Showing posts tagged feminism


Set in an alternative New York City,Born in Flames is a feminist telling of the injustices plaguing society after a socialist revolution. It goes without saying that a theoretical “post-capitalist patriarchy” is the subject of much debate among socialist feminists—the more “vulgar Marxist” of us believe that capitalism is the very foundation of oppression, but you’d be hard-pressed to find a socialist feminist proclaiming that the abolition of capitalism will be a silver bullet to end all sexism.

Of course, in Born in Flames, the “revolution” has actually changed very little in regards to the state or social order. Police still exercise an absurd amount of power, often wielding it violently, communities are still reliant on mutual aid for essential services like childcare, ghettos remain dilapidated, and meaningful work is scarce. A workfare program has been instituted to alleviate unemployment, but this triggers a macho backlash. Now, exacerbating the sexism and misogyny that pervaded pre-revolution, men are rioting, under the impression that women and minorities are taking all the “good jobs.”

Wow. Where are all the ladies?
Jon Hilbolt, lectures director for the Heritage Foundation, commenting on the fact that the audience at an event featuring Mona Charen telling them “women need feminism like a fish needs a bicycle” was “small and mostly male.” Gotta love Republican outreach to women and minorities.


Joan Crawford at her best in Possessed (Clarence Brown, 1931)

via deforest



In 1967, Kathrine Switzer was the first woman to run the Boston marathon. After realizing that a woman was running, race organizer Jock Semple went after Switzer shouting, “Get the hell out of my race and give me those numbers.” However, Switzer’s boyfriend and other male runners provided a protective shield during the entire marathon.The photographs taken of the incident made world headlines, and Kathrine later won the NYC marathon with a time of 3:07:29. [Wiki]

Awesome women in history.

She’s an inspiration. 

Kathrine Switzer was the first woman to run the Boston Marathon with an official number, which she got by applying as “K. V. Switzer”. The year before, in 1966, Bobbi Gibb was the first woman to run and complete the Boston Marathon, although she did so unofficially. And in 1967 she beat Kathrine Switzer by about an hour.

I happened to find Jock Semple’s autobiography in the thrift store one time, so I had to see what he had to say about the event. He seemed rather annoyed that after all the decades he put into being the Boston Marathon guy, way back before distance running caught on in the 1970s, this was the thing that people remember most about him. He says he was only concerned about Switzer having gotten an official number under false pretenses, especially since he was in the bus with the press who noticed her and started making comments about a woman running.

So, out of what seems to be have been his own crazy devotion to the sanctity of the Boston Marathon eligibility rules (I mean, he seems to have been nuts about this. He let another marathon send him qualifying times after his deadline back in the ’40s or something and was still upset in the ’80s that he’s pretty sure they fudged some of them), he flipped out, being a rather short-tempered sort of person. He claims to have had no problem with Gibbs’s runs, and not to have had any particular opinion on whether or not women should be able to run. Whatever rules the Boston Athletic Association decided on, he just wanted to enforce them. Or, at least that’s his story. He’s hardly an impartial source.

(Source: sabino)


Advocates of Nordic social democracy should be thrilled to discover a perk of gender-equalizing work-family reconciliation policies: they combat skeeviness.

Cockblocked by Redistribution: A Pick-up Artist in Denmark | Dissent Magazine

(Do yourself a favor and put this link somewhere you’ll remember it. Probably in the medicine cabinet. Next time you feel nauseous and angry at the world because you accidentally read something one of those Pick-up Artist people wrote, read the article to make yourself feel better about the world.)

LTMC: I liked this quote from Roosh’s book:

[Denmark] liberalized me when it came to a government taking care of its citizens….Denmark sucks balls for [sleeping with] women, but it kills the United States when it comes to having a higher standard of living.

Another one to file under the horrors of Socialism.

(via letterstomycountry)

I totally meant to blog about this article when I first read it a couple weeks ago, but I’m like the laziest blogger in the world. Apparently, Denmark is some sort of hellhole for skeevy pick-up artists. Hopefully, more of the world can follow.


