January 29, 2012
Occupy Oakland demonstrators shield themselves from an exploding tear gas grenade (REUTERS/Stephen Lam)

[A] city’s civic buildings—paid for by previous and current generations of citizens—DOES belong to the people, NOT the government, and certainly NOT the police. The people of a city OWN that city via the taxes they are forced to pay for the privilege of being a municipal shareholder. And, so we’re clear, they would have been providing “compensation” in the form of all the community care they were going to administer in and through that building—care the city Oakland has failed to provide to its citizens. …[T]his was not theft. No one was looking to sell, profit, or personally gain from the Occupying of an empty, wasted, civic space. This act was many, many members of the Oakland community attempting to turn a squandered, empty building into a community center where they could offer and coordinate help for homeless folks that have been abandoned by the leaders of Oakland. This act was a pure representation of selflessness. No one person would have personally benefitted from the using of a wasted resource such as the convention center. The whole intent was to create a facility where citizens that wanted to could volunteer and donate their time and skills to helping their fellow humans. Occupy needed nothing from the city, except a reasonable response to a compassionate, pragmatic solution to a complex problem. Occupiers did a fantastic job of shining a light on the fact that city leaders and business owners are more concerned with protecting the emptiness of Oakland’s buildings than they are living, breathing people that are the most in need of compassion and assistance. Mayor Quan, do buildings really matter more than the most vulnerable lives? (Mhris Carco)

Occupy Oakland demonstrators shield themselves from an exploding tear gas grenade (REUTERS/Stephen Lam)

[A] city’s civic buildings—paid for by previous and current generations of citizens—DOES belong to the people, NOT the government, and certainly NOT the police. The people of a city OWN that city via the taxes they are forced to pay for the privilege of being a municipal shareholder. And, so we’re clear, they would have been providing “compensation” in the form of all the community care they were going to administer in and through that building—care the city Oakland has failed to provide to its citizens. 

…[T]his was not theft. No one was looking to sell, profit, or personally gain from the Occupying of an empty, wasted, civic space. This act was many, many members of the Oakland community attempting to turn a squandered, empty building into a community center where they could offer and coordinate help for homeless folks that have been abandoned by the leaders of Oakland. This act was a pure representation of selflessness. No one person would have personally benefitted from the using of a wasted resource such as the convention center. The whole intent was to create a facility where citizens that wanted to could volunteer and donate their time and skills to helping their fellow humans. Occupy needed nothing from the city, except a reasonable response to a compassionate, pragmatic solution to a complex problem. 

Occupiers did a fantastic job of shining a light on the fact that city leaders and business owners are more concerned with protecting the emptiness of Oakland’s buildings than they are living, breathing people that are the most in need of compassion and assistance. Mayor Quan, do buildings really matter more than the most vulnerable lives? (
Mhris Carco)

January 26, 2012
fyeahcap:

thisshitisallracist:

pantsreminder:

bossymarmalade:

pantsreminder:

bossymarmalade:

pantsreminder:

Hemashri
So I’m making up Hindu myths or something. She charms men, has sex with them, then eats their souls. fun stuff.
(Hemashri means one with a golden body apparently)

Are you Hindu?
If you’re not (and judging from this bizarre Jasmine flower-of-the-desert outfit and lack of knowledge of EXISTING Hindu myth figures, I’m guessing you’re not even Indian), why do you think it’s your right to “make up Hindu myths”?

I don’t know, creative freedom maybe? 
Just because I don’t know much about Hinduism and clearly didn’t do any research doing a stupid doodle doesn’t mean I can’t give it a half assed story related to what I happened to be inspired by. 
Maybe if I had seemed a little more serious about this I’d understand why you felt the need to ask this, but in all honesty, do I have to explain creative impulses to you? I’d do research if I was more serious about it because there’s nothing worse than being the artist that doesn’t know about what they’re drawing, but I’m not really even planning on doing anything with this character.
I don’t know if you’re an artist but if you are you know how you can just see an image in your head, and you have to draw it. Usually while I’m drawing I make up stories, and that’s not exactly a time when I want to be doing research. I just create, regardless of inaccuracies.
Maybe instead of getting angry you could try and educate me as to why you think I shouldn’t do this or what I did wrong or something. I always accept critiques on my art, which includes problems with accuracy, or if it offends you I can draw something more accurate. I’m not here to make enemies, I don’t want you to feel like you can’t tell me that I’m wrong. (for the record though, I’d definitely prefer you take it to my ask box)

Maybe if you didn’t want actual Hindus to be grossed out by your half-assed assumptions and perpetrating of stereotypes, you should keep this kind of shit in your digital sketchbook and not post it with a laconic comment about how you invented a Hindu creature who sexes up men and eats their souls.
“Artistic license” and “creative freedom” are valid concepts.  They mean that as an artist you can use images in whatever way you choose to communicate a message.  What they DON’T mean is that nobody should criticize you if blithely use the iconography of a group you don’t belong to, because we should all understand your artistic methods and that your creative impulses are more important than the way this representation of Hinduism hurts actual Hindus.

“Maybe instead of getting angry you could try and educate me”

AHAHAHAHAHHA 
I don’t do Racism 101, sorry.  Maybe instead of being defensive and demanding an education, you could DO SOME DAMN RESEARCH.

