these noble pursuits

squintyoureyes:

“I often tell a story about a conversation I observed in a feminist theory seminar that I participated in about a decade ago. A white woman was explaining to a black woman how their common experience of oppression under patriarchy bound them together as sisters. All women, she explained, had the same experience as women, she said. The black woman demurred from quick agreement. “When you wake up in the morning and look in the mirror,” she asked the white woman, “what do you see?” “I see a woman,” responded the white woman hopefully. “That’s the problem,” responded the black woman. “I see a black woman. To me race is visible, because it is how I am not privileged in society. Because you are privileged by race, race is invisible to you. It is a luxury, a privilege not to have to think about race every second of your life.” I groaned, embarrassed. And, as the only man in the room, all eyes turned to me. “When I wake up and look in the mirror,” I confessed, “I see a human being. The generic person. As a middle class white man, I have no class, no race and no gender. I’m universally generalizable. I am Everyman.” Lately, I’ve come to think that it was on that day in 1980 that I became a middle class white man, that these categories actually became operative to me. The privilege of privilege is that the terms of privilege are rendered invisible. It is a luxury not to have to think about race, or class, or gender. Only those marginalized by some category understand how powerful that category is when deployed against them.”

—

Michael S. Kimmel, Ph. D., “Gender Equality: Not for Women Only” (via thepoliticalpartygirl)

Dr. Kimmel is also a blogger for Ms. Magazine, and we’ve never heard someone explain the privilege of privilege so succinctly. Bravo.

(via motherjones)

(Source: politicalpartygirl)

2 months ago -

1899

raphaellaskies:

Huffington Post calls the shit out of LGBT organizations for doing nearly nothing for the T.

dumbthingswhitepplsay:

thtqueerlyfe:

creatureboy:

assholedansavage:

i-ate-jims-crow-with-hot-sauce:

iragray:

TW: CISSEXISM AND BRUTAL VIOLENCE

… imagine a 19-year-old girl being dropped off at an acquaintance’s home by a taxi on a Sunday night and finding three men on the lawn waiting for her. Imagine them kidnapping, torturing, decapitating, dismembering and burning her alive for sport, as young, raucous boys would to a Barbie doll. Imagine them chucking her torso on the side of a highway, with absolutely no regret or sense of immorality. Imagine being the mother called into the morgue to identify a defiled torso as your daughter. Swallow that bitter pill of reality and tell me that marriage is the most important issue for the LGBT community in 2011. For several in the transgender community, it might as well be 1969 all over again, because nothing has changed for them.

Fucking thank you. We’re getting beat the fuck up and murdered, and their biggest concern is gay marriage.

Oh.

Okay then.

Cool.

“I have nothing against marriage equality; I believe in it. But I also know that marriage means nothing if we aren’t alive or otherwise able to enjoy it.”

YES.

Yeah, the whole “we want gay marriage!” whilst I have to worry about myself or my friends getting killed all the time kinda sucks. This is why the gay community sucks balls and I don’t identify with them.

Hi, queer anarcho feminist scene! LOVE YOU!

This is what I aim to change in LGBTQ organizations. I want the focus to be on greater issues, more grave issues.

I just want to repeat that Shelley Hillard was black.

Not just trans.

BLACK and trans. THAT MEANS SOMETHING.

2 months ago -

2638

stfuantichoicers:

The primary argument for reproductive choice is the argument that women have the right to decide what goes on in their own bodies. Even if we assume that fetuses are people with all of the rights of people with birth certificates, they still don’t have the right to use another individual’s body without her consent. Organ donation is not mandatory, and if a random person tried to hook you up for an impromptu blood transfusion, they would be charged with assault.

Most anti-choicers just rage and respond that if you’re a slut who dared remove the freshness seal from her vagina, you lose the right to bodily autonomy. The popular analogy “Swimming is not a contract for drowning; driving in a car is not a contract for death; walking outside is not a contract for assault” addresses the fact that sex is not a contract for pregnancy.

If your antis are typical, they will likely just respond with “SLUTSLUTSLUTSLUTSLUTSLUTSLUT MURDERING SLUT.” In this case, reminding them that 70,000 women die every year (13% of worldwide maternal deaths) because abortion is illegal might draw their attention to the fact that anti-choice =/= pro-life.

They may argue that abortion hurts women by causing breast cancer, mental illness, or infertility. They may also argue that because abortion is unsafe in countries where it is illegal, it must be unsafe here. You can respond with:

The American Cancer Society, the National Cancer Institute, the World Health Organization, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists agree that there is no correlation between induced abortion and breast cancer.

The American Psychological Association has found that there is no statistical difference in depression or PTSD cases in women and adolescent girls who have and have not had induced abortions.

In the US, where abortion is safe and legal, less than .3% of first trimester abortions result in complications requiring hospitalization. This makes a first trimester abortion safer than pregnancy, labor, and delivery of an infant.

A few other statistics you can whip out:

88% of abortions take place in the first 12 weeks (first trimester) of pregnancy.

Less than 1.5% of abortions are “late-term” (after 21 weeks). These can only be performed in cases where the mother’s life/health is at risk or the fetus is diagnosed with an extreme abnormality incompatible with life.

“The Pill” does not cause abortion, it prevents ovulation.

Plan B does not cause abortion, it prevents implantation within 72 hours of unprotected sex. Pregnancy is not medically defined as beginning until 8-10 days after intercourse, so Plan B cannot possibly be an abortifacient.

The neural connections in the fetal brain are not well enough established to experience pain until at least 24 weeks. This means that no electively aborted fetus feels pain.

The Christian bible contains verses that imply that the Christian god is A-OK with abortion. And even if he weren’t, we don’t live in a theocracy (and we have that pesky First Amendment thing), so the rights of the nation’s women cannot be curtailed because one religion’s holy book says so.

I hope that helps!

(Question made rebloggable by request from whereisfranklin)

2 months ago -

474

Three goals of being a GREAT ally.

dumbthingswhitepplsay:

There are three things all allies need to aspire to:

1) Learning. This is base learning; getting the lingo, getting the philosophy behind what lingo is good and what is charged, the various terms that people in the group in question use, and whether that same lingo might be cool in one group and not cool in the other group. Get used to asking people how they would like to be referred to. Get used to using turns of phrase and removing turns of phrase that you might not have before. Actually look up the research before you talk, and make sure it is from an actual credible source, as well as an experiment that was carried out in a way that doesn’t severely skew the results.

Learning is the BEGINNING of your journey. Your job as a GREAT ally does not end after you know the basics, and that’s all this is. The basics.

2) Internalizing. This is where the “liberal” allies get stuck. They know the basics, but they haven’t internalized them. ACT as if it is not all about you. EXPECT to be brought down a peg if you mess up, ACT like you KNOW how to apologize. ACT like you understand that the pain of oppression is greater than yours. Prepare to change your usual actions on a dime so that your ACTIONS speak for you. ACT like you understand that when you do something oppressive, you are NOT the first person, and you WILL NOT be the last, either. ACT like you know that you have no right to speak to the marginalized group about their marginalization.

Now that you’ve done this, you’ve made sure to stop YOURSELF from being oppressive. But this is not enough. Using a metaphor I’ve seen applied to this situation, even if you removed 100 snowflakes from the avalanche, it will still kill many people.

3) Action. Not just through controlling your own actions, but by taking action against others when you see oppression. This is the crux of being a great ally, the willingness to, for a moment, actually take on what the marginalized groups take on every day, all day, and attack it. Is there a risk to you? Yes. Is that risk nowhere near the risk the marginalized person would take for saying the same thing? YES. So you have no excuse. NO excuse. NOTHING is an excuse. Especially because this is the part MOST people want to give excuses about.

2 months ago -

215

monkeyknifefight:

robot-heart-politics

Ladies (and dudes), let’s talk for a minute about the word “slut.”

This term exists solely to shame women into “socially appropriate” behavior and police their sexuality. This term exists to remind women that their bodies, their sexuality, their minds, and their mouths are not their own, but belong to society, which gets to determine how, when, where, and why their bodies get to be used by society—which, btw, usually means men.

If a woman dresses in a way that society does not like, acts in a way that society does not like (and the acts that will get you labeled a slut are hardly limited to the sexual), or has sex in a way that society does not like (i.e. YOU ENJOY IT), then she is labeled a slut. It is hoped that by employing this shame term, women will go scurrying back to acting in a way that is not in any way threatening to men or to the patriarchal status quo.

There is absolutely nothing inherent about the number of sex partners a person has had—or the perceived number of sex partners a person has had, as the case more often is—that is indicative of whether a woman has respect for herself. If anything, I tend to think that the women who use this term are probably the ones with a self-respect issue. After all, a woman with self-respect knows she doesn’t have to set up comparisons based on an arbitrary, inaccurate, and sexist standard between herself and other women so that she can feel good about herself.

Dudes who use this term use it because they think it’s an easy way to shut a woman up or discredit her. Either way, they win.

Please. Unless you like to think of yourself and all women as public property subject to public authority and control, you shouldn’t use this word. EVER.

(via squintyoureyes)

2 months ago -

1405

kungfucarrie:

totheexperts:

stfuantichoicers:

pansymandy:

Do it, I dare you. Abortion is WRONG. Pass it on pro-lifers.

SPOILER ALERT

Here’s what comes up in the first frame of Google Images:

Several political cartoons (both pro-and anti-choice)

This infographic about the dangers of unsafe abortion in countries where it is illegal

This BAMF

2 images that could possibly be of an actual first trimester abortion (90% of all abortions).

6 images that are of late-term abortions (>2% of all abortions), which are only legal in cases to preserve the woman’s life/health or in cases of severe fetal abnormality.

I’m still pro-choice.

Now it’s your turn. Google for “back alley abortion.” But don’t click on images this time- I want you to form an informed opinion based on facts.

Click the first link. Read about all of the women who died pre-Roe and all of the women and girls dying now because of restrictions on safe and legal abortion.

Click the second link. It’s an article that cites a peer-reviewed source, confirming what you just read on Wikipedia.

Click the third link. It’s the recollection of a woman who had a pre-Roe back-alley abortion. It’s horrific, and she was one of the lucky ones.

Are you satisfied, or did you bother reading at all? Ok, go ahead and click images. That second picture is of Geraldine Santoro’s lifeless body. (Trigger warning for images in that article). She died when she attempted to induce abortion in the fear that her estranged husband would murder her for being pregnant with another man. She hemorrhaged to death, alone in a seedy motel room. She left behind two daughters to be raised by their abusive father.

So what about now? Are you pro-choice, or are you still clinging to the idealogical dogma of sacrificing real, breathing, feeling women for unconscious, unfeeling fetuses? Which of us is truly “anti-life?”

^

Reblogging for badass commentary. And yes, PLEASE, inform yourself.

2 months ago -

4043

Don’t say rape when you don’t mean rape.

nathanonline:

There are many things rape is not:

consensual sex

affectionate contact

a bear hug

a tackle

eye contact

an argument

a surprise

overburdening

an athletic loss

a neutral metaphor

There are only a few things rape is:

forcing sex on a person

despoiling a population or place

[a mustard plant or grape residue]

No one rapes your Internet connection, or rapes you in a debate. No one rapes your ask box with spam. People don’t rape with their eyes, that’s called “eye-fucking.” You are not raped with a passionate hug. No one rapes you at basketball or rapes you with a tackle, playful or athletic. You don’t want someone to rape you, because then it isn’t rape. Wanting to rape does not mean wanting to have sex. You do not want to rape people to whom you’re attracted, unless you are a rapist.

As long as I’m talking about it, here are some misconceptions:

Nonchalance toward rape does not combat the stigmatization attached to victims.

The word rape does not give itself power. The power comes from the context of the word for victims.

Rape victims are not asking you to be hypersensitive by asking you not to belittle or to trigger a trauma.

I’m not violating your right to free speech by asking you to be considerate.

If you read this and felt attacked, ask yourself why. We don’t say “sexually abused” metaphorically, so why say rape? I’m not asking you to never use the word. I just believe it should only be used when you seriously mean rape. When we live in a world without millions of victims, we can talk about redefining or reclaiming it.

