Everyday Feminism - aka Everyday Autism

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Sweet and Savoury said:
Wikipedia is becoming pretty suspect as a source on cultural or social issues. It's neutrality is definitely been questioned as too many of the senior editors are SJWs or lean in that direction.
Click to expand...
Nah, it's not just culture and social issues - absolute biggest sources of headaches are in biographies and company and organisation articles in general. I've always said the problems with Wikipedia's content has never been due to editor bias (because everyone is biased one way or other) - the problem is that biased editors may use questionable sources to make their biased points (or, hell, just wing it and hope no one notices). If you use less questionable sources, at least you're biased toward the scientific consensus, which most people think is a good thing.

And the only huge problem with Wikipedia is that there's lots of arguments about sources and their validity, but not enough people who are actually capable of making the judgments on whether a source is good or not (and when you get down to it, it isn't even that difficult - basic stuff that's part of even lower university degree learning material) and actually doing something about that. You may point out that some source is bullshit, but editors aren't interested in doing anything about that. And the whole deletion process is just a massive pile of bureaucracy.

Another fun fact: hard-sciences types may think that social sciences may be full of feelsy-arguey wimbly-wombly stuff, but they still need to explain their sources of data, methodology and the logic behind their reasoning, which in turn means they can be peer-reviewed. As someone who came from computer science background, I was surprised by how huge bunch of methods qualitative research has at its disposal. Less rigour, yes, but not less science.

In summary: Less quoting on random crank blogs and more on peer-reviewed literature. Because if reality has it, then scientists have probably noticed it, and if not, please do wait for them to notice it.

Sweet and Savoury said:
Does Wu really deserve a wiki page? Really? And such a glowing one too.
Click to expand...
Well, all that complaining from GamerGate certainly got the mainstream media interested. All hail Streisand Effect.
 
bumping this
http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/05/dad-bod-phenomenon/
http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/05/dad-bod-phenomenon/ The editors at EF know where the real activist issues are, and apparently those are dumb memes that no one else besides them has ever heard of. Here they criticize the "dad bod" (?), or the idea that dads don't have to have a six-pack as long as they don't completely let themselves go, or something, because there's apparently also a "mom bod" who must have a perfect after-baby body with no stretch marks or anything (??????) and therefore the "dad bod" is sexist. I don't get it either.

http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/05/being-intersex/
What Does It Mean to Be Intersex? 4 People Generously Let You Know I love how the title included the word "generously" as to say "Remember, you're a privileged shitlord who doesn't deserve to watch this video, but luckily for you these saints right here were nice enough to educate you."

Alice: I have XY chromosomes, but typical female genitalia.

Emily: I’m a girl who has testes and XY chromosomes.

Pidgeon: I identify as a queer gender non-conforming intersex person.
Click to expand...

This is hilarious to think about in real life if you imagine two people who are like "yeah, I'm a female externally, but I actually have XY chromosomes" and then Special Snowflake barges in and comes out with all this meaningless Tumblrese babble that basically means "I may or may not have been tested but I'm totally just like you because calling myself intersex makes me feel special!"

http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/01/homonormativity-101/ One of the points they describe as "homonormativity" is "marriage equality as the major goal of the gay rights movement". I'm not even fucking kidding, they've completely come full circle and said that the marriage equality movement, "reproduces, rather than challenges, heterosexual dominance and normativity and uses this as a basis for who deserves rights". In other words, convincing straight people that gays are just like them is a bad thing now!
 
DrChristianTroy said:
It's not like the points of that one article were wrong. Seems kind of useless to preach what we already know but whatevs. If dude got paid for it then more power to the author.
Click to expand...

I just found it sort of ridiculous the lengths the author went to emasculate himself in order to prove he is a "good feminist".
 
For me, it was really their endorsement of "fat acceptance"---right down to denying rampant obesity was even a health problem for American society. They've growing as bad as anti-vaxxers or climate change deniers.
CatFace said:
I really wish these people would latch onto a different word for their brand of pseudo feminism.
Click to expand...
The problem is that "feminism" originally had positive connotations, so you got all these assholes claiming to be "feminist" to make their nonsense more marketable. It's a bit like how white supremacists now call themselves "white nationalists" as if they were the white equivalents of "black nationalists" like Malcolm X.
 
I know transexuals and duel genital people exist, but they are rather rare a
ChameleonBody said:
I don't know if I've said it before but cultural appropriation is my least favorite of the many ludicrous SJW ideas and it was the first one to really make me decide "yeah, fuck these guys." I used to think of myself as a really multicultural person. For example, I moved into the international dorm of my campus. Shame that "multiculturalism" has gone from expressing love for and engaging with other cultures to hating yourself for doing so. (:_(

Anyway, joke of a site.
Click to expand...
I know what you mean. Even if a black woman did your dreadlocks and you got written permission from 50 black people of various ages and backgrounds, it still wouldn't be enough. It's not that different from the xenophobes of the early 1900's who didn't want non-WASPs' filthy culture (Jazz, spaghetti, etc) effecting their people.
 
