pyrocat101
gryffindorgeek7777:

mad-piper-with-a-box:

thetomska:

giddytf2:

the-last-teabender:

Robin Thicke is unapologetic about how rapey ‘Blurred Lines’ is, meanwhile the dude who parodied it issues a public apology for one word.

And that is just one reason why I love Weird Al.

It’s great that he’s addressed this but are we really supposed to believe that NO ONE during the extremely lengthy processes of writing a song, recording it, mastering it and animating the music video wouldn’t have brought it up?

Excuse me but how the hell is spastic even remotely insulting?

So I just recently learned that in the UK calling someone spastic means the same thing as calling someone retarded, only much worse.
If it makes people in the UK feel any better, people in the US literally do not know this (like literally no one I have ever met and/or know). Here being spastic is usually meant to mean something along the lines of acting like a hyper-active child (like running around in circles yelling just because they feel like it please be quiet for just 2 minutes type of child). NOBODY here uses it as a slur.
Since Weird Al is a US musician and the US music industry is pretty non-international, yeah actually I think its entirely possible that none of the people who worked on this song actually knew that spastic was considered an awful slur in some parts of the world.
And I’m like 99.9999% sure that Weird Al is genuinely very sorry that he was accidentally offensive.

gryffindorgeek7777:

mad-piper-with-a-box:

thetomska:

giddytf2:

the-last-teabender:

Robin Thicke is unapologetic about how rapey ‘Blurred Lines’ is, meanwhile the dude who parodied it issues a public apology for one word.

And that is just one reason why I love Weird Al.

It’s great that he’s addressed this but are we really supposed to believe that NO ONE during the extremely lengthy processes of writing a song, recording it, mastering it and animating the music video wouldn’t have brought it up?

Excuse me but how the hell is spastic even remotely insulting?

So I just recently learned that in the UK calling someone spastic means the same thing as calling someone retarded, only much worse.

If it makes people in the UK feel any better, people in the US literally do not know this (like literally no one I have ever met and/or know). Here being spastic is usually meant to mean something along the lines of acting like a hyper-active child (like running around in circles yelling just because they feel like it please be quiet for just 2 minutes type of child). NOBODY here uses it as a slur.

Since Weird Al is a US musician and the US music industry is pretty non-international, yeah actually I think its entirely possible that none of the people who worked on this song actually knew that spastic was considered an awful slur in some parts of the world.

And I’m like 99.9999% sure that Weird Al is genuinely very sorry that he was accidentally offensive.

fatgirlopinions
If you are not as concerned about the people handing you your food in the restaurant as you are about the pigs on the farm where it was grown, your approach is classist. … If you start telling someone all about your new trendy diet or asking them about theirs without knowing if they have an eating disorder that may be triggered by your prattle, your approach is ableist. If you tsk-tsk at people who are overweight for what they are eating and claim you’re concerned about their health, yet you’re not actively campaigning to make healthy food more accessible and affordable, your approach is sickening and I don’t want you in my activism.
chigar-and-a-waffle

lotrlockedwhovian:

chenisthebestkitty:

geekdonnatroy:

castayel:

fuchsimeon:

viperpilot:

Well, this is embarrassing

Left: Adrianne Palicki promo shot for NBC’s Wonder Woman.

Right: Kimberly Kane promo shot for ‘Wonder Woman XXX: An Axel Braun Parody’.

….is it just me or does the porno version outfit not only look WAY BETTER crafted and prettier, the actress also has more muscles, a nicer fitting chest piece and a waaay more fitting body type and skin tone. 

Also the porno version doesn’t look more “feminine”/more sexy whatever.

That… is EMBARASSING

the “official” one looks like a really bad Halloween costume

I mean fuck the porno one has bigger wrist cuff I REPEATE: BIGGER WRIST CUFFS PORNO WOMAN IS BETTER DRESSED TO KICK ASS *cries*

can someone contact the designer of the porno 

clearly he/she knows how a womans body works.

It’s embarrassing when the official looks a like a porn and the porn looks like the official thing.

The thing that makes me stunned the most is that even the boobs of the porn version are cupped and held in better by her clothing than those of the official thing…

The moment a porn movie treats the boobs of a woman with more subtlety than a big name production, some staff changes are in order.

