“When you’re a girl, you have to be everything. You have to be dope at what you do but you have to be super sweet and you have to be sexy and you have to be this, you have to be that, and you have to be nice,” she says. “It’s like, ‘I can’t be all those things at once. I’m a human being.”—Nicki Minaj (via youaintshitbitch)
Joe Rehyansky, a part-time magistrate and Vietnam veteran, wrote on conservative news site The Daily Caller that lesbians should be allowed to serve in the military because straight male soldiers could “convert” them.
Mr Rehyansky, of Hamilton County, Tennessee, argued that men were naturally more promiscuous than women and “it fell to men to swing through the trees and scour the caves in search of as many women as possible to subdue and impregnate – a tough job but someone had to do it”.
Then, he claimed that the “promiscuity” of gay men, coupled with HIV, would have “the potential for disastrous health consequences” if gay men were allowed to serve openly in the military.
“Gays spread disease at a rate out of all proportion to their numbers in our population and should be excluded from the military,” he argued.
He continued: “Shouldn’t the overwhelmingly straight warriors who answer their county’s call be spared the indignity of showering with other men who achieve lascivious enjoyment from the sight of those lithe naked bodies, and who may be tempted to seek more than the view?”
Lesbian military personnel, who Mr Rehyansky praised for their “medical and administrative specialties”, should be allowed to serve because they apparently have low sex drives.
His final argument, which has now been removed by The Daily Caller, was as follows: “My solution would get the distaff part of our homosexual population off our collective ‘Broke Back,’ thus giving straight male GIs a fair shot at converting lesbians and bringing them into the mainstream.”
Mr Rehyansky was accused of advocating corrective rape for lesbians by some commentators.
That guy needs to die in a plasma burst.
And people thought that corrective rape was only in South Africa.
Skin him alive.
I can’t fucking believe what I just read.
lithe naked bodies
lithe naked bodies
LITHE NAKED BODIES
Aside from the sheer rage-inducing wrongness of this whole thing, methinks Mr. Rehyansky also protests too much.
“Feminism (at least my brand) doesn’t oppose sexiness, but it opposes compulsory sexiness… If women could be sexy on our own time—if looking and acting sexual was an indicator that we were actually interested in being sexy, rather than just doing what we gotta—then sexiness would mean something. We’d realize that actually, women aren’t sexless when left to our own devices. We’d discover the many different things that make women feel sexy (some of us kinda rock the cargo pants, thank you) and we’d be more comfortable with women being unsexy when they had other shit to do.
I think that if women—if people—were free to express their sexuality when and how they wanted, there’d end up being more sexiness in the world, and this is why feminism is ultimately pro-sexy.”—
Oppression exists when one social group, whether knowingly or unconsciously, exploits another social group for its own benefit.
Individual Level: Beliefs or behaviors of an individual person; conscious or unconscious actions, or attitudes that maintain oppression.
Institutional Level: Institutions such as family, government, industry, education, and religion shape, and are shaped by, the other two levels. The application of institutional policies and procedures in an oppressive society run by individuals or groups who advocate or collude with social oppression produces oppressive consequences.
Societal/Cultural Level: Society’s cultural norms perpetuate implicit and explicit values that bind institutions and individuals; cultural guidelines, such as philosophies of life, definitions of the good, normal, health, deviance, and sickness, often serve the primary function of providing individuals and institutions with the justification for social oppression.
Features of Oppression
Pervasiveness: Oppression fuses institutional and systemic discrimination, personal bias, bigotry, and social prejudice in a complex web of relationships and structures that saturate most aspects of life in our society.
Restricting: Oppression denotes structural and material constraints that significantly shape a person’s life chances and sense of possibility.
Hierarchical: Oppression also signifies a hierarchical relationship in which dominant or privileged groups benefit, often in unconscious ways, from the dis-empowerment of subordinated or targeted groups.
Complex, multiple, cross-cutting relationships: Power and privilege are relative, however, since individuals hold multiple and cross-cutting social group memberships.
Internalized: Oppressive beliefs are internalized by victims as well as benefactors. The oppressor doesn’t have to exert any more pressure, because we now do it to ourselves and each other. Divide and conquer works.
“Isms”: Shared and Distinctive Characteristics: It is of value to identify both the particular characteristics of specific forms of oppression (such as racism, sexism, heterosexism, ableism, etc.), as well as the patterns that connect and mutually reinforce different oppressions in a system that is inclusive and pervasive.