1. 123katemarie:

goodbyesweetieuntilnexttime:

xeansan:

camerongale:

drakensberg:

ttthegingerqueer:

Just filled out my health insurance forms!

yeah!!! fucking around with health insurance forms!!!!

I hate when people complain about “oh health forms are stupid they want my biological sex instead of my gender!!!!” or “they only have male or female!!!”
There’s a reason for that, you dumb fucks, and they’re referring to biological sex
Different health risks are present in different sexes, and whatever gender is in your head does not change the fact that if you were born female, you have a higher risk for certain cancers and osteoporosis, and if you were born male you have a higher risk for heart disease and often a shorter lifespan than a female.
In other words, your biological sex is an important factor in health and health insurance, and your special snowflake status doesn’t change that.

Coulda said it nicer but it’s true; it’s about health.

So true. Sex does not equal gender people need to stop getting so butt hurt about science and biology. 

*SWOOPS IN* NOW HOLD UP THERE FOR ONE HOT SECOND
As a matter of fact, not everyone is born biologically male or female! This phenomenon is known as INTERSEX.
Intersex is not a gender identity. Let’s look at the definition from the article:

Intersex is a term that relates to a range of congenital physical traits or variations that lie between ideals of male and female. Intersex people are born with physical, hormonal or genetic features that are neither wholly female nor wholly male; or a combination of female and male; or neither female nor male. 


Many forms of intersex exist; it is a spectrum or umbrella term, rather than a single category. Intersex differences may be apparent at birth. Some common intersex variations are diagnosed prenatally. Some intersex traits become apparent at puberty, or when trying to conceive, or through random chance.

I know what you’re thinking. Most people fall into one biological camp or the other - intersex differences can’t be all that common right? Well, let’s look at some numbers. Back to the article: The lowest popular estimate of intersex difference occurrence is 1 in 2,000 (.05%) of births. However, a more likely count is 1.7% - making intersex characteristics about as common as red hair.
Now, this number still sounds low, but it’s not unheard of for doctors to perform genital-altering surgeries on babies who don’t seem to quite fit into one category or the other. However, I’m not aware of any system for documenting or accurately estimating the frequency of these occurrences. This isn’t proven fact, but it’s also likely that some people who develop intersex characteristics later in life (at puberty, by random chance, or while trying to conceive) never reveal their intersex status out of shame or uncertainty and therefore remain uncounted.
Also, a point that’s non-intersex related: Gender absolutely can influence your health (for example, HIV is known to spread more easily between same-sex partners). People in the LGBTQIA+ category are also much more likely to live in a state of poverty, homelessness, or to have experienced domestic violence and abuse - all factors that have the potential to significantly impact a person’s physical and mental health.
Not to mention trans people, who may be mid-transition - a very much biological process, just as much as it is an identity one.
So, yeah, before we start using sexually violent insults to degrade those who don’t like being forced into the male/female dichotomy (from either a biological sex or gender standpoint), let’s do our research, k? :)

    123katemarie:

    goodbyesweetieuntilnexttime:

    xeansan:

    camerongale:

    drakensberg:

    ttthegingerqueer:

    Just filled out my health insurance forms!

    yeah!!! fucking around with health insurance forms!!!!

    I hate when people complain about “oh health forms are stupid they want my biological sex instead of my gender!!!!” or “they only have male or female!!!”

    There’s a reason for that, you dumb fucks, and they’re referring to biological sex

    Different health risks are present in different sexes, and whatever gender is in your head does not change the fact that if you were born female, you have a higher risk for certain cancers and osteoporosis, and if you were born male you have a higher risk for heart disease and often a shorter lifespan than a female.

    In other words, your biological sex is an important factor in health and health insurance, and your special snowflake status doesn’t change that.

    Coulda said it nicer but it’s true; it’s about health.

    So true. Sex does not equal gender people need to stop getting so butt hurt about science and biology. 

    *SWOOPS IN* NOW HOLD UP THERE FOR ONE HOT SECOND

    As a matter of fact, not everyone is born biologically male or female! This phenomenon is known as INTERSEX.

