if your boyfriend is your best friend, you’re doing it right.
if your boyfriend is your only friend, you’re doing it wrong.
This is honestly the best poster I have found in a while supporting breast cancer awareness. I am honestly so sick of seeing, “set the tatas free” and “save the boobies”. There is no reason in hell a life threatening, life ruining disease should be sexualized. “Don’t wear a bra day,” go fuck yourselves. You’re not saving a pair of tits, you’re saving the entire package: mind, body, and soul included. Women are not just a pair of breasts.
if dinosaurs are dead then explain how they cast the dinosaurs for jurassic park
Here’s something that I’ve been wondering off and on now: how we define intersectionality.
I don’t know about y’all, but the intersectionality I’m working with is the one that was developed by Kimberle Crenshaw. The basic idea is that race, gender, class, sexuality, disability, etc. intersect (hence, intersectionality) — that is, you cannot separate any of them from the others.
For instance, I am a queer Black woman. I am all of these things at the same time. I do not experience any of these in isolation. Each of these filters my experience of the others. When I experience racism, I experience it as a Black person who is both queer and a woman. When I experience sexism, I experience it as a woman who is both queer and Black. When I experience homophobia, I experience it as a queer person who is Black and a woman.
But apparently this is not the definition of intersectionality that so many White folks and men are working with online. Their definition seems to be that a person can be privileged in one area and oppressed in another. Maybe I’m not getting something really critical here, but that, to me, doesn’t seem like an intersection (I visualize it as a crossroads). To my mind’s eye, that looks more like a step ladder, where you take X amount of steps up for every privilege and Y amount of steps down for every marginalization.
For the record, I operate under the first concept of intersectionality. The second is so fucking self-evident that I don’t even need to create new vocabulary for it. But that’s that Aristotelian compulsion for classification for you, yet another instance of Whiteness dominating discourse.
It does not escape me that it is the work of a Black feminist that has been distorted this way.
Re: second concept: isn’t that just kyriarchy?
Pretty much but those who use intersectional that way I find don’t understand kyriarchy either.
In my experience (mostly with White feminists) when they hear ‘intersectional’ they seem to think of is layers on a cake, usually with one layer being the utmost important and ignoring most of the others beyond a hand wave of ‘yes, but that’s in addition to’ rather than that it affects everything. Like when they discuss the “universal girl experience” it forgets that the able middle class White cis woman experience as a child isn’t universal and changing anything changes everything. It’s treated as a layer on the side when it’s in the whole thing and just noticing there is something beyond their layer to them is ‘intersectional’ when really it’s a whitewashed treatment of kyriarchy. That’s the best metaphor I can come up with and I hope that makes sense.
(tagged: intersectional, kyriarchy, seetobetriesmetaphors, white feminism, I like the metaphor though I’m not sure it makes as much sense as in my head)
Fitz’s highly scientific way of explaining explosions.
Not a good idea to piss off medusa