#sexist turkish men | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

mariacallous · 2 years

Text

THE AUTOCRAT’S PLAYBOOK

Authoritarian leaders and illiberal democrats have responded to the threat of women’s political mobilization by reversing progress on gender equality and women’s rights. Their motivation is not all strategic—many probably believe in sexist ideas—but their worldview is self-serving.

In fully authoritarian states, the mechanisms of sexist repression can be uncompromising and brutal. Often, they take the form of policies that exert direct state control over women’s reproduction, including through forced pregnancies or forced abortions, misogynistic rhetoric that normalizes or even encourages violence against women, and laws and practices that reduce or eliminate women’s representation in government and discourage women from entering or advancing in the workforce.

In China, for instance, Xi has launched a population suppression campaign against the Uyghurs and other ethnic and rural minorities, forcing birth control, abortions, and even sterilization on many women. Women from ethnic minorities now face the threat of fines or imprisonment for having what Beijing considers too many children. In Egypt, state control over women’s reproduction is harnessed to the opposite effect: abortion is illegal in any and all circumstances, and women must seek a judge’s permission to divorce, whereas men have no such requirement. In Russia, where abortion has been legal under any circumstance since 1920, Putin’s government has attempted to reverse the country’s declining population by discouraging abortions and reinforcing “traditional” values. In all three countries, despite nominal constitutional commitments to protect women against gender discrimination, women are dismally underrepresented in the workforce and in powerful official roles.

In less autocratic settings, where overtly sexist policies cannot simply be decreed, authoritarian-leaning leaders and their political parties use sexist rhetoric to whip up popular support for their regressive agendas, often cloaking them in the garb of populism. In doing so, they promote misogynistic narratives of traditionalist “patriotic femininity.” The scholar Nitasha Kaul has described these leaders as pushing “anxious and insecure nationalisms” that punish and dehumanize feminists. Where they can, they pursue policies that assert greater state control over women’s bodies, while reducing support for political and economic gender equality. They encourage—and often legislate—the subjugation of women, demanding that men and women conform to traditional gender roles out of patriotic duty. They also co-opt and distort concepts such as equity and empowerment to their own ends. Although such efforts to reassert a gender hierarchy look different in different right-wing settings and cultures, they share a common tactic: to make the subjugation of women look desirable, even aspirational, not only for men but also for conservative women.

One way that autocratic and illiberal leaders make a gender hierarchy palatable to women is by politicizing the “traditional family,” which becomes a euphemism for tying women’s value and worth to childbearing, parenting, and homemaking in a nuclear household—and rolling back their claims to public power. Female bodies become targets of social control for male lawmakers, who invoke the ideal of feminine purity and call on mothers, daughters, and wives to reproduce an idealized version of the nation. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has argued that women are not equal to men and that their prescribed role in society is motherhood and housekeeping. He has called women who pursue careers over motherhood “half persons.” Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government has similarly encouraged women to stop trying to close the pay gap and focus instead on producing Hungarian children.

Across the full range of authoritarian and semiauthoritarian regimes, sexual and gender minorities are often targeted for abuse, as well. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people are seen as undermining the binary gender hierarchy celebrated by many authoritarians. As a result, they are frequently marginalized and stigmatized through homophobic policies: Poland’s “LGBT-free zones,” for instance, or Russia’s bans on “LGBTQ propaganda” and same-sex marriage. Beijing recently went as far as banning men from appearing “too effeminate” on television and social media in a campaign to enforce China’s “revolutionary culture.”

Despite their flagrant misogyny—and, in some cases, because of it—some authoritarians and would-be authoritarians succeed in enlisting women as key players in their political movements. They display their wives and daughters prominently in the domestic sphere and sometimes in official positions to obscure gender unequal policies. Valorizing traditional motherhood, conservative women often play supporting roles to the masculine stars of the show. There is perhaps no better illustration of this dynamic than the dueling women’s movements that supported and opposed Jair Bolsonaro’s 2018 presidential campaign in Brazil. Bolsonaro’s opponents organized one of the largest women-led protests in the country’s history under the banner of Ele Não, or “Not Him.” His female supporters swathed themselves in the Brazilian flag and derided feminism as “sexist.”

In the patriarchal authoritarian’s view, men are not real men unless they have control over the women in their lives. Trump’s masculine authority was therefore heightened when his wife, Melania Trump, walked behind him onto Air Force One, and it was challenged when she refused to appear with him in public. Sara Duterte-Carpio, the mayor of Davao City, in the Philippines, and a daughter of President Rodrigo Duterte, was a front-runner to succeed her father until he announced that women are “not fit” to be president. Despite the country’s history of female heads of state and Duterte-Carpio’s leading poll numbers, she dutifully filed her candidacy for vice president instead.

Fully free, politically active women are a threat to authoritarian leaders.

While women are pigeonholed into traditionally feminized roles, patriarchal authoritarian leaders trumpet their power with gratuitous displays of masculinity. Putin posing topless is the viral version of this public peacocking, but casual misogyny, carefully staged photo ops, and boastful, hypermasculine rhetoric also fit the bill. Think of Trump’s oversize red tie, aggressive handshake, and claims that his nuclear button was bigger than Kim’s—or Bolsonaro’s call for Brazilians to face COVID-19 “like a man.” This kind of talk may seem ridiculous, but it is part of a more insidious rhetorical repertoire that feminizes opponents, then projects hypermasculinity by criticizing women’s appearance, joking about rape, threatening sexual violence, and seeking to control women’s bodies, all in order to silence critics of patriarchal authoritarianism.

The counterpart to this violent rhetoric is paternalistic misogyny. As Kaul writes, “While Trump, Bolsonaro, and Duterte have most explicitly sexualized and objectified women, projecting themselves as profusely virile and predatory, [Indian Prime Minister Narendra] Modi and Erdogan have promoted themselves as protective, and occasionally, even renunciatory, father figures . . . to keep women and minorities in their place. . . . [They] are at times deeply and overtly misogynist, and yet at other times use progressive gender talk to promote regressive gender agendas.”

As tolerance for misogyny in general increases, other shifts in the political and legal landscape occur: protections for survivors of rape and domestic violence are rolled back, sentences for such crimes are loosened, evidentiary requirements for charging perpetrators are made more stringent, and women are left with fewer tools with which to defend their bodily and political autonomy. For instance, in 2017, Putin signed a law that decriminalized some forms of domestic abuse, despite concerns that Russia has long faced an epidemic of domestic violence. On the campaign trail in 2016, Trump famously minimized a video that surfaced of him bragging about sexual assault, dismissing it as “locker room talk,” despite the fact that numerous women had accused him of sexual assault and misconduct. Once Trump became president, his administration directed the Department of Education to reform Title IX regulations to give more rights to those accused of sexual assault on college campuses.

Finally, many autocrats and would-be autocrats promote a narrative of masculine victimhood designed to gin up popular concern about how men and boys are faring. Invariably, men are portrayed as “losing out” to women and other groups championed by progressives, despite their continued advantages in a male-dominated gender hierarchy. In 2019, for instance, Russia’s Ministry of Justice claimed that reports of domestic violence were overstated in the country and that Russian men faced greater “discrimination” than women in abuse claims. In a similar vein, aspiring autocrats often maintain that masculinity is under threat. Among Trump supporters in the United States, such claims have become commonplace. For instance, Senator Josh Hawley, a Republican from Missouri, recently blamed leftist movements for redefining traditional masculinity as toxic and called for reviving “a strong and healthy manhood in America.” Representative Madison Cawthorn, a Republican from North Carolina, echoed Hawley’s sentiments in a viral speech in which he complained that American society aims to “de-masculate” men and encourages parents to raise “monsters.”