Yaoi Huntress Earth said:
I know transexuals and duel genital people exist, but they are rather rare a

I know what you mean. Even if a black woman did your dreadlocks and you got written permission from 50 black people of various ages and backgrounds, it still wouldn't be enough. It's not that different from the xenophobes of the early 1900's who didn't want non-WASPs' filthy culture (Jazz, spaghetti, etc) effecting their people.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong but, didn't the Vikings(who were white btw) have their hair in dreads? As a black person I find this to be quite silly that white people(most time of the white women) shouldn't braid their hair.
 
God dammit, I loathe blogs/websites like these.

Nitwits like these is why other nitwits love to vilify modern feminism. Every anti-feminist I've argued with acts like feminism originated from the insane side of Tumblr or this hypocritical blog. *sigh*
 
Oh god, 'cultural appropriation'.

Yet another SJW buzz word that they themselves have no idea what it means.

I've seen using a fork at a Chinese restaurant be called 'cultural appropriation', I've seen the same claim for using chopsticks. In my experience the people who go on about 'cultural appropriation' are the same that say if they go to a Chinese restaurant and the chef isn't 'Chinese' then it isn't a REAL Chinese restaurant.

You know what the people who cry 'cultural appropriation' sound like to me? They sounds like racists.

Sorry, I am still a bit sore from when SJW spergs invaded a beauty forum I like not too long ago. Apparently being white to SJW's means not being allowed in the ethnic hair section of Walmart, and it's a capital crime to buy anything even if it works nice for your hair.

It's my own fault. I mean there was a black lady on the box, I should have known I shouldn't have grabbed it. Just like those water fountains have the handy black/white distinction, or the back of the bus has that area blacks go, and schools, or... hm, wait, I think I am experiencing a time warp.
 
Last edited:
Too Many Crooks said:
God dammit, I loathe blogs/websites like these.

Nitwits like these is why other nitwits love to vilify modern feminism. Every anti-feminist I've argued with acts like feminism originated from the insane side of Tumblr or this hypocritical blog. *sigh*
Click to expand...
Agreed. You see it on this very site: people don't even believe things like privilege, appropriation, triggers, etc. are actually real concepts, because they only know the SJW version, which is nothing like the real (mostly academic) version. Privilege is when the aggregate population A on average has some sort of advantages over the aggregate population B, not when the guy next to you on the bus spread his legs too wide. Appropriation is when you completely take something from another culture and make it your own, not when you go to a Chinese restaurant while white. Triggering is when you hear a loud noise and have a fucking PTSD flashback to an IED going off next to your jeep, not when someone on Tumblr said something mean and it made you have to face that spending 10hrs a day on the internet while your youth and health slowly fade and no progress actually occurs in the real world is a bad idea.
 
http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/11/ableist-language-matters/

3. What’s wrong with using bodies as metaphors, anyway?
Think about it this way: Consider that you’re a woman walking down the street, and someone makes an unwanted commentary on your body. Suppose that the person looks at you in your favorite dress, with your hair all done up, and tells you that you are “as fat as a pig.”

Is your body public property to be commented upon at will? Are others allowed to make use of it — in their language, in your hearing, without your permission?
Click to expand...

Yes.

Or is that a form of objectification and disrespect?
Click to expand...
In the same way that a stranger should not appropriate your body for his commentary, you should not appropriate my disabled body — which is, after all, mine and not yours — for your political writing or social commentary.

A disabled body should not appear in articles about how lame that sexist movie is or how insane racism is. A disabled body should be no more available for commentary than a nondisabled one.

The core problem with using a body as a metaphor is that people actually live in bodies. We are not just paralyzed legs, or deaf ears, or blind eyes.

When we become reduced to our disabilities, others very quickly forget that there are people involved here. We are no longer seen as whole, living, breathing human beings.

Our bodies have simply been put into the service of your cause without our permission.
Click to expand...

This argument might work better if people vividly imagined masses of wheelchair-bound children whenever they say "lame", or an asylum full of people in straitjackets whenever they say "crazy" to talk about their weekend, which they don't. The colloquial meaning is detached enough from the clinical meaning that it's not connected to oppression in any meaningful way. This is retarded.

6. If my disabled friend says it’s okay to use these words, doesn’t that make it all right to use them?
Please don’t make any one of us the authority on language. It should go without saying, but think for yourself about the impact of the language you’re using.

If you stop using a word because someone told you to, you’re doing it wrong. It’s much better if you understand why.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter whether any disabled people are actually offended whenever someone says "stupid" or "lame" because we're here to be offended for them!

http://everydayfeminism.com/2015/05/feeling-like-a-man-during-your-period/

1. Pretend You’ve Been Wounded
Kind of kidding, kind of not.

Look, there are pretty much two reactions a guy has when he sees a most horrifying splotch on his underwear: 1) “Holy fuck, I’m dying!” and 2) “Stop panicking, this is normal! Stop panicking, this is normal! Stop panicking, this is normal!”

