16-Year-Old Feminist

Opinions are largely unchanged.

Technically an 18-year-old-egalitarian.

I had the most liberating conversations yesterday (or this morning?)

None of us were drunk. My two roommates and I started talking about anal sex. We reasoned that someone must have started it, so which sexual act came first? 

We are all normally very argumentative, but we were genuinely curious. Therefore, we put together a myriad of questions - who discovered sexual acts first? What did they start with? Did they share with anybody else? Did Adam and Eve do it? Do we set the conversation in the Garden of Eden? - and we spoke for an hour. We offered possible insights and examples and I still remember the genuine excitement we had during this conversation. No one was defensive about their ideas, and when a new point was brought up, we changed our minds easily. 

As silly as it sounds, I think we had an ideal explorative discussion about anal sex. So that was pretty cool. We were very efficient when no one was defensive or laid a claim over a personal idea. Just goes to show you the sheer level of productivity that you can have when you’re not trying to change anybody’s mind. 

I want to write about this discussion as a significant intellectual experience for my college application. 

linear-relationships said: Your blog is perfection, that's all I can say. You've got a fan from me! I adore this tumblr, I usually try my best to stay away from politics on this website but I'm following you for sure. I love everything you post, I find it very inspirational. I personally tried to start a side blog, in which I posted and replied to political posts, and it ended up turning out very badly. I received lots of hate messages and decided to let it go b/c I couldn't handle it. Well done 2 u darling you're strong.

Thank you for your kind words! 

I’m sorry you received hate messages :/ I’ve received quite a few also and it really sucks when people ruin your blogging experience by being assholes! 

Anonymous said: Even the original Koss study never said 1 in 4 women will be raped in college, but *by the time they enter college*. Only 30% of these 1 in 4 will happen during their college time.

That’s very true! Some campaigns have even cited “1 in 3” women will be raped in their lifetime, and I honestly can’t figure out where they got that. 

The Problem With Rookie-Reading, Girl-Empowering Modern Young Feminism

Feminism is diverse.

And the Laci Green-watching young feminists don’t see the ugly parts. 

I’ve read a lot about feminism and led a little class on it last year, and if there’s one thing I can say about feminism, it’s that the amount of head-butting and disagreement is extraordinary. There were disagreements all the way back to the first wave, and they became more and more prominent as time went on. You can’t possibly expect Wendy McElroy and Gloria Steinem to agree on the direction feminism should take, and I would pay good money to see a showdown between Naomi Wolf and Christina Hoff Sommers.

Yes, people are taught to associate feminism with negativity - but a lot of that is frankly the fault of feminists. You can’t say “feminism doesn’t promote misandry” when Valerie Solanas wrote the S.C.U.M Manifesto calling to kill all men. You can’t say “feminism is pro-sex and pro-women’s choice” when you see Tumblr users saying things like “you’re oppressing yourself by being a stay at home mother”. You can’t say “feminism fights for the right of men to be recognized” when Erin Pizzey, the woman to start the first women’s shelter in the UK, got death threats for trying to help men who are violated at the same rate. You can’t say “feminists stand up for male sexual assault victims” when “Men Can Stop Rape” is a campaign started by feminists that erases the existence of men victimized by women and perpetuates the male/perpetrator and female/victim paradigm.

I think we’re too attached to the feminist label. We think feminism is a criterion for being a good person, because who doesn’t want the dictionary definition of feminism? “Equality for all genders”. That’s the ideal feminist, though, and many feminists simply work against that very ideal whether they realize it or not. Furthermore, “equality” is hard and complex to arrive to because of decades and centuries of institutional inequality.

Modern young feminism is easy. 

It’s easy to strawman anti-feminists as people who don’t understand feminism or who have been fed too many cherry-picked examples of extreme misandry. It’s easy to fight against a woman yelling “kill all men” in the streets. It’s easy to call out white middle-class feminists who throw their fellow women of colour under the bus.

