Vulgar Displays of Power

Coercive rape

fuckingrapeculture:

There seems to be little information out there on coercive rape, and that is troubling because it is extremely prevalent. What is even more troubling is the lack of recognition coercion gets because it doesn’t fit an idealized rape script, and is often dismissed as merely “bad sex”, which it’s not. 

In order to understand it, lets define rape first. 

Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse, which is initiated by one or more persons against another person without that person’s consent.

Consent is not just about saying yes, or a lack of a clear no. Consent only counts if it is enthusiastic, given by someone who is able to consent (sober) and was not obtained by coercion. Consent can also always be revoked. 

This means that if your partner has not created a safe environment for you to say no, the consent was not given freely. 

Coercion is simply anything a person does to make it harder for their partner to say no. 

Some of the examples are :

Guilting (saying you owe them sex because they did something, such as pay for dinner)

Threatening body language

Nagging - Continually asking for sex after you have already said no

Verbally threatening

Manipulation 

Blackmail

The list goes on. 

 

(via saucy-mermaid)

Yay! Let's do it! YAY!

knowledgeequalsblackpower:

posttragicmulatto:

sodcalm-getangry:

jcoleknowsbest:

native-detroiter:

headturnmeon:

empressmo:

thetruestofsays:

Can anyone say bullshit

I knew this long time ago. Smh

Smh

but we’re just looking for racism!

Water is wet

also if the burner is on and you touch it, it will burn you. 

this just in, stores selling pre-sliced bread!

Alert! Alert! There are 7 days in a week. 

(via trotskitty)

"The irony of this case is that, in asserting statutory rape laws, Kaitlyn Hunt is being held to equal standards as anyone else would be in a heterosexual relationship. Of course, that equality is lost when it comes to marriage rights for many same sex couples across the country."

Florida Teen Arrested for Dating (via HelloGiggles)

(Source: jessiben, via sanityscraps)

"The reality is that so-called pro-life movement is not about saving babies. It’s about punishing women for having sex. That’s why they oppose birth control. That’s why they want to ban abortion even though doing so will simply drive women to have dangerous back alley abortions. That’s why they want to penalize women who take public assistance and then dare to have sex, leaving an exemption for those who become pregnant from rape. It’s not about babies. If it were about babies, they would be making access to birth control widespread and free and creating a comprehensive social safety net so that no woman finds herself with a pregnancy she can’t afford. They would be raising money for research on why half of all zygotes fail to implant and working to prevent miscarriages. It’s not about babies. It’s about controlling women. It’s about making sure they have consequences for having unapproved sex."

How I Lost Faith in the “Pro-Life” Movement (via cunicular)

(Source: patheos.com, via sanityscraps)

alexandraerin:

mattbellamysfolds:

“if i’m a person of color, i’m allowed to hate white people!!!!’

“if i’m gay, i’m allowed to hate straight people!!!!”

“if i’m a woman, i’m allowed to hate men!!!”

“if i’m trans*, i’m allowed to hate cis people!!!”

The problem with this post—one of the problems with this post—is what we might call the logic of allowance. In point of fact, the reverse of those statements is true across the board.

White people are allowed to hate people of color, and we do, with wide-reaching results. Straight people are allowed to hate gay people, and they do, with wide-reaching results. Men are allowed to hate women, and they do, with wide-reaching results. Cis people are allowed to hate trans* people, and they do, with wide-reaching resutlts. These hatreds are allowed, encouraged, supported, and upheld on systemic and personal levels. 

The “reverse hatreds” being cited with such gleeful derision (this is hateful post, by the way… whether you agree with its sentiments or not, this post mocks people and kicks them when they’re down and I’m very disappointed to see a blog that I don’t think of as hateful reblogging it) aren’t actually allowed. They aren’t tolerated. They are slapped down. Just observe on Tumblr how a person of color who is not suitably deferential to white people… and this is a moving goalpost, often an invisible goalpost that is erected on the fly specifically to pounce on and victimize a particular blogger… observe how they get treated. Observe the reaction to trans* people who don’t bow to cis sensibilities.

And some might say “WELL WHAT DO YOU EXPECT WHEN YOU SAY THINGS LIKE DIE CIS SCUM OR DEMAND WHITE PEOPLE EXPLAIN WHY THEY’RE FOLLOWING YOU”, but here’s the thing: those things are reactions. And I’m sure the person who made this post and everyone who co-signs it would say “well, those reactions are just as bad as the actions they’re a response to”.

First of all, they’re not, on any level. You might believe in your heart of hearts that they’re not good, but there’s a severe imbalance of power and a resulting imbalance in effect. If a tractor trailer hauling several tons of cargo has a head-on collision with a smart car… well, we could say that they both hit each other. But that descriptor tells us nothing about the aftermath.

