Let’s talk about feminism. What is it?
According to the Mirriam-Webster dictionary, it has two non-medical definitions:
1: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
2: organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests
Look at that #1 definition. Equality of the sexes. Nowhere does it list misandry, man-bashing, or the destruction of family. So guess what? If you believe in political, economic, and social equality that crosses sex and gender lines, congratulations! You are a feminist! Wait, don’t run away! Did I make you uncomfortable just now? Why is that? Do you associate the term feminist with “feminazi?” Are you afraid of being seen as an activist? Causing a fuss? Well guess what? Activism is NOT a part of the primary definition. Of course, we appreciate activism, but being a feminist doesn’t mean you have to go to marches, get abortions, burn your bra, or practice kicking men in the testes. I can honestly say I have never done any of those things, and I run a feminist blog.
Sometimes, being a nerd girl is stressful. Yesterday, I saw Star Trek: Into Darkness and there was so much I loved. I wanted to write a stellar review of it and post it here, but something was stopping me. In writing down my notes, I realized that there was also a lot that was upsetting me about the movie. As you may have noticed, when I get upset, I dwell. I research. This time, it took me from Star Trek to Sherlock via Benedict Cumberbatch, and from there to Doctor Who, via Stephen Moffat. What do these fun and fantastic things all have in common besides my love? Unfortunately, a horrifying treatment of women and prime examples of a misogynist male gaze in tv/film.
If you haven’t seen STID, Doctor Who, or Sherlock, be aware that this entire article contains SPOILERS.
Hello nerdlings! I am so sorry that this took forever to write. This month has been really intense. Lately, I have had so many articles about breasts showing up in my newsfeeds that it almost feels like the summer of the Superbowl Nip Slip again. Once again, it all boils down to the idea that women’s bodies are not their own. They belong to the public, to be consumed as society sees fit.
If any of you are friends with young mothers, you probably see a lot of articles about breast-feeding. For it, against it, for it in public, against it in public, etc. For whatever reasons, people have a lot to say about how women feed their babies and everyone seems to have an opinion on it. Formula feed? You’re lazy and your baby is going to die without your immunities! Breast feed? Better not do that in public, it’s pornographic! Feed your baby well into toddlerhood? You’re going to raise a pervert! There’s really no way for a woman to win, but at least these arguments stay somewhat around the topic of what breasts are actually for. Breasts exist to supply nutrition. We are one of the only mammalian species to have “swollen” breasts when not pregnant or nursing (some scientists think it’s to encourage reproduction by basically making a butt on our chests!) but the point is, breasts are primarily for food. Their function for pleasure is secondary. Continue reading
Good news: I got my computer back from the repair shop! Bad news: it has to go back tomorrow. Since I have it for one day, though, I wanted to write something for you all. Today, I wanted to write about the fashion industry, because despite being in the headlines more for severely damaging behavior, it’s still seen as a glamorous profession. However, recent news has pushed that one temporarily to the back burner. Apparently, we still need to talk about rape culture.
Hello again! I missed you! It’s really hard to keep on top of all things internet when I can only use my phone and my office computer and I apologize. Also, if you are reading this in Boston or have loved ones there, stay strong. The hearts of the whole world are with you right now.
Earlier this month, we heard many arguments against marriage equality. Primarily these arguments break down into three major categories: the Bible says it’s wrong (which only matters in a theocracy), what about the children (they seem fine), and “it’s a slippery slope to bestiality and pedophilia.” Many have pointed out that these are the exact same arguments used in the 1960s against interracial marriage. Now, hardly anyone would say that interracial marriage is immoral and harmful. How did that change come about? Did people suddenly open their eyes and realize that racism is wrong? No. The older generation died out and the younger generations had a very different mindset. Continue reading