It’s not so easy to recognize the problematic parts of “Men Can Stop Rape” and “Don’t Be That Guy” though, because a significant part of the population - including educated, intelligent, and passionate young women - believe the narrative put forth by those campaigns and don’t recognize the harm. It’s not so easy to recognize that “1 in 4 college women are raped” is the result of an irresponsible and purposefully biased study that - yes - victimizes women by telling them that they are in greater danger than they actually are. These ideologies are slowly shaping our world, because the number of protest-going feminists is growing in our schools. It’s even more frustrating because there are legitimate anti-feminists who actually hate women and want to police people according to gender roles. Does feminism fight against that? Yes! But then many modern feminists lump “anti-shitty parts of feminism” with “anti-women and anti-all genders” and dismiss all the arguments that contradict each other.

That’s why educated, intelligent, and passionate young women can oppose feminism. I do admire feminism for several aspects - it’s somehow taken the LGBTQ movement and race relations under its belt and educated a lot of young people who may have even more harmful ideology fed to them at home. It’s difficult, though, to figure out what exactly are the problematic parts and to weed them out. That’s also why anti-feminist feminists exist - to police a movement that has history and potential. At this rate, it’s probably easier to just build a different boat and sail under “egalitarian”.

Nerdymouse's College Fund

nerdymouse:

Ok, so yes… I am trying to save up. But I do need help since my family refuses to help. 

Signal boosting from a broke student~

(via nerdymouse)

the-pietriarchy:

tumblr.png

the-pietriarchy:

tumblr.png

(via noyka)

allaboard-the-hogwarts-express said: I've just discovered your blog and your opinions reflect mine 100% congrats on having an awesome brain :) :)

Aha, thanks! Glad to hear that you agree with me!

sjhetalia:

perfectvic:

LITERALLY MY FAVORITE

#NoNotAllWomen because women scholars have discredited this.  Female journalists have debunked the mythical “1 in 3 women” statistic that’s being passed around as fact.  The leading organization devoted to helping victims of rape is openly against the concept. Christina Hoff Sommers, a self-proclaimed equity feminist, exposed the flawed and deceptive methodologies behind the 1 in 4 and 1 in 8 rape figures. These “studies” are inflated to generate the government grant money women’s organizations depend on and keep the hysteria alive thus validating their feminist agenda.
A 2013 special report by the Department of Justice found that between 1995 and 2010 rape and sexual assault declined over 50%.
RAINN has officially stated that, “In the last few years, there has been an unfortunate trend towards blaming ‘rape culture’ for the extensive problem of sexual violence on campuses. While it is helpful to point out  the systemic barriers to addressing the problem, it is important to not lose sight of a simple fact: Rape is caused not by cultural factors but by the conscious decisions, of a small percentage of the community, to commit a violent crime." 
Wendy McElroy, an individualist feminist, wrote an article this month on rape cultureaccurately comparing it to Hitler’s big lie, concluding it by saying, “As a woman who has experienced genuine sexual violence, I ask one thing of the awareness month and the people promoting it. Tell the truth. Tell the truth to women and tell it about men. Those who use the big lie of ‘rape culture’ to promote their politics have more in common with rapists than they know; both use the pain and fear of women to their own advantage.”
KC Johnson wrote an article last month on rape culture, describing it as having 3 central characteristics: 
"First, it has received almost fawning press coverage (what media members want to be deemed pro-rape?)—allowing for transparently absurd allegations, such as those at Occidental, to be presented as credible. In some instances, this has come from the usual suspects, such as Kingkade at Huffington Post, Allie Grasgreen at Inside Higher Ed, and Richard Perez-Peña of the New York Times. But the phenomenon has also received extensive, uncritical attention in BuzzFeed, which despite its generally solid treatment of legal issues just hired the discredited Katie Baker to help coordinate its ‘rape culture’ articles. In a media too often accepts at face value a politically correct narrative on campus, the ‘rape culture’ claim is almost ideal for campus ‘activists.’
Second, the ‘rape culture’ approach allows activists to shift the narrative away from uncomfortable questions about due process and false accusations against innocent male students, and toward a cultural critique in which the facts of specific cases can be deemed irrelevant.Selena Roberts pioneered the tactic at Duke—when the case against the lacrosse players imploded, she (falsely) claimed that her guilt-presuming columns were merely designed to critique a flawed ‘campus culture.’ Or, as Amanda Childress implied in her oft-criticized remarks, whatever value might exist in following specified procedures in sexual assault cases, universities should focus their efforts on tackling broader cultural mores.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the ‘rape culture’ approach provides a weapon to advance a particular type of gender-based agenda (curricular and administrative priorities need to be revamped to recognize that women are victims) in a campus environment in which race/class/gender advocates already dominate.There always will be a stray, anonymous misogynistic comment on a message board, or by a drunken student at a spring-break party, from which advocates can then generalize to claim that a crisis exists on campus—without ever defining precisely what a ‘rape culture’ is, or how the steps they recommend could possibly eradicate it. And since there isn’t a recent example—from Duke to Dartmouth to any of the current Title IX claims—in which those who have cried wolf on campus have experienced any repercussions for their actions, there is no drawback in advancing inflammatory claims, no matter how unlikely.”
Men aren’t sharks, men aren’t russian roulette chambers, men aren’t mosquitos, men aren’t fucking poisoned m&m’s. Men are human beings who are capable of fucking up and doing horrible things JUST like everyone else.
~Prussia