    Intersex is not a gender identity. Let’s look at the definition from the article:

    Intersex is a term that relates to a range of congenital physical traits or variations that lie between ideals of male and female. Intersex people are born with physical, hormonal or genetic features that are neither wholly female nor wholly male; or a combination of female and male; or neither female nor male. 
    Many forms of intersex exist; it is a spectrum or umbrella term, rather than a single category. Intersex differences may be apparent at birth. Some common intersex variations are diagnosed prenatally. Some intersex traits become apparent at puberty, or when trying to conceive, or through random chance.

    I know what you’re thinking. Most people fall into one biological camp or the other - intersex differences can’t be all that common right? Well, let’s look at some numbers. Back to the article: The lowest popular estimate of intersex difference occurrence is 1 in 2,000 (.05%) of births. However, a more likely count is 1.7% - making intersex characteristics about as common as red hair.

    Now, this number still sounds low, but it’s not unheard of for doctors to perform genital-altering surgeries on babies who don’t seem to quite fit into one category or the other. However, I’m not aware of any system for documenting or accurately estimating the frequency of these occurrences. This isn’t proven fact, but it’s also likely that some people who develop intersex characteristics later in life (at puberty, by random chance, or while trying to conceive) never reveal their intersex status out of shame or uncertainty and therefore remain uncounted.

    Also, a point that’s non-intersex related: Gender absolutely can influence your health (for example, HIV is known to spread more easily between same-sex partners). People in the LGBTQIA+ category are also much more likely to live in a state of poverty, homelessness, or to have experienced domestic violence and abuse - all factors that have the potential to significantly impact a person’s physical and mental health.

    Not to mention trans people, who may be mid-transition - a very much biological process, just as much as it is an identity one.

    So, yeah, before we start using sexually violent insults to degrade those who don’t like being forced into the male/female dichotomy (from either a biological sex or gender standpoint), let’s do our research, k? :)

    Reblogged from: actualmenacebuckybarnes
  2. klotzblog:

Important!  (I’m using it for my creative writing right now)

    klotzblog:

    Important!  (I’m using it for my creative writing right now)

    Reblogged from: hella-bara
  3. medicine:

    A collection of academic articles examining colonization’s role in erecting a gender system that futher legitimizes whiteness and capitalism at the expense of nonwhite people and our cultures

    Colonialism, Two-Spirit Identity, and the Logistics of White Supremacy

    Binarism: Myths and Reality, a great piece on binarism’s relationship with colonialism and white nonbinary trivialization of the concept

    On Nonbinary ”Invisibility”, a piece on white nonbinary appeals to being visible to power at the expense of genders that are specific to Indigenous and/or People of Color

    Black Sexual Politics: African Americans, Gender, and the New Racism by Patricia Hill Collins

    If you have more resources on the topic, feel free to reblog and add more!

    Reblogged from: apfelgranate
  4. feministcaptainmorgan:

    Very informative. 

    Reblogged from: missinterpretations
  5. This one time I was Milan and I’m literally around multi-millionaires and billionaires at this dinner and Dita Von Teese gets on stage and she gets buck naked and she spins around in a big martini glass and everyone clapped for her. And it’s bullshit. It’s not fair that it’s OK for her to do it because she doing it for rich white people but you know I was in like, the hood, and I did what I had to do to survive… and I constantly get ridiculed.

    - Amber Rose 

    Curve Magazine Interview “The Real Amber Rose” (2011)

    I love Amber Rose don’t care who knows

    (via blackamazon)

    Reblogged from: feminishblog
  6. grrrlfever:

A page from issue #2 of grrrlfever zine, downloadable (for free) here.

    grrrlfever:

    A page from issue #2 of grrrlfever zine, downloadable (for free) here.

    Reblogged from: feminishblog
  7. feminishblog:

    Please understand when someone says you have privilege - whether it be because of your race, gender, etc., understand they are not saying they claim to know you and understand your life. They are not saying you have lived an easy life. They are not saying you were born with a silver spoon or found one along the way.

    What they are saying is that you were born with something, something that others were not. You were born with an advantage that for the time being, is still inherent and institutionalized.

    What they are saying is listen, because as a result of that privilege, there are some things you can’t learn unless you do exactly that - listen.

    So I implore you: Open you eyes. Close your mouth. Fill your ears, and consequentially, your heart and mind.