Revenge of the Patriarchs

65 notes · View notes

audreygcblog · 2 years

Text

The Lady versus the Man

Pope makes love to Lady Mary Montagu, 1852. Print from oil on canvas original at Auckland City Art Gallery

Who was Lady Mary Wortley Montagu?

After reading Lady Mary Wortley Montagu's Turkish Letters in class, I had to know more about this woman who traveled and published her writing despite the negative bias against women participating in what they considered a man's area of expertise. She was born in 1689 and was the daughter of the 5th Earl of Kingston and Lady Mary Fielding (a cousin of the novelist Henry Fielding). Throughout her adult life in 1700s Europe, she was known as a traveler, essayist, poet, feminist, and, by her male colleagues, an eccentric. She was a highly intelligent woman who had not only widely read literature to her name but also was known for her work in the medical field. Her fascination with smallpox derived from the unfortunate marring of her beauty by the disease. While in Turkey, she discovered the Turkish practice of inoculation and brought it back to Europe. Unfortunately, her work on inoculations was stolen by men who worked in the medical field in England. Montagu's battle with the men in her line of work was nothing new. Her ideas about women and medical knowledge made her an object of ridicule by the men who felt threatened by her. From her worst enemies to her closest friends, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu's progressive ideas had her society turning against her.

The Frenemy

One of the most notable rivalries between Montagu and one of her male contemporaries is her rivalry with her friend, Alexander Pope. Pope and Montagu met while she was traveling with her husband who was a member of Parliament. Later on, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, Alexander Pope, and John Gay became friends and shared their works with one another. Unsurprisingly, Pope was enthralled by Montagu's intelligence and witty personality. While traveling he wrote letters to her, hoping they could meet up. However, Montagu was not as interested in him as he was in her. It was even rumored that when Alexander Pope confessed his love to her, she laughed at the absurdity of the confession. It's clear that this rejection was a blow to the ego of Pope. Afterward, Pope went on to mock her writings on feminism and her progressive ideas in his satirical works. The piece most obviously addressed towards her is in Pope's most famous work, Dunciad, where he describes her as a prostitute that is made fun of for her feministic ideals. Although she wrote poetic responses to his criticisms, Montagu quickly abandoned their poetic warfare. Montagu saw how Pope was enjoying her responses as if they were simply a form of entertainment, and Montagu was not going to give him the satisfaction of thinking he got under her skin. Instead, she let him continue to make a fool of himself. His bitter and sexist writing would, later on, show modern audiences how petty and hurt he was when he did not get his way with Montagu.

The Opponent

Alexander Pope was not the only well-known writer that had beef with Lady Mary Wortley Montagu. Johnathan Swift, the satirist best known for Gulliver's Travels and "A Modest Proposal", wrote his poem "The Lady's Dressing Room" in 1732. "The Lady's Dressing Room" follows a man entering a woman's dressing room without permission. He then proceeds to discover all of her hygiene and grooming products, along with her dirty laundry and area for relieving herself. At the end of the poem, he concludes that women are disgusting and are simply lying to men when they dress themselves up and put on make-up. Montagu took to the pen and called Swift out for his sexism and misogyny in her poem "The Reasons that Induced Dr. S. to Write a Poem Call'd the Lady's Dressing Room". The poem describes the protagonist called the Doctor, referring to Swift, and his attempts to woo a prostitute named Betty. When he fails to enamor her, he angrily blames her for his sexual failures and vows to write "The Lady's Dressing Room" about her. To which she wittily replies, "I'm glad you'll write. / You'll furnish paper when I shite," referring to the male speaker's disgusted reaction to discovering the lady in the dressing room defecated like a human being. Montagu's poem addresses the ridiculousness of Swift's misogyny and observes why he reacts with such an absurd attack on the female gender.

Fragile Masculinity

Both Pope Alexander Pope's and Johnathan Swift's misogynistic writings stemmed from one thing in common: rejection. It is a common consensus that Pope's sudden switch from being close friends with Montagu to being one of her biggest critics is due to his bruised ego after being rejected by her.

For Johnathan Swift, Montagu straight-up calls him out for attacking women because of feeling emasculated after being rejected. Montagu is open about the Doctor in "The Reasons that Induced Dr. S. to Write a Poem Call'd the Lady's Dressing Room" being Swift. After the Doctor can't perform in bed, he tries to blame his failures in his sexual life on Betty. After vowing to write "The Lady's Dressing Room", it is clear to the audience that this is Montagu's way of accusing Swift's misogynistic writing of being a response to rejection from a woman.

Although Alexander Pope and Johnathan Swift continued on to be celebrated writers, Montagu's critiques on their sexist ideas and writings would become important works of literature that helped further the feminist movement. Without her observations on the toxic masculine ideas that flourished in her society, other women may not have been able to deduce the roots of the sexism in their societies.

Conclusion

In both instances, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu was able to point out the direct cause of Alexander Pope's and Johnathan Swift's fits of rage against the female gender. It makes me wonder how many male writers and artists included sexist and misogynistic rhetoric without being corrected by anyone. Without women like Montagu, perhaps we would not have come as far as we have in addressing such issues as misogyny and sexism in literature and other writings today.

#Spotify

3 notes · View notes

laniaakea · 8 months

Text

Even though my assigned gender is female i think sometimes i might be a bit sexist?

Like i was lucky enough to grow up in such a privileged way that i've barely experienced sexism, and i don't notice when it happens to me or to others.

Like i don't have that kind of instinctual understanding of women's issues that most people do. I remember when i was younger my father told me that if someone tries to hurt me i should kick them in the balls and run. And i ask him "what if it's a woman". I guess i never lived with that kind of fear.

I should work on that because just because i don't take sexist comments to heart, it's a very serious issue that makes many people feel rightfully scared to death, and men still kill women just because they cheated and think it's normal. so what the fuck, what on earth has brought me to distance myself so much from a social issue that clearly concerns me?

There are often some relatively, weird, creepy or slightly repulsive people that try to hit on me like on train rides, and i humor them because i am so bored and starved for human interaction with no strings attached.

I've had:

chinese guy who showed me how crazy it is that you can just google porn in europe,

Girl form congo whose austrian boyfriend's grandmother admitted to her to doing acts of terrorism in south tyrol during the seventies (she was actually very cool i was just shocked cause my family was kinda on the receiving end of the terrorist attacks),

guy who tried to convince me to buy into his pyramid scheme for edible toothpaste pills,

very dumb american soldier, fan of andrew tate and proud of his german heritage, who i accidentally brought to the conclusion that capitalism might not always be the best thing (he caught himself, and said: wait, don't get me wrong, i love capitalism),

literal austian neo-nazi 1 (more sexist),

literal austrian neo-nazi 2 (more xenophobic),

a turkish guy who tried to convince me to drop out of school and make money off air bnb like he did, ("i'm self made" entrepreneur attitude) when i pointed out that i need an apartment to do that, he just ignored me,

South tyrolean guy who tried to set me up with his son,

German guy who used to work for renowned german food production industry giant, trying to set me up with one of his two sons, telling me how many houses they got in munich and that one of them has a phd in physics. hes wife is an architect tho and her work seemed really cool tho

the funniest thing is that these people don't know i'm a lesbian

0 notes

dumbbitchfrommars · 11 months

Text

Not long until we board our final flight. I feel so gross and haven’t showed in two days… two days have never been so hectic and sweaty and gross. 11 HOURS! Such a huge flight. We really did it and it wasn’t even that bad. Soon I’ll be in Greece and living my mamma Mia, donna dreams. Ugh. Nothing is coming out right.