Reaction 1 can be nonchalantly labeled as irrational to an outsider, but they’ve forgotten the important fact that we’re trans guys because we see ourselves as men. If any guy sees blood on his underwear, he’s within his right to hit the panic button. Ergo, trans guys are pretty normal on that front.

One way to combat the panic is to embrace it. Don’t fight your brain and be all, “Well, it’s actually a simple, natural sloughing of the uterine lining due to a lack of fertilized egg…”

No. Don’t fight the trans part of your brain by being a textbook.

Recognize that yeah, you’re bleeding; and yeah, it’s in a place that makes no sense to you; and yeah, it therefore causes feelings of panic because something’s happening that shouldn’t be happening.

Why wouldn’t you have an emotional reaction to that?

If you don’t have an emotional reaction to such a thing, then your survival instincts aren’t working right. And if you try to suppress such a reaction, it’ll make you feel sick.

Blood is blood is blood. And if you see blood coming from any part of your body it shouldn’t be, your brain concludes only one thing: Something’s wrong.

In essence, you’re injured.

Your body needs help, so help it.

Treat it like you would any other malady. Rest is necessary for the weary, pads are like gauze. Done deal.
Click to expand...

Trans men are too sensitive apparently to acknowledge that they have female bodies instead of crying bloody murder whenever they get a period.

4. Recognize This Experience Actually Enhances Your Masculinity – By Dismantling It
Before we go further, a history lesson: There’s this thing called the feminist movement. And in this movement, the motive is to create equality for all sexes and genders, often by dismantling patriarchy one tendril at a time. It’s not a desire to destroy masculinity. It is a desire to destroy toxic masculinity. Because it’s—you know—toxic.

The toxic versions of masculinity have been built up around a hierarchy of men and which among them is manlier than thou.

Lengthier cis penises, more notches on a bedpost, a stronger ability to crush cans on your forehead without flinching; toxic masculinity is a perpetual pissing contest. In short, you’re only a man if you’re manlier than another man.

…What?

But seriously, let’s indulge that route a moment. Because you know what? We, as trans guys, still win out over the cis guys. (Fuck yeah!)

Confused? Let me explain.

What you’re going through is far more than the usual cis man has to deal with. What you’re going through is defying all of logic and nature, which in my book means the very fabric of being should be imploding in on itself right now.

You’re bleeding. From an area of your body that shouldn’t exist. Frequently and repeatedly.

But are you still standing? Yup.

“But dear, deluded James,” you say. “Didn’t you just say toxic masculinity was bad, then pretty much argue that trans guys could nonetheless be more toxically masculine than cis guys? Shouldn’t we then, like, maroon all trans man on a deserted island for the good of feminism?”

Shush. I’m not done.

The point of arguing how trans men can not only play, but win the toxic masculinity war is in that it actually dismantles the entire thing.

If trans guys can win out, but were categorized as “female” upon birth, are occasionally still categorized as “female” by ignorant individuals, and often are cis-penis-less and/or have mounds of fat on their chests, it means the primal notions of masculinity are null and void.

Masculinity can no longer be defined by a set of physical characteristics brought upon a person by luck.

It can only be defined by enduring a series of difficult, strenuous circumstances through hutzpah you’ve decided to call your masculinity. Masculinity becomes something earned, not something given. And you earned it by surviving life, not at the expense of gay bashing, cat calling, or slut shaming.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's because it's late at night, but I read this like three times already and it still makes no sense to me. If a trans man has a period then they are manlier than other men because other men would not handle bleeding from their dick, but then that means masculinity is not real because a man with a vagina is manlier than one with a dick...? Well, I guess I get it now, it's just incredibly stupid.
 
How incredibly condescending. "Hey trans men I know you've been dealing with dysphoria for years now but lemme tell you how you should be doing it!"

If somebody wrote an article about how to feel like a real woman while wearing pants or how to feel like an able bodied person while sitting in a wheelchair these people would lose their shit.
 
It's possible for women to pee standing up. It requires a bit of practice and some forethought, but it's possible.

I could just as easily say it's female privledge that their bathrooms tend to have more stalls, air fresheners, bigger mirrors, and even couches.
 
Splendid Meat Sticks said:
Need Help Dealing with Trolls? These Feminists Have 5 Ideas
Oh shit guys, they're onto us.
Click to expand...
57% were women. 29% were scared for their lives.
100% need to grow up.
I doubt some trolls calling you a feminazi or w/e makes you fear for your life.
Also, these people aren't even getting messages from trolls, just random hateful crazies on the internet. That'd be like if I drew a pic Muhammad and then called the extremists making threats against me "trolls."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom