I remember my wife often saying how exhausting it was for her to have to tell me what to do all the time. It’s why the sexiest thing a man can say to his partner is “I got this,” and then take care of whatever needs taken care of.
I always reasoned: “If you just tell me what you want me to do, I’ll gladly do it.”
But she didn’t want to be my mother. She wanted to be my partner, and she wanted me to apply all of my intelligence and learning capabilities to the logistics of managing our lives and household.
She wanted me to figure out all of the things that need done, and devise my own method of task management.
I wish I could remember what seemed so unreasonable to me about that at the time.
It’s not just about equal division of labor. It’s also about, “this thing is important to her. If he ignores it, he’s saying that what she wants is irrelevant to him.”
And that’s a guy saying, “I’m only spending time with you because it’s pleasant for me.” He’s already decided what’s “really” important, and her input is not welcome.
If he won’t do the dishes and laundry, he’s looking for fun, not a partnership. And his “leftist” ideals will be the same–something he studies because it’s interesting to him; a form of activism that he thinks will bring him a better life. If he can’t do household tasks that matter to a person he loves, he sure as hell can’t support policies that help people whose struggles he doesn’t even acknowledge are real.
They actually have a well paid full time job and position for someone who tells others what to do and schedules their activities in corporate sector. They call it the manager.
Based on this (x). Conclusion: they’re still fuckers.
Or maybe daddy works all week to provide us money for food and clothes
Becausedaddy’s labour is arbitrarily placed at a highervalueandthe work he does all week is no more important or legitimate than domestic labour. The capital value of the same relative labour is dependent on the gender of the person its performed by, and the capital values of different, specific kinds of labour, are dependent on the gender of the person who usually performs them in a society. The work easily available to women is priced cheap or free, and the work women have to struggle harder to get is still worth less capital than that same work when performed by men.
In short, daddy gets to choose what he gets to work on, and the job he gets to choose can easily generate more than enough money to feed and shelter more than one person. In this scenario, women still have to do work, but are often forced to depend on others to support them, let alone able to consider supporting others with their labour.
In some cases, men might actually prefer their wives to do even less in terms of domestic labour, because it will be a symbol of conspicuous leisure, which is the mark of status. Women doing no work at all only happens if daddy has so much money and power that he wants to show it to people by how he can support a family with even less work on their part.
A society directing women to be dependent on men, who like their women that way, is definitively a patriarchy, and the division of labour between men and women continues to reinforce gender inequality even today.
Hopefully you can see more of the repercussions of EXACTLY WHAT WAS IMPLIED IN THE ORIGINAL POSTnow.
oh, please, please, please read this commentary because this person was kind enough to give y’all a free lesson on gender roles WRT domestic work/work in a capitalist society since we, in America, live in a masculine society in terms of work and values.
one of my big problems with the “feminism is for equality” shit is that..if we treated women and men exactly the same in society, women would still not be treated right.
an example would be that if women were treated the same as men, we’d be treated as if we, and our bodies, function same as them. men don’t get pregnant and thus don’t get maternity leave while pregnant. if women were treated the exact same as men, women would lose things we need (paid maternity leave, free/accessible contraceptives, etc) because treating women the exact same as men is treatingusas if we are men.
i don’t want to be treated as a man, i want to be treated as a person who’s worth has no bearing or tie to men. i am my own person and women and men experience different things, so i don’t want equality, i want equity (because women and men function different, you can see through the maternity leave example) and not only that, but liberation.
Because trans Men are 1% of the trans communit for gods sake
They’re literally not though, more females are diagnosed with gender dysphoria than males are in America. Trans women have male privilege, socialization, and entitlement. That’s why their voices are the loudest.
Yeah I remember seeing some stats somewhere (i think from the UK) that said it was something like 3-4 girl (afab) gender clinic referrals for every 1 boy (amab). And the evidence that trans women still receive male privilege is everywhere. Richest “female” film director is a trans women. Highest paid “female” CEO is a trans woman. A lot of the “women” hired to do coding jobs are trans women. The fact that anyone even takes Jonathan Yaniv seriously or gives him the time of day is because he’s male. The fact that trans women in media get recognized for things other than giving birth or being in porn? That most of the money raised by LGBT orgs now goes to trans (women’s) causes? That they’ve so easily been allowed into female sports/spaces and are even allowed to define female lived experiences on their own terms? It’s all because they were born male.
@dont-want-heaven I am genuinely curious where you got the 1% stat from, or was that based on how few trans men you ever see or hear from in any form of media?