It feels so strange to journal when I’m surrounded by people. I feel their energy like it’s my own. Everyone’s a little anxious to get boarded already, but the flight isn’t due to leave until 4! I guess that is soon.

It’s been a long time since I’ve seen a dog. It’s weird, I’m used to seeing them everywhere in Adelaide/Australia. I have seen one since leaving. To be fair we have only been inside the airport. But in Singapore! No dogs to be seen. Devil sent. I do not want to return to Singapore. Pretty sure they were racially profiling me the minute I touched down.

It’s funny to see how the veil of privilege is being lifted when I continuously get singled out by security. Now you get to see what it’s like for us, all the time. I only snapped once and i was very sleep deprived too. Good job me! But they do deserve your anger.

What else is new? Turkish boys are actually very very handsome. But they also seem mean. I can’t know without knowing their culture. Are they sexist? Misogynist? Or is it that they’re racist? Or maybe they don’t like tattoos… or piercings. Maybe it’s my style thats not boring enough or ladylike or just not like them, and they prefer to stick to the norm. Maybe they can sense my inherent dominant/powerful energy, and prefer submissive (subservient) women.

There are so many reasons someone might not like me, and yet I still find ways to turn it into my fault. It’s really not important to pay so much attention to what others think of me. Particularly men. I will spend my lifetime trying to eradicate my need for male validation.

I wish I didn’t have to make everything about gender and sex… but it’s how the world was built. It’s literally my job to analyse the system so I can save myself from falling victim to it.

I knew I wanted to have a lil journal moment but I didn’t think it would turn down this road. I guess it makes sense, all I’ve done since leaving Adelaide has been gawking at every semi attractive man I see, which is pretty often. Can I get my head out of the gutter already?! Eek. Where does a girl draw the line?

Anyway. Everyone’s already lining up to board this flight when they haven’t even begun announcing sections yet. What’s the rush?!

On my last point. I have been thinking a little too much about this… worrying my pretty little head. In mamma Mia she was like me, very open hearted and ready to take the dive with someone, even if that someone she’d only met that day. But at the same time, her best friend was like me, in that she showed a directness and desire to men she found attractive. But in a way it rubs me the wrong way? Is it my own internalised expectations that it’s “less than” or “less respectable” for a woman to behave in that way… when men do it and I accept and support it and actually prefer it ?! Why is there a double standard… but also it’s a nice feeling to have the gender divide with certain courting traditions, to keep things interesting. THERES NO WINNING!!!!

I think I need to sit my ass down and live in the moment and appreciate these moments instead of criticising myself for being human. I’m 22 and horny, yes I’m gonna lust after a man from time to time. Here and there… falling for a split second when we meet eyes… every other man I see! Lol. Look, I love that about me. I love people. I appreciate everything about everyone.

On that note… there’s a tatted man around my age about to get on this flight with us to Athens! Cherry was right when she said I see tats and instantly fall in love. It doesn’t take much. And that is something I am working on! This note is proof of that work! I’m trying my best here.

The funny thing is (to the universe), when I finally do let go of this obsessive need to be seen by men, and start seeing myself, that’s when it’ll fall into place

0 notes

unsharpened-dagger · 4 years

Text

Me when I hear a dumb fuck relative of mine speaking about how it's okay for men to have more than one wife and that women shouldn't aspire greater goals and should naturally be prepared to be a subservient housewife and that motherhood should be the only important thing to them AND that it's the woman's fault if she gets assaulted because she was with a man alone at night and wore sinful clothing:

#I legit hate almost all of my relatives #especially the female ones that think this way #the only time i speak to them is on special events but nothing else #they never had the chance to be independent so now they go and be like this #not just them #Turkish society in general is very sexist towards both men and women #🖕🏻

5 notes · View notes

crazyaboutto · 3 years

Text

Why Istanbul Convention is must have in Turkey

Oh hey it’s me, once again talking about Istanbul Convention! Why? Because 1) I’m Turkish woman 2) I’m a decent human being that can’t turn blind eye to something that’s against human rights

They withdrew from Istanbul Convention because it’s against family and religious values. Again FUCK THEM!

Do you want to know what the political leaders of the government party says about women? Some of them got replaced in recent years but the thoughts are still same.

Here are the original and translations:

“I already don’t believe in women-men equality. The violence against women is exaggerated” - President

“If the mother is raped, what’s the crime of the child? Let the mother die!”

“The unemployment rate is high because women are looking for jobs.” - Minister of finance

“The woman must be chaste, mustn’t laugh in the crowd.” - Vice president

“Aren’t the jobs at home enough for ladies?” - Minister of forestry and water affairs

Side note: Here “jobs” is used for “chores at home” such as ironing, cooking, taking care of child etc

Also normally, “bayan” is used for “woman” when you address to someone such as in letters etc. however, It’s sexist to use it when you refer someone’s gender because these men use “woman” as “girl who lost her virginity”. Basically they Act as if “woman” is something to be ashamed of.

“The rapist is more innocent than a woman who has abortion.”

“The one who gets raped should bear the child. If necessary, the government will take care of the child.” - Former minister of Health

“Mothers shouldn’t put any career but motherhood career in their center.” - Former minister of health

“When girls get education, men can’t find girl to marry.”

The ideology of men who run the country is this!

Now Istanbul Convention is out of the way! What do you think will happen to Turkish women now?

Help us to spread awareness about Istanbul Convention!

How to help:

Make Istanbul Convention or Istanbul Sözleşmesi trend on tumblr so we can get mass attention

Go to Twitter and use #istanbulsozlesmesiyasatir in tweets so it can be trending worldwide

Sign the petition in the notes

#istanbul convention #istanbul sözleşmesi #human rights #women's rights #women rights #feminism #femicide #turkey #türkiye #sexism

320 notes · View notes

indiasreviews · 3 years

Text

Is Frankenstein frankly pretty sexist?

Reading time: 2 mins

What is the first thing that comes to mind when you think of Frankenstein? Is it the monster? The mad scientist? The desire for knowledge? Or is it the clear misogyny throughout the novel?

Like all works of literature, Frankenstein is a product of its time. The nineteenth century was one of immense gender inequality and it is no surprise that Shelley’s novel offers very few rights for the women within it. The two main female protagonists in the novel are perfect examples of the ideals of femininity that existed at the time. For example, Caroline is presented as a woman who is seen as incapable of looking after herself, and because of this, requires the protection of a man… *rolls eyes*. Her character acts as a reflection of the position of women within a patriarchal society such as the nineteenth century.

The dependency that women were expected to have on men is shown when Victor states that his father ‘strove to shelter’ his mother. Victor goes on to describe his mother, Caroline, as a ‘fair exotic’, as though she is this fragile and vulnerable flower that relies on the male gardeners care and attention for survival. Oh please.

Not only does this show the almost sub-human status of women during the nineteenth century as she has been compared to an inanimate object, but also explores the archaic values of the time.