I even have alternatives, though there are obviously many more:

ravish

ravage

exhaust

overwork

pulverize

obliterate

trash

defile

squash

clobber

pommel

destroy

burden

defeat

massacre

trample

vanquish

overpower

thwart

(via coeurdesfeuilles)

2 months ago -

1987

Words

rosewater-sailor:

When someone steps forward and says, “Your usage of this word is hurtful and you need to examine your speech,” the correct path here would be to examine your speech, not to continue railing against them because you can’t accept the fact that maybe, just maybe, you are wrong.

I know it’s hard to be wrong. It’s hard to swallow your pride and admit that you made a mistake - I get that. But when someone informs you that you are wrong, and you continue to repeat those words or that action, you are going from making a forgivable error to being malicious. There is no excuse for consciously deciding to harm someone. If you want to go around using other people’s very existence as slurs and jokes, acting like a child who doesn’t know any better, well… You’re not a child anymore, you’re not on the playground, and this kind of discourse is no longer acceptable or excusable.

Do not turn it around on the person and try to say they’re too sensitive - you are not sensitive enough. And don’t try to shirk responsibility when we call you on it. You are at fault here, REPEAT, YOU ARE AT FAULT HERE. When you defend your ~right~ to say these things, you’re essentially saying that your ability to hurt people is more important to you than stopping and thinking about the things you say and who you say them to, which is downright disgusting.

Your right to be an asshole is not, and never will be, more important than someone else’s right to go about their lives without being used as your punchline.

(via monkeyknifefight)

2 months ago -

293

privilege a poem for men who don’t understand what we mean when we say they have it

stfurapeculture:

igotmyperiod:

privilege
a poem for men who don’t understand what we mean when we say they have it

privilege is simple:
going for a pleasant stroll after dark,
not checking the back of your car as you get in, sleeping soundly,
speaking without interruption, and not remembering
dreams of rape, that follow you all day, that woke you crying, and
privilege
is not seeing your stripped, humiliated body
plastered in celebration across every magazine rack, privilege
is going to the movies and not seeing yourself
terrorized, defamed, battered, butchered
seeing something else

privilege is
riding your bicycle across town without being screamed at or
run off the road, not needing an abortion, taking off your shirt
on a hot day, in a crowd, not wishing you could type better
just in case, not shaving your legs, having a decent job and
expecting to keep it, not feeling the boss’s hand up your crotch,
dozing off on late-night busses, privilege
is being the hero in the TV show not the dumb broad,
living where your genitals are totemized not denied,
knowing your doctor won’t rape you

privilege is being
smiled at all day by nice helpful women, it is
the way you pass judgment on their appearance with magisterial authority,
the way you face a judge of your own sex in court and
are over-represented in Congress and are not strip searched for a traffic ticket
or used as a dart board by your friendly mechanic, privilege
is seeing your bearded face reflected through the history texts
not only of your high school days but all your life, not being
relegated to a paragraph
every other chapter, the way you occupy
entire volumes of poetry and more than your share of the couch unchallenged,
it is your mouthing smug, atrocious insults at women
who blink and change the subject — politely — privilege
is how seldom the rapist’s name appears in the papers
and the way you smirk over your PLAYBOY

it’s simple really, privilege
means someone else’s pain, your wealth
is my terror, your uniform
is a woman raped to death here, or in Cambodia or wherever
wherever your obscene privilege
writes your name in my blood, it’s that simple,
you’ve always had it, that’s why it doesn’t
seem to make you sick to your stomach,
you have it, we pay for it, now
do you understand

—D.A. Clarke

reprinted from Banshee, Peregrine Press

Copyright (c) 1981 D. A. Clarke. All Rights Reserved

Written in 1981 and not a single thing has changed.

2 months ago -

654

a woman, taking up space

invertebrateparty:

When I was in fourth grade, I was sitting with my cello, waiting for my orchestra concert to begin. The cello was on the floor, but I was seated in my section in a long dress with my knees spread wide, and my elbows on my thighs. My mom - in the audience - gestured to me for five minutes to sit “properly,” and when I didn’t follow her instructions, she came up and reprimanded me for sitting “like a boy.”

