Tumgik
Link
6 notes · View notes
Link
From article: "Today is Equal Pay Day. That is the date the salaries of women catch up with the salaries their male counterparts earned in 2012. There is much public discussion about why it is that women do not succeed at the same levels as men and about the dissatisfaction many young women have with their careers. The reasons for these situations might just stem from the fundamentally different experience that women and men have on the job. With respect to the legal profession, it is difficult for many male attorneys to understand the work environment of most female attorneys. Imagine, though, that the roles in most law firms were reversed. Reverse the Roles. Picture a male attorney fresh from law school, beginning to look for his first job. More of his law professors than not were women, but his class was about 50 / 50 men and women. He hadn’t given much thought to gender differences in the job market, but he shines up his shoes and heads out . . ." I honestly only got about half way through this article and then had to stop because yeah this is my life.
11 notes · View notes
Text
Just FYI
Treating race as a costume has nothing to do with race being a social construct.
8 notes · View notes
Quote
'Why did you let us f*** you over?' is not a defense to f***ing somebody over.
John Oliver, Last Week Tonight, May 17, 2015
31 notes · View notes
Link
...but after reading about MRA proponents' collective hatred and spewed vitriol over the film's decidedly female-centric plot, I have re-evaluated my stance. So, although I never thought I'd ever have the opportunity to write this: "thanks, MRAs!" I am now definitely excited about this movie!
5 notes · View notes
Text
Rape culture jokes v. Rape jokes
[TW: rape, rape culture] Last night, on Inside Amy Schumer, there was a sketch about football and rape culture that was absolutely amazing. Anyone who knows me knows that I have serious problems with "rape jokes." I simply do not have it in me to find rape jokes funny or to tolerate them in anyway. Rape is many things -- humiliating, degrading, physically and emotionally excruciating -- but rape is NEVER funny. Rape humor is not “just jokes” or “stand-up.” Humor about sexual violence suggests permissiveness — not for people who would never commit such acts, but for the people who have whatever weakness that allows them to do terrible things unto others. People who laugh at rape jokes aren't laughing at a joke. They're laughing at the concept of rape. And that -- much like the crime itself -- is disturbing and horrible. We are free to speak as we choose without fear of prosecution or persecution, but we are not free to speak as we choose without consequence, and I for one will not stand idly by when someone uses another's pain as a (figurative, but perhaps literal) punchline. However, this skit -- much like Wanda Syke's "detachable vagina" monologue -- is not a "rape joke." It is a "rape culture joke," which is an entirely different species of comedy (aka satire). Unlike a rape joke, a rape culture joke doesn't seek to normalize rape and uphold the rape culture, but instead seeks to examine, challenge, and dismantle it. The world is full of terrible things, including rape, and it is okay to joke about them: we use humor to process terrible things, and also raise awareness of ubiquitous problems in society. But the best comics use their art to call bullshit on those terrible parts of life and make them better, not worse. And that is precisely the art of "rape culture" jokes. Before getting to clip, though, I'll note that the video below may still be triggering, because there is a lot of discussion of rape culture tropes and examples of rape apologia and victim-blaming. Likewise, although I find this skit funny, that doesn't mean anyone else has to agree. I understand and respect that some survivors do not and cannot find any rape-related humor funny or effective, no matter what its target, and I get that (and I don't think that makes them "oversensitive" -- I think that only means they've got a different sensitivity than I do). So! With all that said, here is the link to the sketch: http://youtu.be/TM2RUVnTlvs
3 notes · View notes
Link
On Monday, Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt and acclaimed Steve Jobs biographer Walter Isaacson were wrapping up a SXSW Interactive panel that had focused on diversity, when an audience member called out the two men for repeatedly interrupting their fellow panelist, the United States' Chief Technology Officer Megan Smith. Even more awkward? The audience member who posed the question was apparently Judith Williams, who heads up Google's unconscious bias program. Here's how it went down: Schmidt, Isaacson and Smith were onstage together for a panel called "How Innovation Happens." One of the recurring themes of their hourlong talk was diversity in tech, and how the U.S. government and companies like Google can get more women and minorities involved. Both men interrupted Smith several times — not unusual for moderated panels — but Williams felt it was particularly poignant given the day's topic of diversity. During a Q&A session with the audience, Williams, who is Google's Global Diversity and Talent Programs manager, asked both men if they thought their interruptions were a sign of the unconscious bias they themselves had been talking about. "Given that unconscious bias research tells us that women are interrupted a lot more than men, I'm wondering if you are aware that you have interrupted Megan many more times," she asked, which immediately prompted a round of cheers and applause from the packed room. Aaaaaand BOOM GOES THE DYNAMITE.