Mellor argues that in Frankenstein, ‘women are relegated to the private or domestic sphere’ and the word ‘relegated’ is a very relevant term here. Like your favourite sports team, women’s positions in society is one that is inferior and lower than their male counterparts. The best example of a domesticated woman is Victor’s love interest, Elizabeth Lavenza, who writes in a letter that ‘the blue lake and snow-clad mountains – they never change’. Shelley uses the monotonous scene in Elizabeth’s proximity as a way of criticising the tedious and repetitive lifestyle that women were subjected and expected to lead. The prejudice against women is further shown via Victor referring to Elizabeth as his ‘pretty present’.

So why does Victor expect his fiancé to appear under the Christmas tree?

Well, it has a lot to do with the old-fashioned view that women were seen as the property of their husbands. And like all great misogynists, Victor views her as an object that belongs to him. However, his possession over Elizabeth doesn’t end here. He notes that he ‘looked upon Elizabeth as mine – mine to protect, love and cherish’. Alexander asserts that in Shelley’s time, the ‘ideal woman is a subjugated woman’, one that is submissive and conforms to the outdated stereotypes. Blah blah blah.

I don’t know if you’ve noticed but almost all of the women in Frankenstein die.

Why is that you ask? It might be because their deaths happen to contribute to the storyline, or it might be because Frankenstein is inherently sexist. If we agree that Frankenstein is a reflection of the society it is set in, then it is unsurprising that none of the female characters survive. In other words, this isn’t a coincidence….

Caroline = dies.

Justine = executed.

The creature’s female companion = ripped apart and destroyed by Victor.

Elizabeth = murdered.

So, what does this say about femininity?

More specifically, what does it say about English femininity?

As the only women who survive Shelley’s brutal killing spree are Safie and Agatha. It is important to note that neither of them are English – Safie is Turkish and Agatha is German.

By showing the other female character’s passivity, Shelley simultaneously critiques stereotypes imposed on women within the English society that she herself was subjected to.

#frankenstein #maryshelley #womeninliterature #victor #fairexotic #elizabethlavenza #victorfrankenstein #caroline frankenstein #femininity

3 notes · View notes

alatismeni-theitsa · 4 years

Note

A while back, I was doing some research on Empress Zoe and found out that a professor from Turkey called her a prostitute. I’m just really confused as to why because Zoe has never been one before, nor has she been particularly promiscuous. Do you think he called her that because of nationalistic reasons or was he just being sexist or was it some other reason? I think I’m late to the party but I still wanna know.

I read about her whole life in order to answer this question and DAMN it would be a great movie! She had three marriages (the two first arranged by the males in her family and the third by herself). I understand how the Turkish professor took that (bc she officially slept with three men). However I find it funny how he judged Zoe even though in the Ottoman empire the mothers of the Sultans were, for a long time, victims of human trafficking and sex slaves. Yes they only had sex with the current Sultans but this is STILL a bad scenario.

#empress zoe #answered

6 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 2 years

Text

Revenge of the Patriarchs

11 notes · View notes

still-a-thot · 5 years

Text

tumblr: "cishet white men are racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic shitheads! all of them! kill them all!"

my reasonably diverse friend group: *makes jokes concerning racism, sexism, and homophobic*

my only cishet white male friend: *dying from caffeine overdose also is the only one not making these jokes because it's just me, The Big Gay™, making jokes about homophobia, my ex-muslim turkish friend making islamaphobic jokes, my female friend picking the iron when playing monopoly bc "I know my place", etc.*

tumblr actin' like the diversity cast isn't out here being the biggest bigots ever to flex on each other

#discourse #maybe #idk #eggplant salads #lmao

2 notes · View notes

panegyricwilliwaw · 5 years

Text

The Battle of Dover liveblog (part 4)

[fic by @werewolves-are-real ]

The disbelief of the English aviators is lovely! How many dragons do you have?!? You want to swim in the habor?!? Why are you jumping off the back of a dragon?!?

Hornblower, that’s a nice historical reference right there

“ ‘As much as a feral will take orders, anyway’ ” & “ ‘Though it is a bit windy’ ” -- you are not helping Tharkay

“...the admirality, who are startled but pleased to realize Laurence is not, in fact, a madman” LOL

“If these men cannont conceive of the idea, he will not point out that Peura’s first-mate is also a woman.” -- Look at your character growth Laurence, you are much less sexist than you were at the beginning!

“ ‘I do some work for the government on occasion,’ says Tharkay. The answer seems deliberately vague.” & “ ‘Oh, good,’ Tharkay says. ‘So he will have a chance to shoot me after all; I may have upset the Turkish Sultan,’ he clarifies.” -- Tharkay, you are a master of understatement

“He’s not sure why the admirals look so pained” & “Laurence suspects this may have something to do with the ferals among his company...” -- oh Laurence

Divine Judgement -- nice name, maybe a bit of foreshadowing for the slave trade? ;) right there with the mysterious and vague letter

the Imperial Family is watching them with great interest, and ironically apparently approves of privateering more than service in the military

Ahh the mistaken for Napoleon bit makes a return in the sequal :)

New recruits! And Laurence is still surprised by his reputation lol

“ ‘Is this normal, then?’ Granby asks. ‘Ships and dragons just appear to volunteer for you?’ Laurence chooses not to respond.” -- Granby asking the important questions, and joining up with them!

“And, he consoles himself, their next few months ought to be perfectly quiet. Surely the admiralty’s simple task will not prove difficult.” -- And now you’ve just jinxed yourself Laurence. Did you not listen to Nunes say you find trouble just be breathing?!

#pan reads fanfic #temeraire #@werewolves-are-real

4 notes · View notes

bomberqueen17 · 6 years

Text

csevet replied to your post “subversivegrrl replied to your post: ...”

YOU DO

i DO. I tried to borrow it from the library and they didn’t have it. It was going to be the next thing I bought but then T. Kingfisher’s Clocktaur War was partly on sale and I couldn’t resist. (It was so good! but doesn’t really lend itself to fanfic. It wasn’t worldbuilding-y so much as a real good character study.) So I have to come down from the ridiculous reading binge that caused, and get myself to a point where I’m Ready to Read another book, which sounds crazy but I seriously get Altered if I really read books too much. It’s. It’s silly.

(if I read it this week I’d be at the farm anyway so it’s not like i’d be missing out on writing time by binge-reading. hmmmmmmm.) (OH RHINEBECK IS THIS WEEKEND by the way! I assume it is too far for you and you are not going so I will pet a sheep for you but if you ARE going then let me know! My sisters and mom and the Farmkid are going on the Sunday so I don’t know how that’s going to be.)

walburgablack reblogged your post and added:

Right, yes, so.[shey] in Bengali is essentially he/she, except it doesn’t denote gender, so “she ate an apple” would be “shey apple/apel khelo” which is also perfectly accurately translatable as “he ate an apple”. It isn’t “they”, which is [tara]. Sanskrit-derived languages don’t really *have* gendered pronouns, but several of the others have gendered verbs, so that balances out. Bengali… doesn’t. I am desperate to write a queer novel in Bengali but alas my grasp of my own mother-tongue is not that strong. I blame the education-system, but mostly myself..

So the gendered verbs... are conjugated in a way that makes the gender of the person doing them explicit? So like, there’d be a verb conjugation that specifically means “she ran” vs “he ran”? I guess I get that.