sjhetalia:

perfectvic:

LITERALLY MY FAVORITE

#NoNotAllWomen because women scholars have discredited this.  Female journalists have debunked the mythical “1 in 3 women” statistic that’s being passed around as fact The leading organization devoted to helping victims of rape is openly against the conceptChristina Hoff Sommers, a self-proclaimed equity feminist, exposed the flawed and deceptive methodologies behind the 1 in 4 and 1 in 8 rape figures. These “studies” are inflated to generate the government grant money women’s organizations depend on and keep the hysteria alive thus validating their feminist agenda.

A 2013 special report by the Department of Justice found that between 1995 and 2010 rape and sexual assault declined over 50%.

RAINN has officially stated that, “In the last few years, there has been an unfortunate trend towards blaming ‘rape culture’ for the extensive problem of sexual violence on campuses. While it is helpful to point out  the systemic barriers to addressing the problem, it is important to not lose sight of a simple fact: Rape is caused not by cultural factors but by the conscious decisions, of a small percentage of the community, to commit a violent crime.

Wendy McElroy, an individualist feminist, wrote an article this month on rape cultureaccurately comparing it to Hitler’s big lie, concluding it by saying, “As a woman who has experienced genuine sexual violence, I ask one thing of the awareness month and the people promoting it. Tell the truth. Tell the truth to women and tell it about men. Those who use the big lie of ‘rape culture’ to promote their politics have more in common with rapists than they know; both use the pain and fear of women to their own advantage.

KC Johnson wrote an article last month on rape culture, describing it as having 3 central characteristics: 

"First, it has received almost fawning press coverage (what media members want to be deemed pro-rape?)—allowing for transparently absurd allegations, such as those at Occidental, to be presented as credible. In some instances, this has come from the usual suspects, such as Kingkade at Huffington Post, Allie Grasgreen at Inside Higher Ed, and Richard Perez-Peña of the New York Times. But the phenomenon has also received extensive, uncritical attention in BuzzFeed, which despite its generally solid treatment of legal issues just hired the discredited Katie Baker to help coordinate its ‘rape culture’ articles. In a media too often accepts at face value a politically correct narrative on campus, the ‘rape culture’ claim is almost ideal for campus ‘activists.’

