before 1 February, 2014, her female nudes were mere blips waving at art history from under university archives and phonebook entries. That day, around 100 female artists got new Wikipedia entries. The intruders behind the takeover were feminist group Art+Feminism, whose global Edit-a-thon saw sessions across six countries involving more than 600 participants.

One year later, and Wikipedia’s highest court has ruled this week on the actions of feminist editors during the GamerGate controversy: the result is that five editors have been banned from editing articles on gender or sexuality altogether. The ruling has dealt a fresh blow in the battle to gender neutralise the wiki world, with Wiki editor Mark Bernstein dubbing the result as “a blunder that threatens to disgrace the internet.” In a year that has seen a series of all-woman Edit-a-thons put finger to keypad, whether we are any closer to infiltrating the Wikipedia boys’ club still hangs in the balance. Instagram photo edits notwithstanding, should editing history be high on the feminist agenda in 2015?

Wikipedia’s troubled record on gender bias is an open secret. A 2011 survey from the Wikimedia Foundation demonstrated that less than 10 per cent of the site’s contributors identify as female. More troubling still, another paper in the same year found evidence of an editing culture actively resistant to female participation, with women more likely to experience adversity in the peer review process. This is contrary to participation in other social media sites, where the gender balance is pretty much equal, or even skewed feminine.

Art+Feminism is the go-at-‘em girl gang that hopes to change all that. The group, headed up by Sian Evans, Jacqueline Mabey, Dorothy Howard, and Michael Mandiberg, believe that there’s been some improvement since their own Edit-a-thon and the activities of other gender gap projects since. But, equally, it’s not enough. Wikipedia is the Lodestar of the digital commons, not only for its authority on knowledge, but, as the group points out, because it is also where the APIs of many other popular sites pull their content: “Absences there are ones that really matter

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next »