A short story of how a boy decided to wear a dress at a party and how the adults reacted to the situation: about as badly as you imagine, and with heaps of gender enforcement directed against both the boy and his parents. But there’s an interesting twist:
Interestingly enough, not a single child said a word about their choice of costumes, other than to compliment Chester on his new dress.
* Feminism should be doing more to garner the approval and support of men.
Let’s apply that reasoning more universally, shall we?
* Abortion advocates should be doing more to garner the approval and support of fundamentalist Christians.
* The atheist community should be doing more to garner the approval and support of religious leaders.
* Anarchism should be doing more to garner the approval and support of politicians.
* Communism should be doing more to garner the approval and support of business owners.
* Antinatalism should be doing more to garner the approval and support of parents.
* Evolution scientists should be doing more to garner the approval and support of Young-Earth Creationists.
* Race traitors should be doing more to garner the approval and support of racists.
* Anti-fascists should be doing more to garner the approval and support of fascists.
Doesn’t work, does it. Then why constantly regurgitate the first and not all the other ones?
A great little interview with Chomsky discusses the rise of corporations in the United States, and the role of public education in molding people to the capitalist system.
Mass education was designed to turn independent farmers into docile, passive tools of production. That was its primary purpose. And don’t think people didn’t know it. They knew it and they fought against it. There was a lot of resistance to mass education for exactly that reason. It was also understood by the elites. Emerson once said something about how we’re educating them to keep them from our throats. If you don’t educate them, what we call “education,” they’re going to take control — “they” being what Alexander Hamilton called the “great beast,” namely the people. The anti-democratic thrust of opinion in what are called democratic societies is really ferocious. And for good reason. Because the freer the society gets, the more dangerous the great beast becomes and the more you have to be careful to cage it somehow… As freedom grows, the need to coerce and control opinion also grows if you want to prevent the great beast from doing something with its freedom…
Why is this not being talked about more right now? A new study came out done on 4500 teenagers in five European countries and part of the results were on abuse: online, emotional, physical and sexual. The percentage of teenage girls reporting being raped by a partner were the following:
This is a huge result which undermines the credibility of all the estimations of lifetime rape we’ve been working with. One on five or one on four are probably a gross underestimation, as I’ve always suspected. Please spread this data on all feminist channels you have access to. This needs to be discussed!
I’m glad I’m not on Facebook.
There has been quite a bit of chatter this past week after it was revealed that a recent Facebook outage was the result of a psychological experiment that the company conducted on a portion of its users without their permission. The experiment, which was described in a paper published by Facebook, and UCSF, tested the contagion of emotions on social media by manipulating the content of personal feeds and measuring how this impacted user behavior.
Over 600,000 users were used as guinea pigs without their consent, which raises a number of serious ethical and legal questions (particularly due to the fact that this study received federal funding), however there is an even more disturbing angle to this story. It turns out that this research was connected to a Department of Defense project called the Minerva Initiative, which funds universities to model the dynamics, risks and tipping points for large-scale civil unrest across the world.
This entry from Brave Lucky Game discusses the whole debunked “alpha male/beta male” myth as it applies to wolves and humans: they don’t even get the myth right.
Second, it assumes characteristics that aren’t necessarily present in wolf packs. Humans like to believe that “alpha” means an aggressive, assertive power that commands everyone else to submit or they’ll rip you apart… but that isn’t the case in wolf packs: alpha wolves are actually the most social and are only rarely involved in a dispute. Actually, alpha wolves are alpha wolves not because they’re the biggest and meanest, but because they are the most charismatic—others want to follow them, trust them, and do what they say. I’ve met only a few alpha humans by the actual wolf definition of “alpha,” and that trait doesn’t have anything to do with looks—although it helps, given the persistent disregard and dismissal of those who aren’t freaking Barbies and Kens.
The MRA definition of alpha seems to be: aggressive, powerful, threatening rapist. Let’s talk about how far these types of individuals get in any social species outside of a civilization and imposed societal structure that prevents them from being straight-up disposed of because homigosh murder!