When I was a senior in high school, I gave one of my good friend’s a copy of my senior portrait. Rather than thanking me and saying I looked cute/pretty/whatever, she looked at it for a while until she asked, “Why are you posing like a guy?” In the photo, I was sitting on steps, but my legs weren’t crossed … you know, how people normally sit on steps.

When I was in graduate school, I was walking to dinner with some colleagues. I was in front of the group with a male friend, walking as I normally do - rather quickly and in a straight line. A guy moving toward us had to step out of the way for me, and my male friend said to me, “Wow, you just barrel right through, don’t you?” I replied, “Yeah? Why shouldn’t people get out of the way for me?”

The way women use space and move through space is constantly policed. We are told to fold up, cross our legs, defer space to others, be as small and insignificant as possible, and interfere with the movement and space of others as little as possible. I see it on public transit, where women shrink into their seats. I see it in classrooms, where women don’t spread their stuff beyond the width of their chair. I see it in magazines, where women are photographed differently from men. I see it everywhere.

A good number of these “presence” norms are embedded into gendered constructions of etiquette, and they get internalized; so much of the policing women experience is actually self-policing. It is rude for a woman to cross her ankle over her knee, or stand with her legs shoulder-width apart, or to expect others to move around her. A woman can get all of the other bits of a feminine gender performance right, but if that woman doesn’t use space in the proper manner, she will be met with resistance and condemnation - her own or someone else’s. But where she has gone wrong will be noticed, and she will be told. Even if she is not corrected outright, her behavior will be the subject of comment (as was the case with my male colleague above). She will be made to feel continually anxious about her presence in space. She will shrink and fold until she nearly disappears.

Men can be expansive, and command as much space as they like. They can sit with knees splayed wide and arms draped over several seats, their crap strewn six feet in either direction, creating a massive bubble of space that is theirs. They can walk down the street, and assume the straight line in front of them is theirs, as far as they desire to go. Men take up space - even technically unoccupied space - and no one questions them.

Women’s space is always borrowed. Even women’s bodies don’t really create a bubble that is all their own. If a woman has enough room to sit or to stand, that is deemed to be enough for her. She isn’t supposed to claim anything beyond her physical, bodily allotment, and even that is policed if she is “too tall” or “too fat.” If she does, she’ll be made to feel it.

(via myslumberingheart)

2 months ago -

2500

The law discriminates against rape victims in a manner which would not be tolerated by victims of any other crime. In the following example, a holdup victim is asked questions similar in form to those usually asked a victim of rape. “Mr. Smith, you were held up at gunpoint on the corner of 16th and Locust?”
“Yes.”
“Did you struggle with the robber?”
“No.”
“Why not?”
“He was armed.”
“Then you made a conscious decision to comply with his demands rather than to resist?”
“Yes.”
“Did you scream? Cry out?”
“No. I was afraid.”
“I see. Have you ever been held up before?”
“No.”
“Have you ever given money away?”
“Yes, of course–”
“And did you do so willingly?”
“What are you getting at?”
“Well, let’s put it like this, Mr. Smith. You’ve given away money in the past–in fact, you have quite a reputation for philanthropy. How can we be sure that you weren’t contriving to have your money taken from you by force?”
“Listen, if I wanted–”
“Never mind. What time did this holdup take place, Mr. Smith?”
“About 11 p.m.”
“You were out on the streets at 11 p.m.? Doing what?”
“Just walking.”
“Just walking? You know it’s dangerous being out on the street that late at night. Weren’t you aware that you could have been held up?”
“I hadn’t thought about it.”
“What were you wearing at the time, Mr. Smith?”
“Let’s see. A suit. Yes, a suit.”
“An expensive suit?”
“Well–yes.”
“In other words, Mr. Smith, you were walking around the streets late at night in a suit that practically advertised the fact that you might be a good target for some easy money, isn’t that so? I mean, if we didn’t know better, Mr. Smith, we might even think you were asking for this to happen, mightn’t we?”
“Look, can’t we talkin about the past history of the guy who did this to me?”
“I’m afraid not, Mr. Smith. I don’t think you would want to violate his rights, now, would you?

