The problem is that white people see racism as conscious hate, when racism is bigger than that. Racism is a complex system of social and political levers and pulleys set up generations ago to continue working on the behalf of whites at other people’s expense, whether whites know/like it or not. Racism is an insidious cultural disease. It is so insidious that it doesn’t care if you are a white person who likes black people; it’s still going to find a way to infect how you deal with people who don’t look like you. Yes, racism looks like hate, but hate is just one manifestation. Privilege is another. Access is another. Ignorance is another. Apathy is another. And so on. So while I agree with people who say no one is born racist, it remains a powerful system that we’re immediately born into. It’s like being born into air: you take it in as soon as you breathe. It’s not a cold that you can get over. There is no anti-racist certification class. It’s a set of socioeconomic traps and cultural values that are fired up every time we interact with the world. It is a thing you have to keep scooping out of the boat of your life to keep from drowning in it. I know it’s hard work, but it’s the price you pay for owning everything.
We keep coming back to the question of representation because identity is always about representation. People forget that when they wanted white women to get into the workforce because of the world war, what did they start doing? They started having a lot of commercials, a lot of movies, a lot of things that were redoing the female image, saying, ‘Hey, you can work for the war, but you can still be feminine.’ So what we see is that the mass media, film, TV, all of these things, are powerful vehicles for maintaining the kinds of systems of domination we live under, imperialism, racism, sexism etc. Often there’s a denial of this and art is presented as politically neutral, as though it is not shaped by a reality of domination.
Tina Belcher’s sexual desires are weird. They’re weird and more than a little off-putting and not meant to be particularly palatable for the average straight male viewer. And it is glorious to watch. The show makes you recognize her desires as a young woman and the possibly that other girls feel the same way. Tina’s budding sexuality might be an exaggerated view of how a lot of teenage girls feel as they grow up, but there are girls out there that relate to Tina and it’s a point of view that rarely gets told. And when it is, it’s almost always bent to fit how men want girls to express their sexuality. But Tina’s sexual desires aren’t there to titillate the audience. They’re there because they’re a part of her.
women are more likely than men to develop a mental illness but you rarely hear about women going on shooting sprees because men won’t be with us or love us or fuck us, bottom line, if you’re willing to relate mental illness and mass murder while also refusing to relate misogyny to women dying at the hands of men, then bye bye no time for you
- It’s not hard to fathom why so many men tend to assume they are great and that what they have to say is more legitimate. It starts in childhood and never ends. Parents interrupt girls twice as often and hold them to stricter politeness norms. Teachers engage boys, who correctly see disruptive speech as a marker of dominant masculinity, more often and more dynamically than girls.
- For example, male doctors invariably interrupt patients when they speak, especially female patients but patients rarely interrupt doctors in return. Unless the doctor is a woman. When that is the case, she interrupts far less and is herself interrupted more.
- This is also true of senior managers in the workplace. Male bosses are not frequently talked over or stopped by those working for them, especially if they are women; however, female bosses are routinely interrupted by their male subordinates.
- As adults, women’s speech is granted less authority. We aren’t thought of as able critics or as funny.
- Men speak more, more often, and longer than women in mixed groups (classrooms, boardrooms, legislative bodies, expert media commentary and, for obvious reasons religious institutions.)
- Indeed, in male-dominated problem solving groups including boards, committees, and legislatures, men speak 75% more than women, with negative effects on decisions reached. That’s why, as researchers summed up, “Having a seat at the table is not the same as having a voice.”
- Even in movies and television, male actors engage in more disruptive speech and garner twice as much speaking and screen time as their female peers.
- Listserve topics introduced by men have a much higher rate of response.
- On Twitter, people retweet men two times as often as women.
The best part though is that we are socialized to think women talk more. Listener bias results in most people thinking that women are hogging the floor when men are actually dominating. Linguists have concluded that much of what is popularly understood about women and men being from different planets, verbally, confuses “women’s language” with “powerless language.”