Second, the ‘rape culture’ approach allows activists to shift the narrative away from uncomfortable questions about due process and false accusations against innocent male students, and toward a cultural critique in which the facts of specific cases can be deemed irrelevant.Selena Roberts pioneered the tactic at Duke—when the case against the lacrosse players imploded, she (falsely) claimed that her guilt-presuming columns were merely designed to critique a flawed ‘campus culture.’ Or, as Amanda Childress implied in her oft-criticized remarks, whatever value might exist in following specified procedures in sexual assault cases, universities should focus their efforts on tackling broader cultural mores.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the ‘rape culture’ approach provides a weapon to advance a particular type of gender-based agenda (curricular and administrative priorities need to be revamped to recognize that women are victims) in a campus environment in which race/class/gender advocates already dominate.There always will be a stray, anonymous misogynistic comment on a message board, or by a drunken student at a spring-break party, from which advocates can then generalize to claim that a crisis exists on campus—without ever defining precisely what a ‘rape culture’ is, or how the steps they recommend could possibly eradicate it. And since there isn’t a recent example—from Duke to Dartmouth to any of the current Title IX claims—in which those who have cried wolf on campus have experienced any repercussions for their actions, there is no drawback in advancing inflammatory claims, no matter how unlikely.”

Men aren’t sharks, men aren’t russian roulette chambers, men aren’t mosquitos, men aren’t fucking poisoned m&m’s. Men are human beings who are capable of fucking up and doing horrible things JUST like everyone else.

~Prussia

(Source: punkypunk, via aboutsocialjustice)

feignedaffections:

neverendinginquiry:

jetpack-johnny:

huffingtonpost:

Wesleyan University sophomore Sally Rappaport is adding a new set of voices to the fight against victim blaming with Project “Not Asking For It.” See the full video here. 

1 in 7 actually

If 50% of “rape victims” don’t consider themselves to be victims of rape, how can one count them as such? Also, if 1 in 8 boys are sexually abused before age 18, where is the 1 in 70 coming from? Fear mongering bullshit this.

^
This. 

I AM SO FUCKING TIRED OF THAT “1 in 4” STUDY BEING USED AS LEGIT STATISTICS 

Read this and get back to me 

On a different note, this is a pretty great idea for an ad, and I was okay with it before the “1 in 4” and “1 in 71” stuff. How about let’s just take decent ideas and do good things with them? 

(via aboutsocialjustice)

mindblowingscience:

pickledpennies:

m00nchaser:

If bees become extinct we will have exactly 4 YEARS to live on this planet. I don’t understand how “not giving a fuck” is more important than your life…

okay, I have a thing to say about this. I’m no expert on bees, but I am a biologist (and entomologist) so I think there is something I can contribute that’ll be of worth.

I agree entirely with the sentiment that we must protect honeybees. Obviously they are massively important for biodiversity, as well as pollinating food crops for humans. There is no doubt that if all the honeybees in the world were to vanish in a day that the consequences would be dire.

However, I disagree that the main cause for concern regarding honeybee death is the use of Genetically Modified (GM) crops. I’d be very interested to read a research paper that says ‘GM crops have killed millions of honeybees’, if indeed such a paper exists because in all honesty I find it highly unlikely that this is a true statement.

Let’s start with some facts about GM crops:

1. The development of GM crops is a highly regulated process, bound by strict country-specific legislature. A great number of trials are carried out long before commercial planting of a GM crop is even considered. It is these trials, and accompanying laboratory studies, that ensure a GM crop is safe to non-target organisms (such as honeybees) by investigating direct and indirect effects (Nap et al. 2003).

2. Crops that are genetically modified to express insecticidal proteins (for crop pest control) have a high level of specificity. This means that the insecticidal proteins being produced by the GM plant will only affect a narrow range of insect groups because of the chemical properties of the protein. For example, GM crops expressing insecticidal proteins sourced from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) will only target some Lepidopteran pests (caterpillars; Romeis et al. 2006). Furthermore, a recent meta-analysis of the literature found that GM Bt crops do not negatively affect the survival of adult honeybees or their larvae (Duan et al. 2008).

3. GM crops can be tailored such that the novel gene is expressed only in particular parts of the plant. For example, GM Bt rice plants express the toxin in the stems but not the grains (Datta et al. 1998). This technique means that gene expression can be excluded from the flowers/pollen of the crop plant, so that bees and other pollinators would not be affected. Neat, huh?