I know Turkish doesn’t have gendered pronouns because of Google Translate’s horrible revelations about how its AI translates them automatically in really sexist ways into English. Machine learning, bruh, laying all your shit bare... So I guess i just hadn’t thought about it except in that one specifically awful context.

When I was in high school I desperately wanted to learn every language. I was going to, I had so many dreams of it. And it turns out my memory is fucking awful, so I took three whole years of Japanese and had forgotten until this moment that I don’t even think that language has pronouns the way English does, let alone gendered ones-- the nouns don’t have genders either, and degrees of formality are encoded within the verb conjugations, which sounds really complicated but is genuinely so simple and easy to hear, very intuitive. And a number of the verb conjugations are just-- only men can use them, women would never be so coarse. It’s not even quite... that cut and dried, but it is, and I don’t remember it well enough to speak intelligently about it at all, because I don’t really have a brain cut out for mastery of any subject at all... Everything about Japanese was so easy to learn and so sensible, except the goddamn writing system-- they have two perfectly easy-to-use phonetic writing systems that they barely use, and then Chinese characters my tiny mind is too tiny to memorize in any useful quantity.

Anyway. I love the idea of a queer novel in Bengali, and I am so heartbroken at the idea of not being fluent enough in one’s mother-tongue to write it-- understand I’m coming from a place of only having the one language that I know well enough to do anything, and I felt so stupid while traveling, I was the only monolingual person I met. But one of the people I met traveling was Nepali, and he said, sort of wryly, that his only language of complete fluency was English. He’d attended English schools from such a young age that he had never fully learned his own native tongue, and while he could have a conversation in it, he couldn’t conduct complicated affairs. He now lived in Germany, with a German fiancée, and conducted most of his daily business in German, but if it was a really important conversation, he had to ask her to speak English, because his German isn’t totally fluent either (and when she got emotional she’d speak too fast for him to understand, and he wouldn’t be able to answer).

#csevet #walburgablack #language fluency #linguistics i guess #by the way i've been keeping a tally #and my name is unpronounceable in literally every language i've encountered #so there's that #my parents did not raise me to be a traveler #it's the initial combination of consonants i think #and the vowels are honestly pretty hostile to most other languages' speakers #but those consonants #nope

8 notes · View notes

fangirlinglikeabus · 2 years

Text

season 5 in my read through of every who novelisation in television order!

doctor who and the tomb of the cybermen by gerry davis this is probably the best of the davis novelisations i’ve read so far - there just feels like there’s a great attention to detail and prose here. it also does nothing to resolve the very obvious racism of the original. in fact, it has the same ‘describing the character played by a black man as a giant’ and various other things that seem to establish toberman as different/alien to other humans, although he’s now apparently turkish, and at least they don’t have the physical gags about the doctor cowering away from him as he would one of the show’s monsters, anymore. kaftan is also now explicitly arab (she gets described as such), so take that utilisation of the scary foreigners trope how you will. as a result, i can’t really recommend this wholeheartedly, but i will tell you some things i liked. there’s lines like ‘the archaeologists had momentarily forgotten the dead man. it interfered with their work’, the doctor speaking ‘in that bright irritating voice that adults use to settle children’s quarrels’ which i love. we get some nice referrals back to jamie and victoria’s cultural contexts, including victoria thinking about her father. there are bass-reliefs of various invasions in the tomb, and the tenth planet cybermen are apparently a particular dynasty, which i thought was interesting. we learn that the professor knew one of the men who died as a ‘promising young student’ which is a nice touch of poignancy, and there’s a sombreness to the ending that feels like More than on screen. victoria ‘had been very struck by kaftan’s great beauty and self-assurance’ which i’m going to wilfully interpret as supporting my lesbian victoria agenda. on the other hand, i do think some of the attempts to look into klieg’s head and give him doubts feel at odds with the ‘ranting madman’ characterisation, which weakened them for me. general changes: we get a very different opening scene, cybermen are THREE METRES TALL (i doubt that’s conveyed on screen), the doctor looks up the cybermat in his alphabetically arranged diary (who journals like that??), this book takes place in an alternate reality where victoria has fair and jamie red hair.

doctor who and the abominable snowmen by terrance dicks after having Too Much to say about the last one i think i might end up saying Too Little about this one. the number of novelisations i’ve read has given me some appreciation for ones which aren’t particularly special or different from the source but remain competent and engaging, and that’s a category this falls into. as per a lot of these novelisations there’s a bit more violence than usual (the captured yeti’s escape involves blood and explicit deaths); dicks adjusts a few of the special effects (robotic yeti have teeth and snouts, whereas the real yeti looks materially different from them); some parts are cut or altered (jamie doesn’t refuse to change into warmer clothing but does consider scottish mountains superior, the doctor now actively courts his idea about the yeti rather than running away from him when he says he has one); we get some insights into what characters are thinking and how they feel about each other. i hate the ‘it was in the nature of females to be contrary’ line - i know jamie’s from the 18th century but what with the war games too i can’t help but feel dicks likes giving him sexist lines. the narration refers to tibetan food as ‘strange’ and jamie and victoria are wary of it, which i’m aware might tow too close to ‘haha weird asian food’ comments for some people’s comfort. the food machine’s back, and doesn’t just produce weird blocks this time but actual food! the jewel in the lotus prayer (also seen in planet of the spiders, btw) is not something i recall from the original, but equally could be there and i’ve just forgotten - either way i’m glad dr who has an example of it where it’s not being used by villains, but is rather a source of beauty and a way to hold off mind control from the great intelligence.

doctor who and the ice warriors by brian hayles again, fairly straightforward stuff. some things are curtailed (not so many ‘tardis landing’ shenanigans, penley’s journey with jamie isn’t detailed), some things are expanded on (for instance, we learn about scavenger shanty towns and garrett and penley were apparently good friends before he left, the frequency the doctor attacks the ice warriors with is apparently used in martian prisons), some things are changed (dr no longer refers to himself as a genius - i think that’s this one? - instead of the conversation about the women’s short skirts jamie and victoria mess about with a high-tech massage chair). i appreciated the ‘oh no, not africa!’ thing is qualified as ‘we’ll be away from the tardis’ but the line does mistakenly refer to the ‘country’. clent’s walking stick not being mentioned is frustrating because it’s erasing a televised instance of disability; victoria being described as ‘doll-like’ is weird and there’s one passing female character who’s just referred to as ‘an attractive girl’, which i found annoying, but other than that the book’s fine on that front. the doctor sometimes sounds more like jon pertwee when hayles throws a few ‘old chap’s in there. heads up for a bit more violence than on screen, including a brief description of how badly storr’s arm is actually injured. overall, if you read this one go ahead. it’s a good novel, but like a lot of those written in the seventies it’s mainly there to provide an alternative to an audience who couldn’t re-view a story, rather than to expand what we saw on screen.

