Sometimes I stress myself out over the unimaginable depths & sheer being of every micro& macrocosm in existence but mostly I just binge watch Netflix.
Saving Face (2012), acid attacks on women in Pakistan
Meanwhile, in America, feminists are complaining about how dress codes are oppressive.
You idiots have never experienced oppression, and pray you never do, because this is what it looks like.
As a South Asian American feminist, let me remind everyone that oppression is not a competition.
Just because we fight one type of sexism doesn’t mean we don’t care about other instances of sexism that don’t affect us directly in our day to day lives.
My heart goes out to this woman and the hundreds of other victims like her. I want to educate people about these kinds of incidents. I support organizations that help women like this.
You may think that dress code issues are trivial, but they are related to a larger issue of women’s bodily autonomy, which affects women’s health and safety.
So please, let’s try to bring awareness and bring about change instead of insulting entire groups of people because they are facing issues that are less scary than the one presented.
“oppression is not a competition”
thank you so much for this wording
if you want to understand the psyche of our generation take a good look at the stories we tell ourselves about the future
because it isn’t flying cars or robot dogs, it’s faceless government surveillance and worldwide pandemics and militarized police brutality and the last dregs of humanity struggling to survive
our generation isn’t self-centered, or lazy, or whatever else they wanna say about us. we are young, and we are here, and we are deeply, deeply afraid.
Tell me something.
When was the last time you opened up your browser and saw a beautiful image of a body shape that looked just like yours?
When was the last time you saw an image of skin markings that looked just like yours?
When was the last time you saw an image of breasts that looked just like yours? An ass that looked just like yours? Scars that looked just like yours? A belly that looked just like yours?
I love this!
And there it is. A nearly all-white crowd chanting to a nearly all-black crowd, “Shoot! Shoot! Shoot!” Contemporary racism encapsulated by an attempt to package it as support for the police, exposed by calls to shoot black men.
There are no words.
I am selfish, private and easily bored. Will this be a problem?
I’ll never punish my daughter for saying no.
The first time it comes out of her mouth, I’ll smile gleefully. As she repeats “No! No! No!” I’ll laugh, overjoyed. At a young age, she’ll have mastered a wonderful skill. A skill I’m still trying to learn. I know I’ll have to teach her that she has to eat her vegetables, and she has to take a nap. But “No” is not wrong. It is not disobedience.
1. She will know her feelings are valid.
2. She will know that when I no longer guide her, she still has a right to refuse.
The first time a boy pulls her hair after she says no, and the teacher tells her “boys will be boys,” we will go to her together, and explain that my daughter’s body is not a public amenity. That boy isn’t teasing her because he likes her, he is harassing her because it is allowed. I will not reinforce that opinion. If my son can understand that “no means no” so can everyone else’s.
3. She owes no one her silence, her time, or her cooperation.
The first time she tells a teacher, “No, that is wrong,” and proceeds to correct his public school, biased rhetoric, I’ll revel in the fact that she knows her history; that she knows our history. The first time she tells me “No” with the purpose and authority that each adult is entitled, I will stop. I will apologize. I will listen.
4. She is entitled to her feelings and her space. I, even a a parent, have no right to violate them.
5. No one has a right to violate them.
The first time my mother questions why I won’t make her kiss my great aunt at Christmas, I’ll explain that her space isn’t mine to control. That she gains nothing but self doubt when she is forced into unwanted affection. I’ll explain that “no” is a complete sentence. When the rest of my family questions why she is not made to wear a dress to our reunion dinner. I will explain that her expression is her own. It provides no growth to force her into unnecessary and unwanted situation.
6. She is entitled to her expression.
When my daughter leaves my home, and learns that the world is not as open, caring, and supportive as her mother, she will be prepared. She will know that she can return if she wishes, that the real world can wait. She will not want to. She will not need to. I will have prepared her, as much as I can, for a world that will try to push her down at every turn.
7. She is her own person. She is complete as she is.
I will never punish my daughter for saying no. I want “No” to be a familiar friend. I never want her to feel that she cannot say it. She will know how to call on “No” whenever it is needed, or wanted.
There was a tradition of not allowing black and whites, and, actually, other interracial couples from marrying. It was a tradition. It got swept aside. Why is this tradition better?