1) Remember that body shaming is always wrong, because people can’t help the body they were born with. If someone disagrees with you on this or anything else in regards to feminism, it’s perfectly okay to suggest that they are a male with a small penis, or that they have a “neck beard”, both of which are totally gross.
2) Insist that everyone who disagrees with the tenets of feminism is a privileged white male who does not believe that women should be able to make their own choices in life. Either that, or they are women who have been brainwashed by the patriarchy, because feminism is the only right choice.
3) Understand that women should be able to wear anything they want in public, even if it’s a mini-skirt and a tight tank top that has the word “slut” emblazoned on it, without total strangers assuming something about their character. Don’t forget that any guy who wears a fedora is obviously a misogynistic douchebag, and most likely one of those MRA assholes.
4) Harp on the fact that women and girls are the only ones who have to be careful about walking alone at night, because men and boys NEVER have to worry about getting jumped, mugged, robbed, killed or molested by some criminal. Remember that if men do get victimized, it probably sucks for them, but it’s kind of their own fault anyway, because they’re part of the patriarchy and the patriarchy is the reason all crime exists. Just don’t ever blame the victim, because that would be wrong.
5) NEVER engage in actual debate with someone who is bringing up facts and statistical evidence that proves whatever you just said wrong. Instead, you can still win the argument by calling them “over-privileged”, saying that you “took some classes” on the subject and they are not worth debating because they hate women, throwing out a feminist catch phrase like “patriarchy”, “male tears” or “what about the menz” over and over, and then blocking them. If you have time before your brain starts making you think about the facts they just proved you wrong with, call them some worse names just to let them know you don’t tolerate misogynists. Then go read some feminists blogs to get those pesky facts out of your head, and maybe drop a comment or two about how you “just won an argument against an MRA”. Whew, that was a close one.
6) Realize that not only is it perfectly acceptable to lump ALL males into the same category as rich, conservative white males with unlimited political power who come from old money, but also that it’s actually harmful to feminist theory to make any distinction at all between some guy who is living in a trailer park in Idaho and say, Mitt Romney, so don’t do it, otherwise this whole “male privilege” theory might take a hit and that’s the last thing you want if you’re gonna keep spouting feminist rhetoric.
7) Constantly complain about the “over sexualization” of women in advertisements, television, and movies, and how that holds real women up to unattainable expectations as far as their bodies go. This is an especially good point to keep bringing up in defense of feminsism, because everyone knows that men aren’t expected to look a certain way in any of these areas. Nope, men in the entertainment industry can be fat, ugly trolls and still be successful actors and models. Just ask Brad Pitt, Channing Tatum, Johnny Depp, Robert Pattinson, or any male underwear model. Looks mean nothing where men are concerned in the entertainment and fashion industries, and it’s totally unfair for any industry that’s rooted in sex and fantasy to keep perpetuating sexual fantasies. It’s all because of the patriarchy.
8) Remember: it’s totally cool to assume that all men are rapists because one of them molested you in some way at some point. Also, all women are bad drivers, on the strength of that one dumb broad who turned left into oncoming traffic and totaled my car a few months ago. It’s just logic, people. If someone of a certain gender did something to you, then everyone of that same gender must by definition be EXACTLY LIKE THAT PERSON. Why is that so hard to understand?
9) Don’t forget to bring up advertisements, statistics, data, or political quotes from over 50 years ago or more to illustrate how bad all women have it in the year 2013, because clearly nothing has improved for them since the 1950’s. If you think that it logically follows from this that either your old statistics are deliberately misleading or that feminism itself is completely ineffective, well, just stop thinking about it because…..patriarchy.
10) If confronted by a skeptic on feminist theory who claims that real equality can only be attained by concentrating on the whole population of the human race and not just half of it, always bring up the fact that feminism is actually fighting for men too, because every unfair thing that happens to men is perpetuated by the patriarchy, which is run by men, so by actively working against men, feminism is actually helping men because men shouldn’t act like men in the first place. Or something like that. I admit this one doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, but hey, you’re fighting the good fight here, and it’s okay to bend the rules of logic as long as you think you’re right. If someone argues, just refer to step 5.
I always see so many social-justice type things that are like, reassuring people in the oppressor group that no, we’re not trying to take anything away from you! Your life will be pretty much the same but better if we achieve our goals!
Which, in a sense I guess that’s true, because a fairer world is better for us all – but honestly, yes, we are trying to take things away from you, and achieving our goals will mean your life is different. Because people in oppressor groups have not been pulling your/our own weight this entire time.