57 notes · View notes
Quote
I knew I needed to provide abortions when I realized that there were people who would not be able to access abortion care if I didn't. As providers, we are the links between the abstract right to abortion and the reality of being able to actually have one.
Real-life superhero Dr. Cheryl Chastine, on the importance of her work providing abortion services at the South Wind Women's Center in Wichita, Kansas (at no small risk to her own safety).
291 notes · View notes
Link
[CN: Class warfare; poverty; addiction] Bryce Covert and Josh Israel review "What 7 States Discovered After Spending More Than $1 Million Drug Testing Welfare Recipients." If you guessed "absolutely nothing except wasting money and increasing stigma around both welfare and drug use," give yourself a gold star!
2 notes · View notes
Link
[TW Disablism, misogyny, VAW] This is a great post that brings some much needed awareness to the sad but predominate social valuation of animals over people (especially those people who are part of marginalized groups). This is something that always really irritates me, and we see it reenacted across a wide spectrum of media. It calls to mind a scene from the movie "Seven Psychopaths" -- a very odd film not without its problems, but at times stunningly self-aware and powerfully satirical -- wherein one of the characters notes the Hollywood truism that "you can never let the animals die in a movie - only the women." My partner and I always cite this quote whenever the occasion calls for it. Perhaps that line should be amended to include other marginalized populations, as well.
0 notes
Link
"Staples Threatens to Fire Staff for Working More Than 25 Hours a Week: In 2015, an Affordable Care Act provision requiring large employers to offer health insurance to staff working more than 30 hours a week kicked into effect. Now, some part-time staff at Staples say management has become extra vigilant about limiting their hours." GO AWAY STAPLES YOU ARE JUST TERRIBLE
3 notes · View notes
Link
"We treat kids who bring some Jif peanut butter in their sandwich for lunch like terrorists who just tried to sneak a dirty bomb onto campus, but in 19 states we’re willing out of ‘balance’ to create a public health hazard because it would hurt the feelings of anti-vax parents to tell them to their faces that their beliefs are stupid and not worth putting the larger population at risk."
^ ^ ^ This right here.
People who refuse to vaccinate their children (other than those who are too young, or immunocompromised, or allergic to an ingredient therein) put others at an absolutely unjustifiable risk of extremely dangerous and highly preventable diseases.
I would be very surprised if, following the scrutiny of the Disneyland measles outbreak, we don’t start seeing civil lawsuits popping up around the country in an attempt to hold these people responsible for the destructive results of their awful choices. Goodness knows I have thought of many ways to do so, and there are lawyers much more talented than I who have undoubtedly devised even more brilliant ways to prove liability in these circumstances.
People within the anti-vaxx movement construct numerous false (or at the very least, fallacious) narratives in an attempt to justify their position. For instance, they claim that it’s their “right” not to vaccinate their children and the “government” can’t force them to do it. They forget, however, that although — for the moment, at least — it is not a crime to deliberately place the rest of society at risk or actively endanger others due to the foreseeable results of these actions, that doesn’t mean that they are immune from being held accountable for the consequences arising from such actions.
Likewise, just because you have a “right” to believe in whatever crap you want (I.e. that vaccines cause autism, or that evolution isn’t real, or that birth control is “abortion,” or that global warning isn’t caused by human actions, or other such nonsense), that doesn’t make the truth or reality any less objective or axiomatic.
And, despite what some people many think, an uninformed and uneducated opinion without the support of any legitimate factual bases is not, actually, “just as valid” as the theories and hypotheses of informed experts and decades — if not centuries — of academic and/or scientific inquiry.
As Neil deGrasse Tyson recently said, “the good thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe in it.”
This is not about “individualism,” nor it is about “persecution.” This is about the selfish actions of an ignorant population, and the damage which flows naturally therefrom. And I, for one, am sick and tired of our collective failure to acknowledge this bullshit for what it is, and hold these people accountable for their proven harm.
