deadminnie: so rad! [IMG DESCRIPTION: Black t shirt with white text: Just another Slut on Birth Control] And I’m one of those sluts who’s on birth control specifically to prevent becoming pregnant. 

deadminnie:

so rad!

[IMG DESCRIPTION: Black t shirt with white text: Just another Slut on Birth Control]

And I’m one of those sluts who’s on birth control specifically to prevent becoming pregnant. 

Tags | feminist | slut | t shirt | t-shirt |
The Untold Story of The Iroquois Influence On Early Feminists

deluxvivens:

by Sally Roesch Wagner

I had been haunted by a question to the past, a mystery of feminist history: How did the radical suffragists come to their vision, a vision not of Band-Aid reform but of a reconstituted world completely transformed?

For 20 years I had immersed myself in the writings of early United States women’s rights activists — Matilda Joslyn Gage (1826-1898), Elizabeth Cady Stanton (1815-1902), Lucretia Mott (1793-1880) — yet I could not fathom how they dared to dream their revolutionary dream. Living under the ideological hegemony of nineteenth-century United States, they had no say in government, religion, economics, or social life (“the four-fold oppression” of their lives, Gage and Stanton called it.) Whatever made them think that human harmony — based on the perfect equality of all people, with women absolute sovereigns of their lives — was an achievable goal?

Surely these white women, living under conditions of virtual slavery, did not get their vision in a vacuum. Somehow they were able to see from point A, where they stood — corseted, ornamental, legally nonpersons — to point C, the “regenerated” world Gage predicted, in which all repressive institutions would be destroyed. What was point B in their lives, the earthly alternative that drove their feminist spirit — not a utopian pipe dream but a sensible, do-able paradigm?

Then I realized I had been skimming over the source of their inspiration without noticing it. My own unconscious white supremacy had kept me from recognizing what these prototypical feminists kept insisting in their writings: They caught a glimpse of the possibility of freedom because they knew women who lived liberated lives, women who had always possessed rights beyond their wildest imagination — Iroquois women.

The more evidence I uncovered of this indelible Native American influence on the vision of early United States feminists, the more certain I became that this story must be told.

Read More

(Source: feminist.com)

Tags | feminist | feminism |
Hoodie Sale! You can get any of my designs on a hoodie… and this weekend only use promo code BUNNY5 to save 20%! The Lightning Edge shop P.S. Any reblogging is appreciated. 

Hoodie Sale!

You can get any of my designs on a hoodie…

and this weekend only use promo code BUNNY5 to save 20%!

The Lightning Edge shop

P.S. Any reblogging is appreciated. 

Did you know I have a little feminist-inspired t-shirt store? Get any of the designs on any of the available apparel. Mix -n- match to your heart’s content.  All at skreened.com/lightningedge! skreened.com/lightningedge

Did you know I have a little feminist-inspired t-shirt store?

Get any of the designs on any of the available apparel. Mix -n- match to your heart’s content. 

All at skreened.com/lightningedge!


skreened.com/lightningedge

"Most preadolescent girls are excellent company because they are interested in everything — sports, nature, people, music, and books. Almost all of the heroines of girls’ literature come from this age group — Anne of Green Gables, Heidi, Pippi Longstocking, and Caddie Woodlawn. Girls this age bake pies, solve mysteries, and go on quests."
—

Mary Pipher, Reviving Ophelia (via girlthatread)

I have this book reserved at the library.

(Source: readreadrose)

what does the feminist emphasis on getting into upper rings of power *really* mean when control of distribution happens on a local level?

I have thoughts on this, but need to get some sleep & later in the day my ADHD gets amplified so I probably won’t articulate them as well as I’d like. 

  • Seeing women  in positions of power enables more women (and girls!) to envision themselves in those positions and to strive towards them as realistic goals. This applies to seeing more people of color in positions of power, more LGBT*Q people, etc. also. 
  • Women in positions of power tend to have a ‘trickle down’ effect (probably not the best term) - in business it can mean more women-friendly policies (i.e. maternity leave and/or paternity leave), in politics more women-friendly legislation (or lately I’d settle for less anti-woman legislation), etc. Ideally it wouldn’t be so cis-centric, either - we’d have more inclusive policies in general. Clearly we have a ways to go there.
  • ‘Normalizing’ women in positions of leadership & power can have a positive effect on how society at large views women. If we always saw a fairly equal representation of women as CEOs or Senators or small business owners or athletes or whatever, we (as a society) would start to treat them more like people, and less like the exceptions to their male counterparts. (Again this also applies to people of color, LGBT*Q people, etc.).
  • I’ve read arguments that womens’ leadership styles are different than mens’ - and that womens’ styles are better because: it’s more collaborative or more team oriented or less risky or any variety of stereotypes. I don’t buy that this isn’t LARGELY how both men and women are conditioned to interact with people their entire lives. I think in a more egalitarian society we’d find that these various styles are present in all kinds of people. (For example, my instinct as a leader is kind of towards dictatorship - if I tell you to do something just do it. But because that’s not really acceptable - nor actually effective in long-term leadership in most situations - I change my style quite a bit.) BUT there IS value in working with various styles of leadership. 
  • More women in those top leadership positions should lead to more women in the ‘lower’ & more local leadership positions. (In relation to my first 2 points). 