This preference for what men have to say, supported by men and women both, is a variant on “mansplaining.” The word came out of an article by writer Rebecca Solnit, who explained that the tendency some men have to grant their own speech greater import than a perfectly competent woman’s is not a universal male trait, but the “intersection between overconfidence and cluelessness where some portion of that gender gets stuck.” Solnit’s tipping point experience really did take the cake. She was talking to a man at a cocktail party when he asked her what she did. She replied that she wrote books, and she described her most recent one, River of Shadows: Eadweard Muybridge and the Technological Wild West.The man interrupted her soon after she said the word Muybridge and asked, “And have you heard about the very important Muybridge book that came out this year?” He then waxed on, based on his reading of a review of the book, not even the book itself, until finally a friend said, “That’s her book.” He ignored that friend (also a woman) and she had to say it more than three times before “he went ashen” and walked away. If you are not a woman, ask any woman you know what this is like, because it is not fun and happens to all of us.
Last week as I sat in a cafe, a man in his 60′s stopped to ask me what I was writing. I told him, a book about gender and media and he said, “I went to a conference where someone talked about that a few years ago. I read a paper about it a few years ago. Did you know that car manufacturers use slightly denigrating images of women to sell cars? I’d be happy to help you.” After I suggested, smiling cheerily, that the images were beyond denigrating and definitively injurious to women’s dignity, free speech, and parity in culture he drifted off
In the wake of Larry Summers’ “women can’t do math” controversy several years ago, scientist Ben Barres wrote publicly about his experiences, first as a woman and later in life, as a male. As a female student at MIT, Barbara Barres was told by a professor after solving a particularly difficult math problem, “Your boyfriend must have solved it for you.” When several years after, as Ben Barres, he gave a well-received scientific speech, he overhead a member of the audience say, “His work is much better than his sister’s.” Most notably, he concluded that one of the major benefits of being male was that he could now “even complete a whole sentence without being interrupted by a man.”
“Stop interrupting me.”
“I just said that.”
“No explanation needed.”
Elliot Rodger was mentally ill. He had multiple doctors and therapists. He had been on medications. He had a personality disorder of some sort and depression. Police showed up at his house to check on his welfare this year because they got a call that said he was suicidal. Rodger, however, talked himself out of getting hospitalized.
He was also a sexist misogynist mens right activist, who happened to have a lot of money. He wrote a 141 page manifesto of his life, and in much of this written document he discussed his hatred of women. He thought that women should be put in concentration camps and starved. To say the least, Rodger had very disturbed and distorted thoughts. This is a result of the rape culture that we live in.
He can both be mentally ill and be a sexist murderer.
Having a mental illness does not make him any less guilty of this horrific crime. It’s not excusing him of the crime. He was fully conscious of what he was doing. He had it all planned out. He wanted to blame women for his shortcomings. He wrote a fucking manifesto that was well over 100 pages. He wanted to kill.
I’m not even sure Wizard society as a whole see mental disorders as a health problem — they seem to act as if mental problems are a moral weakness.It does seem that way, doesn’t it? The general attitude of the Order seems to be, “Oh, there’s nothing wrong with Sirius, he’s just being a jerk.” Dumbledore’s remarks at the end about how Sirius was “too old and too clever” to be bothered by Snape’s verbal attacks comfirm that. The implication is that if Sirius didn’t behave sensibly, it was his own damn fault. But I think expecting Sirius to behave sensibly under the circumstances was like expecting a man with two broken legs to get up and walk. It just wasn’t going to happen.Given the way Wizarding social attitudes seem to lag behind Muggle ones, I think Sirius found himself in the same situation that a lot of shell-shocked soldiers found themselves in during the early days of WWI: people who hadn’t been through the same experience didn’t believe that all these soldiers were really sick — they were just weak, or cowardly, and trying to get out of fighting.
#mental illness cw #i would argue the same for cho#harry’s reaction/actions after the end of the fourth book are justified because he /saw/ it all happen #which is true and a good reason to hole up and BE SCARED #but cho—she lost her first love and was treated like a stupid little girl who cried too much #not as somebody who was experiencing a different kind of grief/depression than harry #harry’s was right—cho’s was wrong. #just as snape’s pain was right and sirius’s was wrong. (chazkeats)