Meanwhile at Marvel, Black Widow wears appropriate ass kicking attire, Thor is a woman and Captain America is black and DC is over there like: what do we do with *whispers* boob

misandry-mermaid

Anonymous asked:

The TV show Sherlock triggers me because the main guy looks identical to one of my rapists. My boyfriend knows this but yesterday when I was at his house, he had the show on anyways. I tried to deal with it, but I couldn't and asked him to turn it off. He replied with "You need to get over it. It's a TV show, not him." It felt like he was being mean, but maybe I'm overreacting? Should I really just get over it?

selfcareafterrape answered:

Trauma triggers aren’t something that you can just “get over” and no one, especially not your partner, should demand that from you.

Your boyfriend was being mean. Or at the very least, not at all empathetic or caring. It’s true that people who haven’t experienced trauma often don’t have any concept of what it is like to deal with on a day to day basis, but if  you’ve explained that you want to avoid something, he should respect that.

In general, people who don’t “believe in trigger warnings” and shit like that, use the argument that “exposure helps people process trauma, so having your triggers around isn’t a big deal”. 

Nope. Terrible argument, go directly to trashcan. 

Trained professionals can help patients through exposure therapy, but that’s an intensive and *consensual* process. Knowing your triggers and avoiding them when you want to is healthy and normal. It’s more than reasonable to want your boyfriends house to be a safe place for you, and you’re not overreacting at all. He needs to respect your boundaries. What he said was unacceptable. 

Be kind to yourself (and don’t feel obligated to be kind to him about this),
-Michelle

selfcareafterrape:

penanna:

selfcareafterrape:

Comment: The character jesse in breaking bad is EXACTLY likewho raped me. style, mannerisms, use of language… everything is terrifyingly identical. but i pep-talked myself the same way op’s boyfriend did. the character nor the actor are NOT my rapist.

This is something I didn’t address in the original post, and I should have.

I don’t mean to make it sound like triggers are a lifetime sentence to either avoiding something or being terrorized by it.

SCaR’s Masterlist has a lot of good resources for dealing with the immediate aftermath of being triggered, and also longer term emotional self-care

But it is really unfair to call what OP’s boyfriend said a pep-talk. It clearly was said with the intention of getting rid of the inconvenience of his partner’s emotional distress, and directly contradicted their previous conversation’s about the OP’s needs as a survivor. It was flippant and rude and a huge breach of trust.

You’re right, that there are ways we can work to overcome triggers and the lasting vestiges of our trauma. But even in your comment, you say that you made the choice yourself, on your own time. 

The person who asked the question has a right to avoid, process, and overcome their triggers, and the way that worked for you, doesn’t have to be what they choose to do.

I can’t tell if your comment was meant to be supportive, and I want to give you the benefit of the doubt, but it comes across as invalidating and disrespectful of the OP’s autonomy, and I can’t let it slide without some comment.

This blog is not for survivors who invalidate other survivors. (But it totally is for survivors who give well-intended advice and sometimes get misunderstood, I’m still not sure which you are.)
-Michelle

In relation to the OP and response: See I don’t understand people who do this. If you have no triggers, no traumas, you don’t get to dictate how someone manages theirs. A person I previously dated asked me why I got so angry at being triggered, why I couldn’t just tolerate it, why exposure to my triggers wasn’t desensitising me, why did I have tumblr savior. They very quickly got it after I told them - unless they had exactly my triggers from the exact same things, which no-one does - that they had no right to dictate how I manage them or try to recover from them, or even if I try to manage at all, if I completely try to avoid being triggered at all costs, which I do. Ironically the person in question now has triggers of their own, and while I’m not happy that they now have triggers, I’m glad they finally now realise what it’s like to have triggers, and to have people dismiss them.

If you have triggers, people need to respect how you wish to deal with them. If they don’t, then they have no respect for you as a person, and you should either give them a serious stern talking to, or get rid of them.

Bolded for emphasis.
-Michelle

biancashotthewarden

hobbitballerina:

chelseawelseyknight:

witchesbitchesandbritches:

lifeundefeated:

Yea it’s clearly our “generation that’s making homosexuality a trend.” Seriously, pisses me off when people say that. look at this! It’s always been around, it’s not a trend, it’s real. It’s beautiful.