    Reblogged from: feminishblog
  8. As I anticipated, the majority of the victims were female. There’s also his mother, and still one other unidentified victim, from the sounds of it?

    There is a clear root cause of all these male spree-killings. It isn’t mental illness nor gun violence (ultimately that’s a major problem which exacerbates an already bad situation, but it isn’t the reason). These men all display very similar characteristics of anxious masculinity and massive male entitlement; they just take it to the furthest end of the spectrum we see displayed by men throughout our society. We are raising these men; these men are part of our society. Whilst their acts are monstrous, they themselves are not monsters.

    All the shooters in these spree-killings are male and almost all of them are white (in the US, anyway; it varies in other parts of the world dependent on ethnic makeup). They have similar personality types: men who have been taught since birth that they’re worth more than other people by virtue of gender, race, sexual orientation etc but have poor social skills. They don’t get the pussy they’re ‘owed’ the job they’re ‘owed’, the attention they’re ‘owed’. Sometimes, that intense sense of entitlement and anger are further displayed in their choice of victims. Some kill indiscriminately, but a lot specifically target women and girls. That’s not a coincidence. And yet the media either a) never notices or b) if they do notice, they don’t report on it. I watched several docos on the Amish school shooting and not a single one of them mentioned the very obvious fact that the shooter separated the boys and girls and then shot only the girls.

    People fumble around asking “why? why?” and the answer is right in front of our faces and is thoroughly tied up in masculinity and the way we are raising our boys to see themselves as worth more than other people, and to deny the humanity of women and children in particular. This is a spectrum, and domestic abusers/killers are enacting the same exact thing, just in a different way. Family annihilators are a particularly obvious parallel; they take out their ex and kids in one fell swoop because he sees them as extensions of himself that he has a right to control and kill at will, rather than people in their own right. The whole thing is just disgusting, and I’m so tired of this happening repeatedly with a whole bunch of “Why?” questions raised, and then things like mental illness or video games get scapegoated. There are many pieces to the puzzle, of course. But the reason some men do this is not ‘because video games’, or ‘because mental illness’. It is ‘because toxic masculinity’ and ‘because male entitlement’.

    Reblogged from: feminishblog
  9. If a woman writes about herself, she’s a narcissist. If a man does the same, he’s describing the human condition.
    Reblogged from: feminishblog
  10. bookshop:

(You guys, not even joking, this is the BEST INTERVIEW EVER <3)
Dad Cracks Zelda Game, Turns Daughter Into Hero
When Mike Hoye set out to make the game Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker more gender-friendly for his 3-year-old daughter (she pronounces it gender “fwee”), he was doing it primarily out of parental love. But when the former system administrator released a crack for the game that reverses the genders of the characters—making Link the heroine and Zelda the guy she rescues—he struck a chord with gamers across the Internet. 
Since Hoye wasn’t about to teach his daughter that she couldn’t be the hero in her own story unless she related to a man, he devised a special crack to reverse all the gender pronouns and other references to Link’s gender in the story. Once the crack was done—he told the Dot it took only “a few days of work, spread out over a couple of weeks”—he shared the results.
“As you might imagine I’m not having my daughter growing up thinking girls don’t get to be the hero and rescue their little brothers,” he blogged on Wednesday. Hoye also made sure that the references matched up tonally, too: When one commenter suggested Hoye replace “lad” with “gal,” he responded succinctly, “‘Gal’ is not something you call the resurrected Hero Of Time.”
Daily Dot: Based on the response from readers, would you consider turning this into a project for more than just games for your daughter? Obviously you’ve highlighted a huge and basic gender inequality issue at work.

I’d certainly consider it. The approach I’ve taken isn’t particularly user-friendly, though, and I don’t know how it could be made much more user-friendly without getting hung up on some of the sharp, rusty edges of modern copyright laws. If this turns into a thing that other people start doing, though, and if the “small patch to the dialog” route I’m taking seems to work for whatever community emerges, then I’d love to contribute to and support that effort.

DD: There’s so much tension right now in the gaming community over issues of sexism that it seems like such a project could be a really touchy subject.

It’s only a touchy subject with people who think the status quo is OK. And since those people are clearly, obviously wrong, I’m not all that worried about whether or not they’re comfortable with it.