Men, abled people, cis people, white people, straight people, rich people, non-intersex people, etc., all benefit from oppression. As in, there are things we/you have that we/you literally only recieve as a direct result of oppression, and in a world without that oppression, we/you will not receive those benefits!
Privileged people will have to give up being centred more, trusted more and deemed more competent than anyone else; having emotional work performed for us/you quietly and without recipricocity; having our/your interests prioritized over everyone else’s; being treated as the default from which everyone else is a variation; and a million more unfair advantages.
Ending oppression will require people in oppressor groups to actively give up all kinds of benefits that stem directly from oppression. There will often be things that oppressors didn’t even notice was a benefit of oppression that will now have to be relinquished. It’s difficult work, and it absolutely will affect your life. But it’s necessary and important work.
If you’re only interested in ending oppression with the caveat that it not affect your life whatsoever and you’ll never be inconvenienced by people gaining back rights they should always have had – you’re not interested in ending oppression, and you should make an effort to cultivate that interest.
I need feminism because… We are strong, independent women!
If you truly are strong, independent women, you would not be relying on feminism to address issues and hardships that most women are very capable, yet unwilling, to address themselves. Feminism relies on strong, independent women to prove that women are capable of showing the same equal levels of determination, talent, power, influence, resilience, toughness, persuasiveness, validity, devotion, leadership, and intellectual ability as any “male privileged” successful man or successful women.
Strong and independent women are, more often than not, enlightened enough to realise that they don’t need feminism, feminism needs them. Feminism needs strong, independent women to validate its claims about females being strong and independent. Don’t you see? Feminism rides on the back of successful, self empowered women, and steals the credit and recognition of their achievements to further push its own agenda!
This is what makes feminism (the first-wave, first-world modern “feminism”), such a dangerous and greedy political movement. It manipulates women into developing victim complexes before convincing them that they need this movement to help empower themselves to become strong and independent women.
I am a woman. I firmly believe that almost every single woman in modern, first world countries have the opportunity of developing and improving themselves to become a strong, independent, self-empowered members of society. Some people act on these opportunities, some people prefer not too. Some people are overwhelmed by the struggles they may face, some people eat their struggles for breakfast. What I am saying is that we have equal opportunities and equal rights under law. What we choose to do with what we have access to is up to us.
Besides, not all women poses is the drive and determination to become super-women-major-media-recognition powerhouses. That is okay. If it makes you happy and fulfilled, be a stay at home mum, view your partner as the head of your household, that still doesn’t make you any more or less strong, independent or empowered in your own way. Don’t let feminism convince you otherwise.
In this week’s blog Lawrence Allen writes for Gay Homestays on the recent discussion initiated by Rose McGowan. You can follow Lawrence on twitter @monopolyphonic .
Actress and activist Rose McGowan hit out at the gay community this week, saying “Gay men are as misogynistic as straight men, if not more so”. McGowan made the claims during an interview for gay American Psychoauthor Brett Easton…
What is the scientific, or at least verifiable, qualifier for the ‘recognition’ of ________ privilege’? How are privilege politics simply not reducible to a reliance on the self-appointed ‘arbiter’ of the Truth? This takes the form of: a relationship of 'faith’ between the arbiter and the condemned (e.g. “I believe that you recognize your privilege, now”) b) an admittance of epistemological incompetence (e.g. “I can never know your oppression, so I need you to verify my own admission of eternal ignorance”) c) self-castigation (e.g. “please forgive me for my privileges.”) Again, all of this is a reliance on a presupposed clear-sightedness of the self-appointed ‘arbiter’. It is an assumption that a judgement is even possible in the first place, and in the second place, only by the those in judgement (I’m the REAL person from ________ group). I’m not saying that ‘privilege’ isn’t real, but that the concept, and how its used, often is expressed in an idealist manner. Then people are too scared to critique the ritual, at the risk of being accused of having X privilege, and that X is supposed to be the reason the person simply can’t understand the privilege (sin) in the first place.
Men like this deserve to die and you can’t convince me otherwise
It’s sad how I didn’t even flinch on seeing this because it’s been so normalized in my own community :( It’s just expected that your husband is free to slap you whenever he gets angry because ‘men are men’ or some bs.