26 notes · View notes
Text
NFL cheerleaders deserve basic employment rights, dammit
[TW misogyny, sexism] California state representative Lorena Gonzalez (who was a former college cheerleader at Stanford) has introduced legislation that would change the legal classification of the state's NFL cheerleaders from independent contractors to employees. This would provide them with much needed protection under state minimum wage and employment laws. A number of lawsuits have been filed against the NFL and their teams for their reprehensible treatment of cheerleaders. The most notable suit was filed last January by the Oakland Raiders' cheer team, in which the plaintiffs alleged that the Raiders paid them the equivalent of less than $5 per hour for cheering during games, practices, and required appearances at other events. The suit also asserted that the Raiders had violated overtime and other fair labor laws. Other similar lawsuits have stated that in addition to not paying these workers minimum wage, the cheerleaders were required to spend thousands of dollars of their own money on necessary job requirements, including hair, makeup, and costumes. One suit against Buffalo detailed that the cheerleaders were judged heavily on their appearance and were often subject to “jiggle tests” to make sure they met "body" requirements. Further, they were often subject to fines for failing to meet these and other requirements. It's pretty fucking outrageous to think that a bunch of corrupt billionaires consider it perfectly acceptable (and defensible) to pay women Jack-shit in exchange for grueling work and heinous discrimination. For fuck's sake, even the dude selling beer and popcorn in the stadium stands is entitled to basic employment law protections that these cheerleaders are routinely denied. And let's not forget the fact that the NFL is all too happy to welcome men with shockingly terrible histories of violence against women into their ranks and provide them with soul-crushingly large paychecks in exchange for their "services." But, you know. Priorities. Or whatever. All workers deserve fair compensation for their time and talent. Anything less is not only illegal, but morally reprehensible. Put simply, the NFL better pay up and shut up, or else they can just go fuck themselves.
7 notes · View notes
Link
Golly-gee, look at all that FREE SPEECH! I can't imagine a better way to spend one billon dollars! Unless, that is, you spent that one billion dollars lobbying to eliminate loopholes in US Law that allows corporations and other "people" to spend one billion dollars lobbying for election results. Or you know. Gold played moon mansions. Whatever.
1 note · View note
Link
“'Easy' is a word not easily spoken among the poor. Things are hard — the times are hard, the work is hard, the way is hard. 'Easy' is for uninformed explanations issued by the willfully callous and the haughtily blind."
2 notes · View notes
Text
An answer to the following: "what book have you read and most despised?"
[CN: sexual violence, violence against women, rape culture, anti-feminism] Outlander, by Diana Gabaladon. Hands down THE WORST book-reading experience of my entire life. And that is saying something, because I've also read a Clockwork Orange. A friend of mine loved this series (apparently, most people love this series, if the amazon reviews are any indication of its popularity) and she recommended it to me because "it has a strong female character in it and is like feminist and stuff." So I thought, 'sure what the heck?' and purchased the first three books. Mind you, this was during a time in my life where I felt that if I started a book or book series, I had to finish it, even if it was a miserable endeavor. The first two Outlander books broke me of this habit for good. Which, I suppose, is the only positive thing I can say about the series. Honestly, I would have to write a full dissertation in order to adequately convey all the ways in which I hated these books (which I may do someday, but today is not that day). In short, however: if I were a librarian and there was a "rape-fantasy or VAW-apologist anti-feminist fauxmance" genre, that's where I would shelve it. And, ADDED BONUS! Evidently, HBO (or STARZ or SHOWTIME or one of those indistinguishable networks) has now made a television show based on these books. I haven't seen the show, but I'd be willing to bet good money that if I did, that series would also be up there on my "most despised media" list. Runner-ups for "most despised book" include, but are not limited to: - Catch-22 by J. Heller (because it is a piece of patriarchal garbage) - Female Serial Killers by J. Vronsky (because it is so incredibly and ostentatiously anti-feminist, like whoa) - Native Son by R. Wright (because it uses violence against women as a plot device) - The Bible (because obviously)
3 notes · View notes
Text
Pro Tip
If you see a spider while you're in a public restroom (especially an occupied one in your office building), do NOT shout: "OH GOD THAT IS A BIG ONE!" immediately upon noticing it. People will think you're weird. And have digestive issues.
6 notes · View notes