So those are a token few reasons why GM crops are safer than perhaps many people believe (as the result of a lot of questionable, non-scientific articles). To come back to our main point about honeybee death, I would like to briefly mention a few alternative explanations for the recent decline in honeybee populations. These are as follows:

1. Many bees have died as the result of broad-spectrum insecticide use. These are pesticides that lack specificity, and can be harmful to non-target organisms. Neonicotinoids are a well-studied example of this (Decourtye & Devillers, 2010). Not to worry, though, because many broad-spectrum pesticides including neonics are well on their way out. Indeed, the EU recently banned a large cohort of neonic pesticides. This is still a topic of controversy, mind (Goulson, 2013).

2. Many bees have died as the result of Varroa mite infestation. Imagine you’ve been bitten by several ticks, except those ticks are the size of dinner plates. That gives you an idea of the severity of a Varroa mite infestation on a single developing bee. The parasitisation of bees by Varroa mites and other parasites is often accompanied by disease transmission. This can result in colonies dying within two years after infestation (Johnson, 2011).

3. Many bees have died as the result of ‘colony collapse disorder’.  This is a phrase that has popped up a lot recently, and is basically an umbrella term for the various causes of bee death including parasite infestation, disease transmission, environmental stresses, and management stresses such as poor nutrition (Johnson, 2011). Colony collapse has been attributed to broad-spectrum pesticide use in some instances. However, it is has still been observed in countries where broad-spectrum pesticides have been withdrawn (in the EU, like I mentioned earlier; Johnson, 2011).

So those are my main points. Please excuse the bullet-point nature of this; I was trying to keep it fairly short. Not sure I managed that haha. But anyway, my take-home message is that GM crops are not the enemy when it comes to honeybee decline. If anything, bees are at much greater danger from the use of broad-spectrum pesticides and from parasites and diseases. Using GM can even help to alleviate some of the problems associated with broad-spectrum pesticides, as they greatly reduce the need to apply such chemicals (Romeis et al. 2006).

A finishing note: Do your homework. Go on google scholar and read some of the literature, making sure it is recent (within the past 10-15 years). Literature reviews are a great way to find out what the consensus is on any given topic. Don’t use popular media as your main source of information where science is concerned; they tend to favour scandal and exaggeration. You want to know what’s really going on? Check out some research articles and see for yourself.

Thanks for sticking it through to the end of this impromptu mini-essay! —Alice

References:

Datta, K., Vasquez, A., Tu, J., Torrizo, L., Alam, M. F., Oliva, N., Abrigo, E., Khush, G. S., & Datta, S. K. (1998). Constitutive and tissue-specific differential expression of the cryIA (b) gene in transgenic rice plants conferring resistance to rice insect pest. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 97(1-2), 20-30.

Decourtye, A., & Devillers, J. (2010). Ecotoxicity of neonicotinoid insecticides to bees. In Insect nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (pp. 85-95). Springer New York.

Duan, J. J., Marvier, M., Huesing, J., Dively, G., & Huang, Z. Y. (2008). A meta-analysis of effects of Bt crops on honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae). PLoS One, 3(1), e1415.

Goulson, D. (2013). Neonicotinoids and bees: What’s all the buzz?. Significance, 10(3), 6-11.

Johnson, R. (2011). Honey bee colony collapse disorder. DIANE Publishing.

Nap, J. P., Metz, P. L., Escaler, M., & Conner, A. J. (2003). The release of genetically modified crops into the environment. The Plant Journal, 33(1), 1-18.

Romeis, J., Meissle, M., & Bigler, F. (2006). Transgenic crops expressing Bacillus thuringiensis toxins and biological control. Nature biotechnology, 24(1), 63-71.

This commentary is SO important. Succinct and with proper sourcing; beautiful.

It infuriates me when people blame GMO for everything without actually examining the evidence.

(Source: antinwo)