I just realized how fucking disgusting it is that it’s considered healthy and normal for teenage boys to eat everything ever yet teenage girls are obviously also growing but are fucking dieting all the time and shamed for eating while they’re growing
Shit
That’s not even the half of it because
- often when a teenager (male or female) puts on some fat it’s in preparation for a growth spurt. Grownups know this.
- teenagers grow in weird gawky ways, like a girl’s hips will spread out and look “fat” until her legs get longer, or they’ll shoot up super tall and then slowly put on muscle and fat. Grownups know this.
- it’s very common for a women’s body weight to fluctuate plus or minus 5% with her menstrual cycle
but in the diet mentality all of these things are considered personal moral failures, a failure of control, when controlling it is literally impossible. I am so incredibly saddened by women who weigh themselves multiple times a week and fuss over ten freaking pounds when that’s well within the bounds of menstrual fluctuation + just-ate-lunch. It’s horrible.
“A culture fixated on female thinness is not an obsession about female beauty, but an obsession about female obedience. Dieting is the most potent political sedative in women’s history; a quietly mad population is a tractable one.” – Naomi Wolf
Grown ups really do not know this. I tell this to parents at least once a week, your child is sleeping/moody/putting on weight because their body is preparing to more or less jump the Grand Canyon of maturation stages. Hormone changes start a full YEAR before first menses.
My own mother, who works in the medical field and has worked solely for OB/GYN for the last 16 years, gave me grief about all of those things. And she knew about hormone level changes and weight distribution changes and she STILL did it. Don’t think hard facts will outweigh societal norms. Keep talking about it until they can’t ignore the facts
BecauseNomeansNo, but is often interpreted as Yes! Yey! Okay! Maybe! Fun times! Try harder! You can have me as long as I’m single! Yey! I’m your property!
Because I have recently had these two conversations:
Convo 1:
Late night, post-party, waiting for a taxi with a friend on an empty street. Two Random Dudes approach us.
RD: Hey are you okay? Do you need help?
Me: No, thanks. We’re okay. Thanks for asking.
RD: Where are you from?
Me:XYZ
RD: Cool. We’re from ZYX.
Me: That’s nice.
RD: Can I have your number?
Me: No, sorry.
RD: Why not?
Me: I don’t know you. I don’t like handing my number out just like that.
RD: But I’m a nice guy.
Me: I bet you are, but I’ve had some bad experiences.
RD: Yeah, but I’M A NICE GUY!
Me: Yeah, but I can’t know that for sure.
RD: I AM! (Random Dudeisn’t really being so nice anymore)
Me: I’m sorry, I can’t give you my number.
RD: Why won’t just give me your number? I’m just trying to be nice to you! I asked if you needed help! I’m a nice guy! Do you have a boyfriend or something? Oh, you have boyfriend, don’t you? Sorry, sorry! Sorry! Have a nice night! Bye!
Convo 2:
Walking in town. Evening.
Random Dude: Excuse me, do you have a cigarette?
Me: No, sorry. (First attempt to leave.)
RD: Hey, wait! Wait! What’s your name?
Me:Name.
RD:I’m Name.
Me: Oh, okay, bye. (Second attempt to leave)
RD: Hey, can I have your number?
Me: Sorry, I don’t give my number to strangers.
RD: Do you have a boyfriend?
Me: No… Why…?
RD: So give me your number!
Me: No, I’m sorry. I just don’t know you and I don’t feel comfortable giving you my number.
RD: You have a boyfriend then?
Me: Why is that even relevant?! I’m a person too, you know! I don’t want to give you my number because I don’t want to. (Leaving.)
(I work for a large corporation, one that prides itself on doing the right thing for its people and the community. As such, it has a number of initiatives it pushes, including a commitment to diversity. I attend an offsite seminar on the subject. We are asked to state what makes us diverse as individuals. We are in the central valley of California and a lot of the attendees are first and second generation citizens. There are lots of stories about border crossings and odd circumstances, all interesting but not really adding much to the experience. When it is my turn I decide to give them both barrels. My presentation is summarized below, all of which is true:)
Me:“I am a white, straight Protestant male.”
Me: “I have been married for 16 years and have two children.”
Me:“I was raised in an upper middle class background in New England.”
Me: “I attended exclusive private boarding schools for high school and college.”
Me: “I can trace my ancestry back to the Mayflower.”
(When I finished I got some odd looks. Somehow, that wasn’t what they were looking for…)
Well, of course not, OP. What they were looking for was a thoughtful response, an attempt to connect with your colleagues, or, failing that, an “interesting” fact about yourself (if one exists - somehow I doubt it), and instead they got you screaming, “I’m a rich, cishet White male! TRIGGERED YET?” at them.