doctor who and the enemy of the world by ian marter i feel really mean for this because there’s nothing technically wrong with this novelisation, and ian marter’s a good writer, but now that the aired story actually exists out there in the world i don’t think this is actually...worth it? unless you’re really desperate to learn the full names of several supporting characters. most of the changes are stuff that’s cut to fit in to a <130 page novelisation - so the beach scenes are shorter, for instance, the chef has fewer scenes, the scene on the helicopter is shorter, and (most tragically for me) victoria no longer tries to elbow slam ‘salamander’. on the other hand (and i may be wrong here, i’ve thought stuff is additional material that’s turned out to be on tv before) i don’t remember her THROWING A SOUP TUREEN AT THE GUARDS SO HARD THAT IT KNOCKS ONE OF THEM UNCONSCIOUS. moving on to other topics: astrid’s dad was killed by salamander, we’re told that the central european zone authority hq used to be tisza palace, i’m like 90% sure that jamie represents victoria as his girlfriend to salamander on tv whereas here he says ‘a friend of mine’ instead, it apparently takes place around new years’ because there’s celebrations that leave the building where they meet fariah mostly empty, the cliffhanger stuff is resolved before it actually BECOMES a cliffhanger but marter gets some nice slightly surreal stuff about the effect of the time vortex on humans with the tardis doors open. as per with these novelisations, it’s more violent than on tv (my notes inform me that kent might have caught on fire?); not as per, benik calls someone a bastard! i’m sure that caused some pearl clutching in 1981. as a last note, this is at least the second novelisation that establishes victoria as wearing victorian clothes at the start, something that she literally does not do on tv after her very first moments in the tardis. what’s going on dudes!

doctor who and the web of fear by terrance dicks fun fact if you at all care about me or my life, this was the first dr who book i ever read and my first exposure to this particular serial (and maybe classic who as a whole? i’m not 100% sure, it’s been over a decade). anyway, bogstandard dicks stuff, we get some nice insights into characters, how they think and how they think about others (for example, jamie grouping trains and spaceships in the same category). given that this is related to a previous story, we also have moments where he recaps the plot of the abominable snowmen for us. mr silverstein has his name changed to mr julius, presumably to avoid any intimations of antisemitism which is definitely a net positive; in what i’m assuming is an attempt at a similar vein the not-yet-brigadier thinks to himself that ‘the welsh usually make such splendid soldiers’, but i don’t think that works quite so well as an apology for evans. i do like the comments about him finding reserves of courage at two points, though, because it gives him a little more depth, even if he is still the worst part of this story. however, he does still get described as reacting to the sphere ‘like a girl frightened by a mouse’ which i hate, and which brings me onto a few moments that read as sexist to me: anne is part of a long line of who women that the novelisation writers see fit to introduce as ‘an attractive young woman’ rather than actually describing her as an individual , and i strongly dislike the alteration of the line from ‘i wanted to become a scientist’ to ‘i wanted to become a scientist like my father’, it feels like she’s no longer allowed to be intelligent on her own terms as opposed to relating to a man. on the note of travers, it’s explained that he became an expert in electronics in his attempt to study the spheres, which is why he’s now well-renowned; he also came under suspicion for mr julius’s murder but anne provided an alibi and he was so obviously horrified that the police left him alone. aside from that, the most obvious addition is that colonel lethbridge-stewart and the doctor now meet ‘on screen’, as it were, and there are both comments about their future friendship in the narration and an extra line where the colonel mentions sending a memorandum to the government about an organisation that will sort out things like this in future. less significant but which i definitely picked up on: it predictably skips the enemy of the world cliffhanger, victoria is wearing very different clothing (a jacket and slacks), jamie gets emotionally attached to the yeti he controlled (he thinks it’s brave, aw), the doctor tells evans smoking is bad for him in what i’m 99% sure is a ‘terrance dicks trying to model for the kids’ addition. not so much an addition as something i find hilarious: jamie is described as ‘towering over’ the second doctor, so either terrance dicks thinks frazer hines is taller than he is or patrick troughton is significantly shorter because there’s really not that much of a height difference lol.

fury from the deep by victor pemberton ok stand by i have a lot of thoughts on this one. sorry. first of all the opening’s quite different and i love it, so much so that i almost don’t mind parts of the rest settling down into more standard novelisation form afterwards, because it sets up the atmosphere so well - it’s a minor thing but i also like the attention the writing repeatedly draws to how cold it is (the balcony floor of the harrises apartment has cracked because of it; it snows; victoria’s bundled up in wool) which i think adds to that. in terms of the opening we’ve got some minor differences - the foam fight is reconstituted, the doctor no longer explains the sonic to anyone, etc. BUT the main thing that stands out to me is that the stunning is spaced out so jamie and victoria are initially still conscious, and jamie tells victoria that he thinks the doctor’s dead. thanks buddy, as if she wasn’t having a hard enough time as it is. so now she has a solid amount of time where she thinks she’s all alone in the world and encounters the seaweed for the first time on the beach before going down herself, and like, we all know that victor pemberton is not actually going to kill off all 3 leads in the first chapter of this doctor who novelisation, but i like that he tried to convince us he would. on a lighter note, jamie is now apparently allergic to the seaweed because it makes him sneeze every time it shows up. the weed also ages people it possesses supernaturally. a few minor details reveal stuff about character relationships - and i feel the need to highlight the fact that van lutyens apparently doesn’t speak english with any trace of a dutch accent, just because it feels like a pointed jab at the one we got on tv. also his first name is pieter in case anyone cares. in contrast the chief engineer doesn’t have a name at all because everyone associates him so strongly with his job and the machinery that most of them don’t know his actual name. minor things: we’re allowed to say damn and hell now, so everyone takes advantage of that; jamie is so musically talented that he can snore a highland reel; megan jones is the daughter of a welsh miner; for some reason pemberton decides to suggest that the weed creature might have a soul so do with that what you will, spirituality wise; jamie and victoria explicitly see each other as siblings; there’s some stuff where jamie makes fun of victoria’s scream which i thought was cute (she treads on his foot in response). both ‘fury from the deep’ and the original vetoed title of ‘colony of devils’ get their titles dropped in narration, which i personally thought was neat. now for the stuff i don’t like: robson gets a fridged wife (he was driving the car in the crash that killed her) which was totally unnecessary and just kinda sat there, an uncomfortable point of misogyny ALONG WITH this book’s incredible amount of weirdness about megan jones. DID YOU KNOW ‘being put on the defensive made her look more attractive’, and ‘one could sense that she was a far more vulnerable and attractive woman than she had ever revealed before’. you wouldn’t do that for a male authority figure, stop it. also when they’re arguing harris concedes to her because apparently ‘the woman’ always uses seniority not reason to get her own way (which is kinda not true, she has logical reasons not to bomb the rigs - there are still people there!) which left a bad taste in my mouth as being at least very close to ‘ooh look at this irrational woman who can’t be relied on’. also when we get to the people in the weed, there’s this really weird line about ‘and one of them was a woman’ like ok great...why are we singling her out? describing the useless secretary of jones as ‘effete’ was also not great (i know pemberton was queer but it’s still a narrative of ‘this guy isn’t manly and he’s useless’). finally, in the scene where they’re checking the weed in the harrises apartment, it’s split into two parts: at the end of the first we have something new to the novelisation (victoria mentioning she saw the weed on the beach) but the beginning of the second feels like it was taken straight from tv without adjusting to this change and it feels slightly inconsistent. i have no idea how much this is just me seeing things. i would like to emphasise though that i did mostly enjoy this book, especially since i like victoria a lot and it had some nice insights into her and her relationship with the other two - plus, something that isn’t super common with these novelisations, it has some prose passages that i really loved and will be keeping for my little quotes blog :)