There is a correct side of history.(via liberalsarecool)
Handedness - the idea that one hand is better able to perform certain tasks than the other - is, if not exclusively a human trait, then certainly a mostly human one. After all, how could you tell if a dog was left-handed or a lion was right-handed? Their paws aren’t evolved to handle complex tasks like our hands are, and there’s no evidence that non-primates favor one limb over any other.
For reasons that can probably best be described as “stupid”, people have historically held left-handers in contempt. You can find evidence of an anti-left bias throughout the world’s languages. The word “left” itself comes from the Anglo-Saxon word “lyft”, which means “weak.” We get the word “sinister” from the Latin word for “left”, and that double meaning persists in the modern Romance languages.
But exactly why humans favor different hands, or why most people tend to be right-handed, remains mysterious. The most common answer is that handedness is determined by the structure of our brains, which are divided into two hemispheres. Our brains are far more specialized than those of other animals, with different regions of the brain responsible for different specific tasks. Admittedly, these are only general guidelines, and most neural activities are shared between the hemispheres to some extent, but we can definitely say that many functions are primarily handled by one hemisphere as opposed to another. This is known as brain lateralization.
Two of the most energy-intensive human activities are language and the use of our fine motor skills - in other words, the use of our hands. One theory suggests that it’s more efficient for the brain to cluster control of these two major tasks in one hemisphere rather than having it spread throughout the brain. Since the vast majority of people have their language functions centered in the left hemisphere, it follows that most people’s fine motor skills would be controlled by the left hemisphere too. Each hemisphere generally controls the opposite side of the body, so the end result is that most people are right-handed.
However, the opposite does not hold true - being left-handed does not mean the language centers are located in the right hemisphere, which is fairly rare. Certainly, lefties are more likelythan righties to have their right hemisphere responsible for language, but it’s still not a common arrangement. Between 61 and 73% of lefties have their language centers in the left hemisphere, compared to over 90% of right-handed people.
This doesn’t necessarily invalidate the division of labor theory. After all, between 70 and 90% of people are right-handed, and well over 90% of those people do indeed cluster language and fine motor skill control in the left hemisphere. What we’re looking at here is the evolutionary equivalent of a rule of thumb. People’s brains are generally organized to maximize energy efficiency, but a reasonably large minority of people - including most lefties - get along just fine with a less efficient arrangement.
What does it actually mean to be right-handed or left-handed?
The everyday answer to that question is probably this: if you write with your right hand, then you’re right-handed. It’s a straightforward enough popular definition, but translating that into scientific terminology is trickier than you might think. Even simply saying that handedness is determined by which hand you prefer to use doesn’t actually help us that much. Let’s consider some of the problems here. Should a person’s dominant hand be determined by the hand they prefer to use, or the hand that performs better in tests? In other words, is handedness primarily psychological or physiological? Even if you can sort that out, there’s still the question of how to categorize all this. Should left-handed and right-handed be considered precisely equal, or does the fact that such a vast majority of people are right-handed suggest that the people are simply either right or non-right? That’s a bit of a charged way to look at things, but it does have some popularity in scientific literature.
And how about people who use different hands for different tasks? I write and throw with my right hand but bat and play(ed) hockey with my left hand - should I be considered primarily right-handed, a mix of right- and left-handed, or ambidextrous, meaning I feel equally comfortable using both hands? And should we look at handedness as something that can be lumped into only a very few categories - say true right-handed, more right-handed, ambidextrous/mix, more left-handed, and true left-handed - or something that exists on a broad spectrum?
Indeed, the very idea that one hand is “dominant” might be a complete misunderstanding of how our hands divide up tasks. In a Science post, Michael Balter details an argument by University of Liverpool archaeologist Natalie Uomini:
Uomini points out that handedness does not mean that one hand is “dominant” over the other. Rather, she writes, “both hands have different but equally important roles.” In right-handed people, for example, the right hand might be used for tasks requiring greater manual dexterity whereas the left hand might perform the more mundane but nevertheless crucial role of supporting an object. (Imagine eating dinner with just a knife but no fork, for example.)
"Consensual sex" is just sex. To say that implies that there is such a thing as "non consensual sex", which there isn’t. That’s rape. That is what it needs to be called. There is only sex or rape. Do not teach people that rape is just another type of sex. They are two very separate events. You wouldn’t say "breathing swimming" and "non breathing swimming", you say swimming and drowning.
Page 1 of 231