(via blackenedbutterfly)

(Source: iuwaehfoaiuwhefoiaulfjqn, via glamaphonic)

2 months ago -

944

There are many reasons that jokes can be considered offensive, but one of the underlying principles is that someone has decided to use your lived experience as fodder for a cheap laugh. Rape jokes make a farce of the brutal trauma that many women have had to suffer through and can potentially trigger memories of the event. Sexist, racist, ableist, homophobic, and bigoted jokes serve only to belittle and propagate the indignities, inequalities, and violence that minorities suffer through on a daily basis under the kyriarchy. When a joke-teller attempts a kyriarchy-approved offensive joke, not only are they asking for the butt of their joke to play along in their humiliation, but it’s also implicitly asking them to confirm for the joke-teller that all those nasty stereotypes are true, that the kyriarchy is right to keep up its oppressive hierarchy because these minorities are just so inherently less than. It’s like asking a rape survivor to agree that they were totally asking for it or asking a woman to say that of course she should be paid less than a man for the same work because her silly lady brain can only handle baby-making. That is why these jokes can be so damn offensive, the joke-teller is asking their audience to be complicit in their own oppression.

It’s just a joke! (via monkeyknifefight)

(Source: trousertheft, via monkeyknifefight)

2 months ago -

562

We do not do trigger warnings. Ever. As a rule. I don’t believe in them, period.

Jessica Coen, Editor in Chief of Jezebel.

Trigger warnings are icky! Unlike photos of women being raped, of course. Those are totally OK and can actually drive your entire “feminist light” business model.

I might have to re-write my motto: My feminism will be rape culture friendly! And you know, then they pontificate against Cosmopolitan for photoshopping images. I’ll take unattainable visions of mainstream beauty over screen caps of a woman being violated any day.

(via redlightpolitics)

In case you haven’t realized yet, Jezebel should not be upheld as an example of a good feminist resource. Which is the nicest way I could think to say “fuck Jezebel.” (via mesmerizingtoo)

#congrats on your gold medal in the grossness olympics

(via anygoddamnedcolleen)

3 months ago -

536

aragons:

hopesichord | cococheez | taputaindegueule:

Someone give this guy a motherfuckin’ certificate.

Why the fuck is this still on my dash, and why is a website predominantly populated by women congratulating this asshole for his asinine, sexist, disturbing remarks?

This has over 128,000 notes? Okay Tumblr, I think it’s time we have a chat about this.

Now before I start, I think the key thing we need to acknowledge that all people are arseholes. I mean, not always and not all the time, but what I mean is that if you are a human being, you have the capacity to act like an arsehole. No more so than when you’re a teenager. I know it sucks to hear it again and again as some explanation from an ~adult about your life because how could they possibly know your life and how you feel because it’s your life and your feelings and no-one else knows how you feel, right? But the fact of the matter is that you’re a teenager, there are a lot of hormones flying around and a lot of growing up going on and as such, people can occasionally suck. You will suck too.

So now that we’ve established that everyone sucks and everyone has the ability to do something hurtful (because being an arsehole is not a gendered act), let’s take a look at Zoe and Toby’s exchange.

Zoe makes a fairly innocuous, vague status update on her own Facebook about boys kind of sucking. Fair dues. As I’ve already stated: people suck.

Then Toby, dear, sweet Toby comes along and throws his tuppence down as some kind of ~romantic gauntlet. Now, what Toby is doing?

Toby is acting like a dick*.

The problem is, Toby doesn’t know he’s acting like a dick because Toby is acting in the way that he has been taught to act by society and some truly terrible ‘romantic comedies’. But trust me, he is. I know you’re all looking at me askance right now because ‘oh my god isn’t this totally sweet how persistent he’s being? he’s totally in love with her and she’s been such a bitch to him! she’s been such a bitch to him and he’s still in love with her! where can i find me a man like that?’.

Kids. You don’t want a man like that. You don’t want a person like that. I am about to tell you why.

