July 31, 2014 · via the-milk-eyed-mender  

Ask me anything.

Could you please explain to me what Social Justice bloggers do, and what they are, I haven't heard of that side of Tumblr prior to your mentioning of them twice in your description and how you are in no part affiliated with them. I proceeded to look up social justice blogging and the likes to understand it, but I still don't know why it's a movement on Tumblr or where it had begun, or why it's looked down upon. I have absolutely no knowledge of SJ Tumblr and would like to be filled in, please?
asks kennelame

wretchedoftheearth:

This is long, so beware.

Social justice itself broadly is generally attempting to better the human condition by challenging injustice. Social justice movements exist offline, and social justice movements existed online before tumblr.

And well, it’s not that I am not affiliated with “SJ tumblr” - it’s more just that “social justice tumblr” is a nebulous, poorly-defined, and honestly, impossible to define part of tumblr. Unlike say, fandom tumblr or soft grunge bloggers, I know very few people who identify as “social justice bloggers” or who even define the purpose of their tumblrs to be “social justice.” No one ends their posts with “follow for more SJ.” Social justice movements are not necessarily interconnected, and plenty of people who support one entirely ignore another.

In practice, hatred of social justice on tumblr is dog whistle politics, and turning a neutral word into something derogatory (much like “politically correct”). It’s usually used to describe the blogs of people who belong to marginalized groups who talk about social issues, even if only in the context of their own lives. I know people who post porn gifs and have apolitical content who have been branded “SJ bloggers.”

I mean sure, I get what people mean when they use the term, and there are valid criticisms of tumblr social justice posts (though my own, below, are different from those of anti social justice bloggers). These criticisms are usually absurd and illogical and rely on tone arguments (you’re too angry or whiny) and uphold the status quo. The opposition is clearly ideological - for the most part the reasons for opposition are transparent, and what they are most concerned about makes their goals obvious.

My major criticisms of “SJ tumblr”

1. Liberalism. I don’t think that social justice, or more specifically, anti-oppression movements, are compatible with liberalism. Liberation, rather than “equality,” should be the end goal.

2. The tendency to completely disregard the work or writings of an author, researcher, or even blogger, based on unrelated harmful things they have done, or their character.

It makes no sense. Posting or reblogging theoretical work or research done by someone does not mean you wholeheartedly embrace an individual, or their views. Some absolutely terrible people have made invaluable and unmatched contributions to their respective field(s) that are not negated by other things they’ve said or done.

It’s also applied unfairly. No one would ever say that Marx is “too problematic” to be quoted (and rightly so), but people do this with many other thinkers, particularly those whose work is not as foundational, and those who are women/of color.

3. My own belief that people misappropriate social justice concepts and jargon - whether in bad faith or due to ignorance - in ways that fit their goals. For example, using standpoint theory to say that only people who belong to a group can discuss the issue at hand, ever.

Anything else I would say is not really specific to “SJ tumblr” or “SJ blogging.” People take wrong, disingenuous, or even harmful posts to be representative of social justice when those people are everywhere. Or troll posts like these.

37 minutes ago · via wretchedoftheearth

59 minutes ago · via sapphrikah  

59 minutes ago · via nearlyvintage

1 hour ago · via misswallflower

septagonstudios:

Francesco Tortorella
1 hour ago · via rivieraboy  

coloursteelsexappeal:

Los Angeles, California; 1992
1 hour ago · via weirdocomixx  

1 hour ago · via mydarkenedeyes  

1 hour ago · via antisexgirl

Ask me anything.

I've spent most of my life trying to convince myself I wasn't a lesbian to the point where I'm an early 20-something and have never kissed or dated a woman (or anyone). I want to but I feel like I'm not worthy of calling myself a lesbian yet because I don't have the experience without 100% certainty. Most are pressuring me that I must be sure and experiment (with men) before I start dating women and eventually come out. If I even kissed a man it would destroy me. I don't know what to do.
asks Anonymous

dykesupremacy:

s0ft-h0m0:

You don’t have to experiment with men to be sure that you’re a lesbian. It sounds like you’re already sure. Lesbians are worthy of being lesbians without sexual experience of any kind under their belts. Don’t do anything unless you genuinely and enthusiastically want to do it.  

For a myriad of reasons, I tried to force myself to be with men before I was comfortable coming out. I deeply regret it. Follow your gut instincts- if your heart and your body are screaming no about men, listen to yourself. You do not have to be with men, ever.

I want every lesbian to hear this, and I wish I had heard this when I was younger.

1 hour ago · via jettgrrrl  

… [G]ender is understood to be a hierarchy, perhaps the sexes are unequal so that men can be sexually aroused. To put it another way, perhaps gender must be maintained as a social hierarchy so that men will be able to get erections; or, part of the male interest in keeping women down lies in the fact that it gets men up. Maybe feminists are considered castrating because equality is not sexy.

Recent inquiries into rape support such suspicions. Men often rape women, it turns out, because they want to and enjoy it. The act, including the dominance, is sexually arousing, sexually affirming, and supportive of the perpetrator’s masculinity. Many … rapists report an increase in self-esteem as a result of the rape. Indications are that reported rapists perceive that getting caught accounts for most of the unpleasant effects of raping. About a third of all men say they would rape a woman if they knew they wouldn’t get caught. That the low conviction rate may give them confidence is supported by the prevalence rate. Some convicted rapists see rape as an “exciting” form of interpersonal sex, a recreational activity or “adventure,” or as a means of revenge or punishment on all women or some subgroup of women or an individual woman. Even some of those who did the act out of bad feelings make it clear that raping made them feel better. “Men rape because it is rewarding to do so.” If rapists experience rape as sex, does that mean there can be nothing wrong with it?

Once an act is labeled rape - indeed, this is much of the social function served by labeling acts rape - there is an epistemological problem with seeing it as sex. Rape becomes something a rapist does, as if he is a separate species. But no personality disorder distinguishes most rapists from normal men. Psychopaths do rape, but only about 5 percent of all known rapists are diagnosed psychopathic. In spite of the number of victims, the normalcy of rapists, and the fact that most women are raped by men that they know (making it most unlikely that a few lunatics know around half of all women in the United States), rape remains considered psychopathological and therefore not about sexuality.

Sexuality, Pornography, and Method: “Pleasure under Patriarchy”
Author(s): Catherine A. MacKinnon
Source: Ethics, Vol. 99, No. 2 (Jan., 1989), pp. 314-346
Published by: The University of Chicago Press

(via exgynocraticgrrl)
1 hour ago · via exgynocraticgrrl

judge me I guess but lee pace looked ridiculous in the hobbit

4 hours ago

rustylazer:

Sade with flowers in her hair.
4 hours ago · via goldstarprivilege  

4 hours ago · via clitoralqueen  

5 hours ago · via dumbgineer