Read more from the most awesome dad on the planet at the Daily Dot!

    bookshop:

    (You guys, not even joking, this is the BEST INTERVIEW EVER <3)

    Dad Cracks Zelda Game, Turns Daughter Into Hero

    When Mike Hoye set out to make the game Legend of ZeldaThe Wind Waker more gender-friendly for his 3-year-old daughter (she pronounces it gender “fwee”), he was doing it primarily out of parental love. But when the former system administrator released a crack for the game that reverses the genders of the characters—making Link the heroine and Zelda the guy she rescues—he struck a chord with gamers across the Internet. 

    Since Hoye wasn’t about to teach his daughter that she couldn’t be the hero in her own story unless she related to a man, he devised a special crack to reverse all the gender pronouns and other references to Link’s gender in the story. Once the crack was done—he told the Dot it took only “a few days of work, spread out over a couple of weeks”—he shared the results.

    “As you might imagine I’m not having my daughter growing up thinking girls don’t get to be the hero and rescue their little brothers,” he blogged on Wednesday. Hoye also made sure that the references matched up tonally, too: When one commenter suggested Hoye replace “lad” with “gal,” he responded succinctly, “‘Gal’ is not something you call the resurrected Hero Of Time.”

    Daily Dot: Based on the response from readers, would you consider turning this into a project for more than just games for your daughter? Obviously you’ve highlighted a huge and basic gender inequality issue at work.

    I’d certainly consider it. The approach I’ve taken isn’t particularly user-friendly, though, and I don’t know how it could be made much more user-friendly without getting hung up on some of the sharp, rusty edges of modern copyright laws. If this turns into a thing that other people start doing, though, and if the “small patch to the dialog” route I’m taking seems to work for whatever community emerges, then I’d love to contribute to and support that effort.

    DD: There’s so much tension right now in the gaming community over issues of sexism that it seems like such a project could be a really touchy subject.

    It’s only a touchy subject with people who think the status quo is OK. And since those people are clearly, obviously wrong, I’m not all that worried about whether or not they’re comfortable with it.

    Read more from the most awesome dad on the planet at the Daily Dot!

    Reblogged from: brumous
  11. visveryextraordinary:

    North Carolina’s novel effort to compensate people who were sterilized under a widespread and decades-long eugenics program that stretched into the 1970s all but died in the State Senate on Wednesday.

    Despite backing from Gov. Bev Perdue and the State House of Representatives, a compensation package that would have given victims up to $50,000 each was not included in the Senate’s budget.

    “I think there’s a very strong message from the Senate they’re not prepared to take it up this year,” said Thom Tillis, a Republican and speaker of the House, who supported paying victims.

    Lawmakers will vote on the final $20.2 billion budget later this week and then send it to the governor, but it is unlikely that any last-minute changes will include the eugenics bill.

    Victims and supporters, who had hoped North Carolina would be the first of 32 states that practiced eugenics to pay victims, were angry.

    “I am just overwhelmed that their mentality is still the same as the politicians who supported eugenics in the first place,” said Elaine Riddick, who was sterilized at 14 after having a baby fathered by a neighbor. “You have done messed up people for life, and this is what you do?”

    The state said that Ms. Riddick was “feebleminded” and potentially promiscuous. So her grandmother, who was illiterate and who feared Ms. Riddick would be sent to an orphanage, signed the consent form with an X.

    Ms. Riddick, who now lives in Atlanta, took a case against the state to the United States Supreme Court in the ‘70s, but it declined to hear her appeal. She is now working with a lawyer representing a group of victims from other states to consider a class-action suit.

    Certainly, fiscal concerns were a factor in the Senate’s decision. If all of the 1,350 to 1,800 living victims came forward, the state could have been liable for about $90 million. But the actual cost was expected to be much less. So far, only 146 living victims have been verified, and an additional 200 requests were pending. The House bill included $11 million for the program.

    Still, some senators argued that paying victims of what had been a legal program could lead to paying descendants of slaves or American Indians.

    “If we do something like this, you open up the door to other things the state did in its history,” Senator Chris Carney, a Republican, told The Mooresville Tribune. “And some, I’m sure you’d agree, are worse than this.”