First of all, if we look at the time span of this long running ~love story~ or what have you, that’s four years. Four years Tumblr. For four years, Toby has been hounding Zoe for a date. Now I know us ladies are supposed to value persistence in the romance department but let me tell you, if I had turned a guy down multiple times over a time span of four years I would not only be a little scared, I would also be massively pissed off. I don’t care if you’re 17 and an idiot (™ Sassy Gay Friend), I don’t care if your conception of love is most likely infantile and non-threatening and in all likelihood a misty-eyed crush that will eventually work its way out your system because you’ll grow the fuck up. I really don’t care. Because there’s not taking the hint and then there’s being an arsehole.

This? Is the latter.

Look. I’m not denying that perhaps Zoe could have been a little nicer about the whole thing like say, just telling Toby she didn’t want to dance with him back in Year 9 (which was two years ago and really Toby, are you keeping a diary of every rejection you receive from a girl the way failed authors do with publishers because the level of recall you have about this is worrying). But, given that Zoe had already rejected him several times over the previous two years, I’d say whilst it’s sort of a douche move, it’s also completely legitimate as far as responses go. Because as Toby has proved thus far, Toby doesn’t take ‘no’/’I’m don’t want to come round to your house’/’please stop giving me Valentine’s Cards or roses or candy’ for an answer.

Apparently, no matter your previous response, come the next year Toby will be there again, like some sort of robotic Terminator, asking you out on all sorts of uncomfortable dates.

So yeah, maybe Zoe shouldn’t have taken both the tickets Toby bought but, did Toby clarify what happened when he mentioned the tickets? No he didn’t. So as far as Zoe may be concerned, he could have just bought her two tickets for funsies. Logic, and Toby’s past history, sort of indicate otherwise but Zoe’s probably got other things on her mind. Like people she actually likes. And GCSEs.

What I am trying to get at here is why on earth do 128,000 of you think that Toby’s long running attempts to win over a girl who is very, very clearly not interested in him romantic? Because when you get down to it, it’s really not. What it is is needy, irritating and ultimately, terribly embarrassing. It is also incredibly uncomfortable, not just for Toby but mostly for Chloe. Because Chloe just doesn’t want to be with Toby, despite his seemingly endless parade of gifts and gestures.

And that’s the thing. Chloe is just not that into Toby. She has every right not to want to be with him. But because he’s performed these ~acts of love~ for her, she’s supposed to clutch at her chest and say “Of course Sir Toby, I will go to the ball with you!” By which I mean, because he’s been nice to her and bought her things, apparently this has earned Toby the right to take her out on a date.

I think this is an important moment to recognise that if Toby had made a status about how girls are such bitches (ugh ugh vomiting in my mouth as I type, oh masculinity) and Zoe left him a long comment detailing every excruciating failed attempt to ask him out, this would not be on Tumblr accompanied by an applause.gif . It would have a string of follow up comments calling her a stalker, telling her to move on, telling her that Toby’s just not that into her. And probably some stfu.gifs for good measure.

We all know why. Because society - and let’s not forget that society aka kyriarchy has the biggest role to play in Toby’s behaviour - deems it okay for a man (or in this case a lovesick 17 year old boy) to aggressively pursue a woman into a relationship but not the other way around.

Never mind that actually, aggressively pursuing someone is not actually how you end up dating someone. You get to take someone out on a date because they’ve accepted your invitation. And they do that because they want to go out with you. You don’t go out on a date just because you once asked them to dance at a crappy Year 9 disco that probably sucked and was held in your school hall. You don’t get to effectively harass them on a yearly basis and then again on a public forum and try to guilt them into a relationship with you.

Let me repeat: no amount of concert tickets, Year 7 science projects or declarations on Facebook will make someone fall in love with you.

Look. It sucks to be in love with someone who doesn’t love you back. It’s the basis of a lot of the literary canon. It makes for great drama. And like I said, it really fucking sucks. Like people. But the appropriate response is to pine, maybe cry, think it over and eventually move on.

What you take from the experience is that: just because you love someone, does not mean they are required to love you back.

So I’m sorry Toby that Zoe doesn’t like you back. But I think it’s time to let go. In fact, you probably should have let go around the time of that third Valentine card. And you shouldn’t have done that project in Year 7 all by yourself.

*gendered insult intended as a way to tie in with Zoe’s original statement.

(Source: now-wecanthaveit)

3 months ago -

228304