The fact that unequal power relations between men and women existed even prior to the advent of capitalism, as did a discriminating sexual division of labor, does not detract from this assessment for in precapitalist Europe women’s subordination to men had been tempered by the fact that they had access to the commons and other communal assets, while in the new capitalist regime women themselves became the commons, as their work was defined as a natural resource, outside the sphere of market relations.
Caliban and the Witch - Silvia federici (via whitedenial-ontrial)

Yet when contemplating Dawkins, Harris, and the attackers of feminist atheists, it is sometimes difficult to keep the positives of Enlightenment thought in the front of my mind. For from a historical perspective, the rhetoric of these New Atheists is depressingly familiar. While they make sure to despise all religions – and credit religion, overwhelmingly, with the majority of responsibility for Bad Things, therefore letting racism, sexism, and capitalism off the hook – the heart and soul of their quest has been to convince the rest of the world that Islam is evil – a statement, they believe, they can make without otherizing the 1.6 billion Muslims in this world. As Dawkins himself put it, “Haven’t read Koran so couldn’t quote chapter & verse like I can for Bible. But often say Islam greatest force for evil today.” When others try to point out, relentlessly and tirelessly, how such rhetoric mirrors nearly to a tee the arguments employed by the imperialists of old – the civilized against the barbaric, the ignorant saved by the Enlightened, the white man’s burden par excellence – they reply that they cannot be considered racist or ethnocentric because, well – because they aren’t racist or ethnocentric. They do not believe some races are inferior, they insist – they do not think all Muslims are inherently violent, but rather that the “ideas” of “Islam” (which is also, apparently, a monolithic thing) are “evil” – and, moreover, do you really want to live in an Islamic society full of overt sexism and Bronze Age ideas, Mr. I’m So Self-Righteous About Racism?

By responding to criticism of their otherizing of Muslims by insisting on the superiority of Western civilization, the Islamaphobes of New Atheism continue the project of imperialism. Moreover, they wield the very thing New Atheists most pride themselves on – the treasured quality of being “rational” – to dismiss and belittle those in the skeptical community who call them out on their bullshit. Harris and his defenders insist that any rational reading of his words can only lead to the conclusion that he is anything but racist or Islamaphobic (a term, in fact, that Harris claims is incoherent) – and anyone coming to a different conclusion, therefore, must be motivated by either Bad Ideas, personal animus, or both. Thus blinded by the delusion and moral cowardice of “political correctness,” his critics, they argue, engage in an irrational frenzy to bring him down. They are not, in other words, good skeptics, but ideologues.

Robin Marie, “Enlightenment Reactionaries: Sexism and Racism in the Atheist Community

This is a great rundown of recent controversies among the various atheist groups on the internet recently. I don’t follow these goings-on closely, but I’ve caught some of it, and it’s just depressing reading about the amount of vile and hateful crap that gets tossed at women who try to discuss the misogyny that they encounter from fellow skeptics. I think the comparison to colonial attitudes that Robin Marie makes here is quite apt.

Also, the timing for this post seems appropriate as the anniversary of Hitchens going completely around the bend on the whole Islamophobia thing.


Today in labor history, July 28, 1869: Women shoemakers in Lynn, Massachusetts, form the Daughters of St. Crispin, demanding pay equal to that of men. It was modeled on and supported by the Knights of St. Crispin, the national shoe workers union, which went on record supporting equal pay for equal work. The Daughters of St. Crispin is recognized as the first national union of women.


Today in labor history, July 28, 1869: Women shoemakers in Lynn, Massachusetts, form the Daughters of St. Crispin, demanding pay equal to that of men. It was modeled on and supported by the Knights of St. Crispin, the national shoe workers union, which went on record supporting equal pay for equal work. The Daughters of St. Crispin is recognized as the first national union of women.

Dear Men:

If you see a debate on the place of rape jokes in comedy, and your response is to go on Twitter and make vile suggestions about how the woman in the debate ought to be raped or is too fat to have to worry about being raped or any similar comment, you should probably just erase that tweet. And then go die in a fire.









A+ commentary!


I had seen the original making the rounds. Glad to see it got a proper rebuttal.

(Source: koriko-cha)


This is just too perfect.


8,395 notes

Posted at 11:21pm
Reblogged (Photo reblogged from shannonpareil)
Tagged feminism history



everything you need to know about reddit in one picture

I guess I’m not really missing out on anything by never bothering with Reddit.

Think for a minute [of] the range of social services that the employer class would have to put into place if there hadn’t been a woman all this time at home, making sure that the next morning this person could go to the workplace restored, for another day’s work. [Imagine if] a woman had not done the washing, the cooking, [the taking] care of the kids, the consoling [of] the children and the husband; [or provided] emotional support and sexual services (which are very important part of the work expected of women). It took a long struggle for women to recognize rape in the family [and] the idea that the woman’s body is [hers].
Silvia Federici (via ninjabikeslut)