(I am the front desk manager at a hotel. We have an ad online looking for a part-time front desk clerk and I’ve been getting a lot of applications. About four months ago we hired a new guy, let’s call him Jim, who is working out to be one of the best employees we’ve had in years, and I’m really hoping to get just as lucky with the next person. Everybody loves him and he has the potential to advance to a manager position in the future if things keep up. Just before three pm, a young lady walks in with a file folder and I can already tell she is here to apply for the job. I go to greet her.)
Girl: “Hi. May I speak with the manager, please?”
Me: “Is this regarding a job application?”
Girl:“Yes, it is.”
Me:“Wonderful! My name is [My Name] and I’m the front desk manager. Pleasure to meet you.”
Girl:“Likewise! My name is [Girl] and I would like to apply for the position you have available.” *she pulls a resume from her folder and hands it to me* “As you can see by my resume I am more than qualified and would be perfect for this job.” *her resume is average to say the least* “There is only one thing holding me back…”
Me: “All right, and what might that be?”
Girl:“Well, do you have an employee named Jim working here? Jim [Last Name]?”
Me:“Yes, I do. He is my best employee.”
Girl: *looks surprised* “Oh, well, I can’t be in the same building with him due to a restraining order I have against him. I can’t work here as long as he’s on your staff. So…”
Me:“Well, then, I guess I won’t be able to consider you. I’m very sorry. Have a lovely day.”
(I hand her back her resume and she looks at me with this devilish look that tells me this girl is a troublemaker. She kind of smiles.)
Girl:“Do you guys do criminal record checks?” *she has a huge smirk as she asks this*
Me: “Yes, ma’am, we do a criminal record check on every employee, including on Jim.”
Girl:“Well, he—”
Me:“We are fully aware of his past and the general manager and I have decided that we are comfortable enough with him to overlook it. We firmly believe that everybody deserves a second chance and Jim is no different. And as I said, he is my best employee, one of the best we’ve had in years, and I have no intentions of firing him as long as he’s doing his job and being honest with us. Is there anything else?”
(She goes red in the face and puckers her lips.)
Girl:“Well, that’s wonderful! I’m so happy to hear he’s doing such a wonderful job. That’s just great. Yeah. Well, can I leave you my resume anyway in case something comes up?”
Me:“Well, things do change so I suppose I could hold on to it but as I said, I have no intentions of firing him so unless he quits I have nothing available for you here. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to wrap up and head home. Thank you.”
(I go back to my office, file the resume and think nothing more of it. The next morning the phone rings and a familiar voice asks to be put through to the general manager. I recognize her right away as the girl from the night before. I overhear my manager’s side of the conversation and it’s clear that she’s going over my head to get this guy fired. After about 15 minutes the general manager hangs up and calls me in to the office.)
General Manager: “You’re not going to believe this: a girl just called and tried to talk me into firing Jim so we could hire her. She said that she is perfect for the job and that we need her on staff but that you are discriminating against her by putting her in a situation where she can’t work here.”
Me:“What?!”
General Manager: “Yeah, according to little miss law school here, it’s illegal to hire people who have restraining orders against them because it prevents their victims from being able to work at those same places.”
Me: “Seriously? She’s crazy. That girl is nothing but a troublemaker and even if Jim wasn’t here I wouldn’t want her on staff. I don’t need that kind of childishness around here.”
General Manager: “Yeah, she also told me we were breaking the law by having her resume here and told me that I have to destroy it because it might be in an area where Jim could see it.”
Me:“She insisted on leaving it. I gave it back to her!”
General Manager: “Oh, I know. I know her type and what they do. This ain’t my first rodeo. Not my first experience with a restraining order either. You should have hear how quickly she changed her tune when I told her that by coming here and calling me she was actually violating her own restraining order thereby making it null and void. I told her I would be giving this information and the security tapes to Jim and his probation officer. She just went silent, then told me happily to never mind and to tell Jim to have a lovely day and to enjoy his job. Unbelievable, some people.”
Me: “Wow. Did she really void her own restraining order?”
General Manager: “Probably. Depends on the terms and conditions, I guess. Anyway, do me a favor and pull up the security footage from last night when she came in and prepare an incident report, please. Let’s wrap this up right now and be done with it.”
(It turned out she had done the exact same thing at Jim’s second job where he worked as a bouncer at a bar. The girl didn’t even need work; she had a full time job and was going to school but was determined to make his life difficult. I don’t know what is going to come of it all but it still amazes me how hateful and vindictive some people can be.)