(Source: muchomegamountains)

Someone on STFU, Pro-Life (or maybe it was STFU Conservatives?) was looking for an “I’m Pro-Choice and I Vote” shirt and couldn’t find one. So I made one. And thought some of my followers might also be interested. Available at http://skreened.com/lightningedge (in a variety of colors & styles)

Someone on STFU, Pro-Life (or maybe it was STFU Conservatives?) was looking for an “I’m Pro-Choice and I Vote” shirt and couldn’t find one.

So I made one. And thought some of my followers might also be interested.

Available at http://skreened.com/lightningedge (in a variety of colors & styles)

thenewwomensmovement:

I just watched this documentary, ORGASM Inc.- Strange Science of Female Pleasure, on Netflix instant play, and it is absolutely worth watching!

“In the shocking and hilarious documentary ORGASM INC., filmmaker Liz Canner takes a job editing erotic videos for a drug trial for a pharmaceutical company. Her employer is developing what they hope will be the first Viagra drug for women that wins FDA approval to treat a new disease: Female Sexual Dysfunction (FSD). Liz gains permission to film the company for her own documentary. Initially, she plans to create a movie about science and pleasure but she soon begins to suspect that her employer, along with a cadre of other medical companies, might be trying to take advantage of women (and potentially endanger their health) in pursuit of billion dollar profits. ORGASM INC. is a powerful look inside the medical industry and the marketing campaigns that are literally and figuratively reshaping our everyday lives around health, illness, desire — and that ultimate moment: orgasm.

Upbeat, engaging, enlightening, and provocative, 
ORGASM INC. will change the way you think about sex.”

For more information on this documentary about Female Sexual Dysfunction, Sex Education, and avoiding predatory pharmaceutical companies visit ORGASM Inc.

Just added to my instant queue

sexism in classical music

everydayfeminism:

I just got back from a chamber music competition (my quartet got an honorable mention, yay!) and while I was there, I had a conversation with a mentor/friend who is a grad student in a music school.

He was just talking about the pressure of doing auditions for orchestras (big ones, like the Cleveland Orchestra and Philadelphia Orchestra) and how blind they are. The judges sit behind a partition and—here’s the relevant part, in case you were wondering—the players walk on a carpet when they enter the stage, so the judges don’t know their gender from their gait or shoes.

First of all, if this is a huge problem, I would personally refrain from wearing heels if it gave away my gender and thus put me at a disadvantage.

But I was just surprised that it is such a problem. How does one’s gender affect one’s playing? Especially for music, you don’t have to be particularly manly or strong (or any of those stereotypical masculine things) to be good. I mean, I’m glad they do the whole carpet thing but who would have known it’s so necessary? I have noticed though, that as a young player, a lot of my fellow musicians are girls. I guess it’s considered a girly thing. But in the professional world, so many big names (Hefeitz, Perlman, Casals, Yo-Yo Ma, etc) are guys. I’m generalizing of course, but maybe there’s a trend?

Anyway, I don’t know how many of you are into classical music and the likes (it’d be really cool if you are! Come talk to me and we can be best friends!) but I could totally connect this to pop culture and today’s entertainment industry too…

So while reading Mozart in the Jungle I came across some information about this. I don’t actually have the book, so I can’t cite specifics or even quote directly (it was a library read). But basically when orchestras went to blind auditions, the number of women who won orchestra jobs went up by a huge amount - I think it was an increase of 4 or 5x. That’s huge. And the thing is, even judges who didn’t think they had a bias against women clearly did if the change was that drastic. 

"Despite many an ardent attempt on the part of some to convince the world we are post-feminism, we still live in a society that is overwhelmingly patriarchal and male-favoring. And while men are still in control — only 12 Fortune 500 Companies are currently run by women and women make up only about 17 percent of the United States Congress — it’s clear that we need to do something to counteract this reality and work towards a world of gender equality. This is where women’s colleges come in. Women’s colleges prioritize the education of strong, motivated women and encourage them to be the leaders of tomorrow. While it’s true that successful, powerful women do (obviously) graduate from co-ed universities as well, that goal is not prioritized or promoted in the same way at those institutions. And sometimes, female students have the potential to be leaders, to achieve great things, but need an extra push. The effect of attending a school that constantly holds up this standard for its students should not be underestimated — in fact, its effectiveness is reflected in the statistics of women’s college graduates."
—

On Attending A Women-Only College - The Frisky (via thefrisky)

Every time I see something extolling the virtues of single-sex education I look for any discussion of the class privilege that most people attending these institutions enjoy. Not because I want to be all “it’s not great!” but because I know there’s a link to someone class & how far they can typically succeed in life (in the traditional sense of the word). 

Theme created by: Roy David Farber. Based on concepts from: Hunson's Black and Blue Eyes theme. Powered By: Tumblr.
1 of 6