Or to use a better example: a pedestrian gets struck in the crosswalk by a car. Might the pedestrian have looked both ways or exercised more care to avoid the accident? Yes, possibly. But the impact of the car on the pedestrian matters more than the impact of the pedestrian on the car, a fact which is actually recognized by law.

Second… if they’re just as bad, well, then why do so many ~*good progressives*~ expend so much time and energy addressing only half of the problem? You can believe that two wrongs don’t make a right, but by addressing the second wrong, you’re implying that one wrong is just hunky-dory. And the wrong you seek to redress says a lot about the actual values that guide your hand.

You could say hate isn’t a Christian value. How about recognizing when someone is in pain and giving them balm? Is that a Christian value? Is it a Christian value to see a scream of rage and frustration and blame the person who gave vent to it?

Jesus might as well have said “I was powerless and you did not empower me, I was defenseless and you did not protect me, I was marginalized, and you did not center me.” when he spoke of physical hunger and thirst.

The hatred society directs at “the least among us” is lethal; the hatred reflected back is an embarrassing reminder of the cloud of hostility and threats society forces them to live under. That’s why we’re so uncomfortable with the latter, even as we blithely accept all but the most blatant and egregious examples of the former, and try to rationalize away or deny what we can’t ignore.

“Your pain and suffering from being marginalized and oppressed is nothing compared to my mild annoyance at your screams of rage! ONLY MY COMFORT LEVEL MATTERS!”

sanityscraps:

the-concept-specialist:

sanityscraps:

abaldwin360:

inkdefense:

pizzavanguard:

actually i have an original macbook not a macbook pro checkmate atheists 

everyone knows you can only criticize capitalism on papyrus scrolls and clay tablets

Heh … I didn’t buy any of the computers I use. They were all provided by my employer - same goes for the iPhone I have.

Checkmate conservatives.

or you could be like

you know

using your enemy’s weapons against them

so to speak

ok

1. no one said anything about atheists
2. it’s s generalized statement which as a whole sadly enough is somewhat true. People bitch about capitalism while waiting in line to get the new iphone or whatever new product is needed to be trendy. It’s trendy right now to be opposed to capitalism. 
3. I do no enjoy capitalism, I have however learnt to cope with it.
4. Just because you do not adhere to this post doesn’t mean it’s invalid.
5. How do you think it being provided by your employer doesn’t follow suit with this post?
6. Sanity Caps nice try. However just to be honest it doesn’t really matter what you use to accomplish the task, just pick the right tool for the job.

1. LOL YOU DON’T GET THE MEME
2. On the surface that may seem hypocritical, but the genius of capitalism is that it doesn’t leave people any other option. We’ve gotten to the point where no one can really survive without some kind of cell phone, so don’t say poor people can’t be poor if they have one. Hell, we’ve literally gotten to the point where we can’t even buy food without being complicit in the suffering of others. That’s fucked, and it’s thanks to capitalism.
   
   And it is not “trendy” to be opposed to capitalism. Lol wut even.
3. Good for you? What does that mean to the rest of us forced to suffer because of it?
4. This post makes no fucking sense. No, we don’t all have fancy Apple electronics. In fact, most of us are too damn poor.
5. Because they didn’t choose to have them? And it would be stupid to leave their jobs because they’re providing them with things they don’t want from Apple because you need money to survive?
6. Haha, nice try with my username. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand what I meant. We use internet platforms to spread the message that, hey, capitalism necessitates poverty, inequality, and oppression, and should really be done away with. The reason Marxism may be “trendy” right now (which I’m still laughing about) is because of our ability to spread the message faster than ever before.

(Source: freeplanetickettonorthkorea)

recall-all-republicans:

Republicans will always think welfare and food stamps are the problem because they are racist and classist.

Register and VOTE.

Get rid of as many Republicans as possible in 2014.

(Source: questionall, via abaldwin360)

(via unorthodoxhousewife)

"Princeton University psychologist Susan Fiske took brain scans of heterosexual men while they looked at sexualised images of women wearing bikinis. She found that the part of their brains that became activated was pre-motor - areas that usually light up when people anticipate using tools. The men were reacting to the images as if the women were objects they were going to act on. Particularly shocking was the discovery that the participants who scored highest on tests of hostile sexism were those most likely to deactivate the part of the brain that considers other people’s intentions (the medial prefrontal cortex) while looking at the pictures. These men were responding to images of the women as if they were non-human."

The Equality Illusion (via lesilencieux)

scary.

(via fuckyeahfeminists)

(Source: thoughtfulcynic, via howtobeacatlady)