the wheel in space by terrance dicks sometimes i look up these novelisations on tardis wiki, just to check i’m not imagining if something is/isn’t an addition, and, encouragingly, for this one it just says ‘to be added’. great. look, i get that it’s hard to squeeze a 6 part story into 40, 000 words, but this really wasn’t interesting to read, for the most part - it’s another one where large portions are just dialogue, for one thing. i will admit that there are minor things i like - the description of the tardis collapsing, the description of the cyber pods as ‘like soap bubbles from the bubble pipe of a child’ effectively takes the playful and associates it with danger, jamie comparing the wheel to a spinning top, the birth metaphor for the cybermen’s emergence. my standards have been dragged down so much by these novelisations that frankly i’m grateful at least one man’s handsomeness gets commented on, and it’s not just the women who get singled out. also, i know a lot of people like the ‘logic, my dear zoe’ line but it always slightly frustrates me because she is right in this case, so i appreciated that the dr mentally admits that. there’s a neat detail where zoe stares blankly ahead of her when she reels off facts, which makes her seem like she’d been programmed and works well with what we know about the way she interacts with the world in her own time - obviously this might be something i didn’t notice in the original because it’s missing. i could rattle off a bunch of small stuff like this (i find it hilarious that the doctor knows zoe’s in the tardis because he sees her crawling in behind jamie on her hands and knees; i do legitimately think it has a better ‘cliffhanger’ than the tv version by ending with the tardis in flight, rather than just the lead-in to an evil of the daleks rerun) but like...for the most part i don’t find any part of it particularly illuminating to the original, unless you count ‘illuminating how much of the back end is just people standing around in rooms’ without the charisma of actors performing the lines. it’s not bad, but for the most part it was just there - gemma’s death especially was something i thought could’ve been done far better in prose. what we have is almost completely tensionless, cutting from her overhearing the cybermen’s plans to her calling the others immediately, without showing any uncertainty or even foreknowledge that she’ll be killed (her knowing this is only mentioned after she dies). it just doesn’t work for me on any level. uh, aside from that...jamie is shirtless for his medical examination? if you like that kind of thing, i don’t know. also, at the end jamie thinks while looking at zoe that it’s already getting harder to remember victoria’s face. not particularly notable, i just found it a bit rude.

#doctor who #classic who #second doctor #jamie mccrimmon #victoria waterfield #zoe heriot #two #laura reads dw books #target marathon #this is so long lmaooo sorry #anyway i don't know what combination of being on holiday + owning three of the novelisations + it being two stories shorter than s4 #+ not having to deal with 2 double length novelisations by a writer i don't really like #made this come out so much quicker but i'm glad it did #i've also found that listening to music while i do it's really helpful? i listen to music a lot anyway but if i put an album on and say i'm #going to read to the end of it it works wonders for my motivation

1 note · View note

cpbandr · 3 years

Text

Final Reflection

In this class, I learned the value of being an independent woman. After reading so many different stories about women in other cultures that are often forced to marry in order to be protected, and how they have to cover their beauty so they are not physically assaulted I believe no woman should be told how to dress or have their role assigned. Growing up in a free country I know that I am fortunate because I can make my own decisions and I have decided that the best way to help women stuck living with outdated cultures or governments (those that do not believe in women’s independence) is through education. A great meme in our course syllabus states, “Write what should not be forgotten.” This is true for teaching women that they deserve to live equally with men and that joining feminist movements can help in the fight for equality. We are identified based on our gender, race and so much more, but at the end of the day we all are human and for that alone we should have equal rights. Being homosexual, a different race or gender should not determine how we dress or how much we get paid, but it does in many cases. Using the media to shed light on the discrimination women face in everyday life is a most valuable way to end stereotyping. A powerful woman such as Ms. Crenshaw and Ms. Okpranta are just two women that are helping to increase change through their writing. TedTalks can help reach women that are not allowed to live freely. In order to live in a world that allows independence, the value of acceptance is another important lesson I learned this semester. When people accept who you are, you are able to express yourself freely and not feel forced into a box that society chooses for you, based on gender. I am only nineteen and have no clue who I am, yet, but I choose to live every day with an open mind allowing me to become the person I will grow into, and having the support of my family and friends is the best thing for me. After reading Three Daughters of Eve, I felt as if I understood so much about how her mom viewed religion and the struggle people face every day when their parent’s views do not align with their own. However, after doing some research through the weekly powerpoints, I was distraught to learn the author, Ms. Shafak was prosecuted for “insulting Turkishness” and would face up to three years in prison. Her book is so important in helping women understand the way gender and tradition are typically viewed by some religions or cultures, or statuses (class structure). Issues are just a few of the important themes discussed in the book. Not having literature bring to light the way things are in other countries is the way governments stop educating women on how they could live their lives. Not having writings also stops the effort that people go through in order to spark change. Women often try to break the stereotypes that culture forces them into believing. A valuable lesson Mohanty shared is that we are often blind to a perspective outside our own. This reminds me of a horse that has blinders on, stopping him from looking around at things that might cause distractions. Knowing that so many women are raised not being allowed to see life choices and opportunities is horrible. However, this brings us back to educating women through writings which can help to remove the blinders some women are forced to wear. Finally, they can see how other women are living independently and choose which way of life they really prefer. There have also been many words I have learned throughout this semester including androcentrism and ethnocentrism, but the words that taught me the biggest lesson were the difference between sex and gender. Until this semester, I had assumed that both words meant the same thing. However, I now know that sex is what you are assigned at birth while gender is how you are assigned culturally/ socially. With my generation focusing on being more “woke” I think this is a powerful thing to educate others about. Luckily with the use of gender-neutral pronouns, we are able to easily recognize how someone chooses to identify themselves rather than just assuming based on outward appearance. I have always been terrified to identify myself as a feminist due to the many men I know who would think I do not like them based on their gender. However, I was able to be educated on what the term feminist means and can confidently identify myself as one because I believe in equal rights and especially equal pay. The thought of being judged for a gender I was born with and not have any control over is sickening to think about. After searching ‘What it means to be a woman?’ I found an article that states “Being a woman means being able to be powerful and assertive, yet kind at the same time. It means being compassionate and vulnerable towards those we love in our lives without feeling weak for doing so. It means striving for our goals even in the face of the adversity we may encounter along the way.” As women, we are told to hide our emotions unless they are deemed nurturing, but for men, they are able to show their emotions and be told it's because they are “men.” I work in an athletic store and when there are sports questions by customers they typically never ask females to help them in our golf department rather, but our most qualified staffer in that department is indeed a woman. Oftentimes men would rather hear things from someone of their own gender because they feel as if we are “lacking qualification” just because we are women. Even though we all have to go through the same exact training, they prefer to hear it from a male.