    North Carolina began sterilizing men and women in 1929 after social workers, county health departments and eventually a state board deemed them too poor, mentally disabled or otherwise unfit to raise children. The 7,600 victims of the program, which was dissolved in 1977, were largely women and disproportionately members of minorities.

    Bolded emphasis mine.

    So… basically, you’re saying that you’re afraid of people pointing out all the shitty things that you and your ilk have done and demanding accountability?

    Charming.

    —Vee

    Reblogged from: safespacenetwork
  12. from minuiko

  13. sarahmac1987:

    Yes, this is a post about language. No, it is not in fact a post telling people how to use language. IDGAF which words other trans people use to describe themselves.

    Still, this terminology sucks:

    MTF and FTM are frequently used to describe trans women and trans men (and generally excludes non-binary trans people, or places them into one of these categories whether or not these categories fit). However, these descriptions are inaccurate and misleading. They don’t describe gender or sex. In truth, they describe a process as perceived from an external position: By an outside observer.

    These terms mean “cis male to trans female” and “cis female to trans male.” That is, what a trans person’s body appears to be defines who they are, and internal subjective realities are denied as invalid or at least invisible and not present until transition begins.

    These labels categorize trans people as not having true categories (sex or gender).

    They actually do multiple things:

    They reify trans people as really a wo/man. MALE to female, FEMALE to male. The sex that does not accurately describe trans people is the prominent word. This is actually misgendering. It primes the pump for perceiving trans people as really being their coercively assigned sex at birth (CASAB).

    They place trans people outside gender - ungendering entirely. MTF and FTM describe processes that trans people undergo, but are used to describe the people who undergo those processes. This places trans people outside of any valid category, always and forever in a between state, where the destination is always an aspiration, but never an eventuality. Even after 23 years I am still described as MTF even though it cannot possibly describe the reality I live, and I have already undergone processes the acronym describes.

    Thus trans people end up with Schrödinger’s sex, except that no matter what, no matter how many times anyone looks, the next person will take that opportunity to decide if you really get to count as your actual gender or if you’re redefined into a position that has no stability, and no definition, just a process, a trip between two points that never ever ever reaches its conclusion. Or redefined back to their perception of the starting point, that your reality is actually that of a cis person with the same CASAB, and that the transition itself has no validity. Or more likely, a combination of all of these things at once.

    And this is why I loathe these acronyms, especially when used to describe people.

    -by Anonymous

    Reblogged from: fuckyeahsexeducation
  14. marsdash:

    Sassy Androgyne Friend: Educating People…

    keepingitconceptual:

    dumbthingsstraightpeoplesay:

    I’ve received so many messages about this recently so I thought I’d make a post about it instead of answering each one privately.

    Each one of us has the right to set our own boundaries when it comes to educating. This, I believe, is…

  15. …the data from a study of faculty at the University of California are telling. Female faculty with children report working fifty-one hours a week at their jobs and another fifty-one hours a week doing housework and childcare—truly the second shift. That’s a 102-hour work-week, accounting for more than fourteen hours a day. Add to this eight hours per day for sleeping, an hour for eating and basic hygiene, and by my calculations that leaves these women the grand total of twenty-six minutes a day for themselves. Faculty fathers, by contrast, put in only thirty-two unpaid work hours a week. This substantially lighter load not only enables them to put in an extra five hours a week at work, but to also enjoy a spare /two hours a day/ to spend doing—well, who knows—while faculty mothers continue to launder, cook, test spelling, wash grubby faces, and read bedtime stories. Behind every great academic man there is a woman, but behind every great academic woman is an unpeeled potato and a child who needs some attention. And women who climb the academic ladder don’t just forfeit their leisure. They are much less likely to be married with children than male faculty (41 versus 69 percent, respectively) and, poignantly, twice as likely once in their postreproductive years to say that they would have liked more children. Put simply, the same career entails greater sacrifices for her than for him. So when a female academic who would like to have more than a few minutes for herself every day, as well as a family, jumps off the academic ladder and into a more flexible but dead-end second-tier research position, is it because she’s intrinsically less interested in a demanding academic career or because there are only twenty-four hours in a day?
    Cordelia Fine, Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference (via bkwrmballerina)
    Reblogged from: socio-logic
Next

Sine Qua Non

Paper theme built by Thomas