These are really beautiful images.

This makes me really happy

There’s a long history of lesbian-like activity in the West.  In the 19th century US, especially after the Civil War killed off so many young men, middle-class and other genteel girls were encouraged in Boston marriages — relationships with other women of similar educational and class backgrounds.  Since women were considered naturally chaste and disinterested in sex, these love affairs were seen as innocent and spiritual.  Women’s lives were wholly separate from men’s that young women infrequently had male friends who weren’t considered a marriage prospect.  They were encouraged to keep to all-female social circles, and the advent of women’s colleges further encouraged that.  Women were expected to mentor each other, love each other, dance with each other, with the older woman acting as the cavalier, the man in the relationship, protecting and guiding the younger, pursuing her and courting her in ways not unlike how young men would court their brides.  But the prevailing cultural wisdom was that these relationships would be limited to kisses and poetry — women were incapable of sexual desire, they tolerated sex in heterosexual marriages because men were sex-driven beasts who demanded it of them.  Without a man, it was presumed that these relationships would be chaste, innocent, and wholly emotional.  Lesbian-like behaviour is most tolerated when women are perceived as less sexual than men.  Homosexual behaviour becomes threatening when sex is involved — when, in the 1920s, women were seen as able to have sexual drives and the idea of sexually companionable marriages came onto the landscape, Boston marriages suddenly became unnatural and disgusting because they directed women’s sexual interests towards other women instead of to the proper channels: towards men.  The flapper was all about the sexually available (to men) young woman.  She contributed to the demise of widely accepted lesbian or lesbian-like relationships.  As soon as the flapper was capable of wanting sex herself instead of tolerating it from her male partner, lesbian/lesbian-like relationships were threatening, deviant, and ruined young women’s chances to become good wives and mothers.

So remember this as you look at the pre-1920s images.  Those women were allowed these passionate loves, even encouraged in them (sometimes after they managed to get a husband, Eleanor Roosevelt in particular), all because the patriarchy was convinced that women weren’t capable of sexual feelings towards one another.  As long as women were seen as desexed, as creatures of sentiment and emotion instead of passion and desire, lesbianism wasn’t a threat.  The minute women were regarded by patriarchal culture as having a natural sex drive, lesbian-like behaviour became deviant and damning.

We didn’t invent homosexuality in the past 20 or 30 or 50 years.  But we continue to labour under the belief and cultural expectation that women’s sexuality is something owed to and owned by men, forever de-legitimising women’s relationships unless men in some way benefit. 

biancashotthewarden

Anonymous asked:

What is 50 shades of grey about? And what's so bad about it?

aconissa answered:

50 Shades of Grey was originally fanfiction based on the Twilight series, which was then published as a novel (along with 2 subsequent books). It sold over 100 million copies around the world and topped best-seller lists everywhere. It’s about to be adapted into a film, set to come out early next year.

It follows a college student named Ana Steele, who enters a relationship with a man named Christian Grey and is then introduced to a bastardised and abusive parody of BDSM culture.

While the book is paraded as erotica, the relationship between Ana and Christian is far from healthy. The core mantra of the BDSM community is “safe, sane and consensual”, and 50 Shades is anything but. None of the rules of BDSM practices (which are put in place to protect those involved) are actually upheld. Christian is controlling, manipulative, abusive, takes complete advantage of Ana, ignores safe-words, ignores consent, keeps her uneducated about the sexual practices they’re taking part in, and a multitude of other terrible things. Their relationship is completely sickening and unhealthy.

Basically, “the book is a glaring glamorisation of violence against women,” as Amy Bonomi so perfectly put it. 

It’s terrible enough that a book like this has been absorbed by people worldwide. Now, we have a film that is expected to be a huge box-office success, and will likely convince countless more young women that it’s okay not to have any autonomy in a relationship, that a man is allowed to control them entirely. It will also show many young men that women are theirs to play with and dominate, thus contributing to antiquated patriarchal values and rape culture.

anigrrrl2:

Perfectly said.