A quote found in the same article mentioned above is a better representation of what it means to be a woman “To me, being a woman also means using my own privilege to support others—Black women, disabled women, and trans women—who face even more barriers than I do. I love being a woman, and I love having the privilege to fight for my right to be a woman with full control over my body, future, and life.” said Tegwyn Hughes. We have the power to control our future, our bodies, and our life based on taking a stand against things we consider sexist and by using our voices to create change and against things that are unfair. We are fortunate to be able to educate women in countries such as India whose culture believes “a woman’s sole purpose in life is to be a good wife and mother.” Nowhere in this statement does it mention that a woman’s role is to provide and have a job and live an independent life outside of the home. These women are raised this way by their mothers and the culture is causing them a lack of education so they don't ask for equal rights. Thankfully, powerful women all over the world are writing books and starting movements with other women to bring about change. As found in the ‘Radical women, embracing tradition’ one woman spoke up about how she felt about injustice happening in her country and talked about the issue with other women, “first just 10 or 20, then 50, and finally hundreds of women---- wearing white, singing, dancing, saying they were out for peace.” As a woman I know I would have the support of so many other women if I ever spoke out against feeling upset about the way I was treated. I remember being younger and thinking I wish I was a boy, it would be so much easier. Now after taking this class and learning about the movements and goals women have created to help create gender equality makes me proud to be a woman. Every day women are a force to be reckoned with, especially in sports. A woman currently in the news that has had the support of so many other women is Simon Biles. After deciding to not be in the final of the 2021 Olympics, women from around the world took to social media to stop any hate she was receiving. At first, I had no idea why they were supporting her because as many articles stated she had lost us the gold medal. However, Ms.Biles is so much more than an athlete and a medal. She is a woman who has been assaulted by her own doctor and used her voice to speak against him alongside many other girls on her team. Oftentimes, sports allow male doctors to get away with what occurs by paying off the athletes, but instead of letting that happen, the gymnasts used their collective voice to show that it is okay to speak out and stand up for themselves.

0 notes

westsemiteblues · 7 years

Link

This guy is a professor at Rutgers. This is Jasbir Puar’s coworker, BTW. Untangle the threads of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism here, I dare ya.

A Rutgers University professor has published multiple social media posts containing antisemitic canards and caricatures, including blaming the Armenian genocide on Jews, describing Judaism as “the most racist religion in the world,” and calling Israel a “terrorist country.”

As first reported by the Israellycool blog, Michael Chikindas — a microbiology professor at Rutgers’ department of food science and director of the school’s Center for Digestive Health — promoted dozens of anti-Jewish conspiracies and comments on his Facebook page this past May, among them references to “international fat Jewish pockets,” and descriptions of “orthodox Judaism” and Zionism as “the best of two forms of racism.”

In one post, Chikindas claimed, “Israel is the terrorist country aimed at genocidal extermination of the land’s native population, Palestinians,” and added: “we must not forget that the Armenian Genocide was orchestrated by the Turkish Jews who pretended to be the Turks.”

He argued that Israel was failing in this attempted “extermination” mainly “because of the number of the Jews of ‘alternative’ sexual orientation (25% of the Tel Aviv inhabitants are gay/lesbians and Israel has more of these than the Netherlands).”

In an earlier post, Chikindas wrote “that Israel, the country of the Jews and for the Jews, has one of the highest percentage of gays in the world.”

The professor also called Judaism “the most racist religion in the world” and shared an interview with Christopher Bollyn, a conspiracy theorist who has claimed American Jews and Israel orchestrated the 9/11 attacks.

Chikindas’ Facebook timeline is filled with images depicting classic antisemitic libels, including a graphicsuggesting Jews — portrayed by the Happy Merchant, a caricature of a hook-nosed Jewish male with a kippah — control the Federal Reserve, Hollywood, the “cancer industry,” “pornography,” “wars for Israel,” and “sex-trafficking,” among other things.

Another image featured the Jewish caricature — representing Israel — being carried by American soldiers and saying, “I am God’s chosen people, you filthy goyim.” A third cartoon showed a Jewish man with a large, hooked nose and a yellow “Jude” star on his suit jacket stealing money from a hungry American boy, and exclaiming, “be a patriot, goy! Somebody’s got to pay 10 billion to Israel.”

Other images depicted an Israeli flag overlaying the White House; accused Zionists of playing “the Anti-Semitism Card”; quoted former Pink Floyd bassist Roger Waters leveling charges of “apartheid” against Israel; and expressed supportfor the anti-Israel boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign.

Chikindas also published multiple posts referring to women — including Israeli Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked, Israeli Culture Minister Miri Regev, First Lady Melania Trump, and President Donald Trump’s eldest daughter Ivanka Trump — as “b**ches” and in some cases “sl*ts.”

After sharing an article claiming to expose the “global elite,” he wrote, “These jewish motherf*****s do not control me. They can go and f**k each other in their fat a***s — you see, I really do not have anything to loose (sic), hence nothing to be controlled.”

In an interview with The Algemeiner on Tuesday, Chikindas rejected accusations of antisemitism, indicating that he was once married to and had a child with a Jewish woman, and had some 25 percent Ashkenazi Jewish lineage himself.

When read comments he made about Judaism, Chikindas pointed to the Talmud — a text containing Jewish law and tradition — which he claimed features racist and supremacist passages, as well as to “extremely degrading racist messages” he said he received on YouTube from accounts with Hebrew-language handles.

These messages — written in Russian, sent from “Jews who were originally from Russia,” and containing vulgar, personal insults, according to Chikindas — were provided as further evidence of the religion’s supposed racism.

Chikindas also said that he was open to having a “civilized” discussion on these issues, and claimed that his postings did not violate any of Facebook’s policies.

Neal Buccino, a spokesperson for Rutgers, told The Algemeiner that “Professor Michael Chikindas’ comments and posts on social media are antithetical to our university’s principles and values of respect for people of all backgrounds, including, among other groups, our large and vibrant Jewish community. Such comments do not represent the position of the University.”

He added that while Rutgers respects the free speech rights of its faculty members, it also seeks to “foster an environment free from discrimination, as articulated in our policy prohibiting discrimination.”

“The university is reviewing this matter to determine if actions taken in the context of his role as a faculty member at Rutgers may have violated that policy,” Buccino added.

This is not the first time that a professor at Rutgers — New Jersey’s largest publicly-funded research university — was caught making comments that were criticized for being antisemitic.

Jasbir Puar, an associate professor of women’s and gender studies at Rutgers, has come under fire for comments she made at a 2016 faculty-sponsored event at Vassar College, where she repeated allegations that the bodies of “young Palestinian men … were mined for organs for scientific research,” according to a transcript of the talk provided by the Vassar alumni group Fairness To Israel.

She asserted at the time that Israel’s actions could be called a “genocide in slow motion,” and said, “We need [the boycotts, divestment and sanctions movement] as part of organized resistance and armed resistance in Palestine as well.”

In a 2015 essay, Puar also wrote that “Palestinian trauma is overshadowed” because “Israel in particular and Jewish populations in general have thoroughly hijacked the discourse of trauma through exceptionalizing Holocaust victimization.”

Mark G. Yudof, former president of the University of California and current chairman of the Academic Engagement Network (AEN), and Kenneth Waltzer, executive director of AEN, wrote in response to Puar’s 2016 comments, “Wild charges against Israel have often been aired on U.S. campuses over the past several years, and their moral perversity pointed out. But Ms. Puar’s calumnies reached a new low.”

“Characterizing Israel and Zionism in ways that anti-Semites formerly characterized Jews has become a stock in trade among anti-Israeli activists on college campuses,” they added.

Puar is set to publish a new book through Duke University Press next month, which argues that Israel seeks to injure and maintain “Palestinian populations as perpetually debilitated, and yet alive, in order to control them.”

The article has been updated to reflect comments by Neal Buccino, a spokesperson for Rutgers University.

#antisemitism #anti-semitism #jasbir puar #homonationalism #pinkwashing #armenian genocide #holy fuck I am so done #rutgers #michael chikindas

284 notes · View notes