I have to say, I believe it.
Oh, I don’t mean the boring, misogynist tale by whiny men that “women make false accusations and ruin men’s lives just out of spite and are always taken way too seriously” bit (their favorite version of this tale is, of course, the false rape accusation).
I mean the part where men are being dismissive and acting as if Jim being enough of a danger to a woman that a restraining order against him was necessary is no big deal.
I mean the part where the GM talks about restraining orders like he’s been slapped with a few himself.
I mean the part where OP acts as if wanting some consequences for Jim’s predatory behavior is being a “troublemaker.”
I mean the part where they bring up Jim being good at his job and well-liked as if any of that precludes him from being a misogynist and a predator.
I mean the part where men will respond to this with “not all men”, while failing to actually condemn (and sometimes even while defending) the attitudes and behaviors here that they want to be dissociated from.
All of that is totally realistic. But the chances of this story having actually happened are slim to none.
For months, every morning when my daughter was in preschool, I watched her construct an elaborate castle out of blocks, colorful plastic discs, bits of rope, ribbons and feathers, only to have the same little boy gleefully destroy it within seconds of its completion.
No matter how many times he did it, his parents never swooped in BEFORE the morning’s live 3-D reenactment of “Invasion of AstroMonster.” This is what they’d say repeatedly:
“You know! Boys will be boys!”
“He’s just going through a phase!”
“He’s such a boy! He LOVES destroying things!”
“Oh my god! Girls and boys are SO different!”
“He. Just. Can’t. Help himself!”
I tried to teach my daughter how to stop this from happening. She asked him politely not to do it. We talked about some things she might do. She moved where she built. She stood in his way. She built a stronger foundation to the castle, so that, if he did get to it, she wouldn’t have to rebuild the whole thing. In the meantime, I imagine his parents thinking, “What red-blooded boy wouldn’t knock it down?”
Her consent didn’t matter. Besides, it’s not like she made a big fuss when he knocked it down. It wasn’t a “legitimate” knocking over if she didn’t throw a tantrum.
His desire — for power, destruction, control, whatever- - was understandable.
I know it’s a lurid metaphor, but I taught my daughter the preschool block precursor of don’t “get raped” and this child, Boy #1, did not learn the preschool equivalent of “don’t rape.”
Not once did his parents talk to him about invading another person’s space and claiming for his own purposes something that was not his to claim. Respect for her and her work and words was not something he was learning. How much of the boy’s behavior in coming years would be excused in these ways, be calibrated to meet these expectations and enforce the “rules” his parents kept repeating?
There was another boy who, similarly, decided to knock down her castle one day. When he did it his mother took him in hand, explained to him that it was not his to destroy, asked him how he thought my daughter felt after working so hard on her building and walked over with him so he could apologize. That probably wasn’t much fun for him, but he did not do it again.
There was a third child. He was really smart. He asked if he could knock her building down. She, beneficent ruler of all pre-circle-time castle construction, said yes… but only after she was done building it and said it was OK. They worked out a plan together and eventually he started building things with her and they would both knock the thing down with unadulterated joy. You can’t make this stuff up.
Take each of these three boys and consider what he might do when he’s older, say, at college, drunk at a party, mad at an ex-girlfriend who rebuffs him and uses words that she expects will be meaningful and respecte, “No, I don’t want to. Stop. Leave.”
This is so brilliant. We learn things from socialization process. What our parents, friends and peers do, media and all. I think perhaps rape is because parents think boys will be boys, they bully, fight and destroy things, it’s their characteristics so they don’t bother to stop them. But it manifests in them, knowing or unknowingly, they will just think, because I’m a boy and boys tend to do these, so it doesn’t matter even if the girl hates it, says no, because I’m a boy.
Just reblog this, this message is really powerful. For parents and future parents.
What’s also interesting, is if you frame this as about spoiling your children, and about spoiled children, people tend to agree and get it. They’ll agree that children whose parents lay down no boundaries for them when they hurt others, who let them have whatever they want at the expense of others, and justify away the harm they do, will probably grow up thinking they can do this to others (usually weaker than them, or they perceive as weaker) as adults. But if you mention the word “privilege”, “entitlement” or anything relating to gender, everybody freaks the f- out and will deny up, down, back, forth, and sideways that how you raise a child, what you allow them to get away with, or training them that their hurtful behaviour will always be justified, can affect them at all.