Well, I guess this’ll be the last time I post any of my doodles anywhere on the internet because they’ll offend someone
I bet you didn’t think twice about offending me, but that’s okay because I’m a white majority and I don’t get any kind of racism. I hope you read what your followers are adding, it makes me feel so important, especially all of the insulting shit about me being an ignorant ”whitey”
And since you’re so unwilling to teach me, I don’t even fucking want to learn. Why would I do research on people who are now rudely putting me down? You tell me to not be so ignorant, then you don’t even tell me what I should do to fix it? Honestly, just because you’re a minority means you can walk all over people, even when they offered to compromise? It’s not like I was planning on offending people, I realize that’s how you deal with some people but why are you taking out your anger on me? You don’t know me at all as a person, and if you couldn’t tell from my last response I just want to understand.
I know you won’t believe me but I’m literally crying right now because you did this in probably the rudest way possible. Thanks for ruining my week.
If you want me to take it down I fucking will, but it looks like now that you’ve drawn everyone’s attention on the “ignorant whitey” everyone has seen it anyway.

I like reblogging passive aggressive shit on my tumblr. I hope no one missed this. Because it’s easily one of my fave posts ever. 
Just…everything I bolded. Wow.

omg.
EDUCATE ME
NEVER MIND I DIDN’T WANT TO LEARN ANYWAY
PASSIVE-AGRESSIVE RAMBLINGS.
I’M TOTALLY CRYING WHITE TEARS.
I HOPE YOU’RE HAPPY.
end scene.

OP—and others who express similar sentiments— it’s important to “do research on people” even after they’ve criticized you because you need to understand
why what you did was wrong (ie, how it upholds stereotypes of women of color as hypersexed arbiters of doom)
why the people you are mis-representing are mad about it (because they’ve been actively oppressed by policies and interpersonal prejudices due to the above stereotypes for decades now—and they’re pissed about it, and they’re pissed when we white folks refuse to get it, and it’s not their responsibility to swallow their hurt or anger to appease us when our entire culture already appeases us. And please note, I say “us” because I am also white)
how your message that “one person possibly of Hindu descent criticized me, so I get to ignore all Hindu people forever” follows a long history of white folks taking criticism from one person of color as evidence that their entire race or ethnic group(s) are bad/angry/crazy and deserve to be insulted, marginalized, or repressed, and is actually the textbook example of racism
OP, from one white person to another, it’s important to hear the criticisms being levied your way and turn it into an opportunity to educate yourself. Putting up this wall of defensiveness is hurting a lot of people of color, and making it that much more difficult for you to understand your role as an artist in a pluralistic, multicultural world. Check out some resources on white privilege and anti-racism and check in with us later. 

fyeahcap:

thisshitisallracist:

pantsreminder:

bossymarmalade:

pantsreminder:

bossymarmalade:

pantsreminder:

Hemashri

So I’m making up Hindu myths or something. She charms men, has sex with them, then eats their souls. fun stuff.

(Hemashri means one with a golden body apparently)

Are you Hindu?

If you’re not (and judging from this bizarre Jasmine flower-of-the-desert outfit and lack of knowledge of EXISTING Hindu myth figures, I’m guessing you’re not even Indian), why do you think it’s your right to “make up Hindu myths”?

I don’t know, creative freedom maybe? 

Just because I don’t know much about Hinduism and clearly didn’t do any research doing a stupid doodle doesn’t mean I can’t give it a half assed story related to what I happened to be inspired by. 

Maybe if I had seemed a little more serious about this I’d understand why you felt the need to ask this, but in all honesty, do I have to explain creative impulses to you? I’d do research if I was more serious about it because there’s nothing worse than being the artist that doesn’t know about what they’re drawing, but I’m not really even planning on doing anything with this character.

I don’t know if you’re an artist but if you are you know how you can just see an image in your head, and you have to draw it. Usually while I’m drawing I make up stories, and that’s not exactly a time when I want to be doing research. I just create, regardless of inaccuracies.

Maybe instead of getting angry you could try and educate me as to why you think I shouldn’t do this or what I did wrong or something. I always accept critiques on my art, which includes problems with accuracy, or if it offends you I can draw something more accurate. I’m not here to make enemies, I don’t want you to feel like you can’t tell me that I’m wrong. (for the record though, I’d definitely prefer you take it to my ask box)

Maybe if you didn’t want actual Hindus to be grossed out by your half-assed assumptions and perpetrating of stereotypes, you should keep this kind of shit in your digital sketchbook and not post it with a laconic comment about how you invented a Hindu creature who sexes up men and eats their souls.

“Artistic license” and “creative freedom” are valid concepts.  They mean that as an artist you can use images in whatever way you choose to communicate a message.  What they DON’T mean is that nobody should criticize you if blithely use the iconography of a group you don’t belong to, because we should all understand your artistic methods and that your creative impulses are more important than the way this representation of Hinduism hurts actual Hindus.

“Maybe instead of getting angry you could try and educate me”

AHAHAHAHAHHA 

I don’t do Racism 101, sorry.  Maybe instead of being defensive and demanding an education, you could DO SOME DAMN RESEARCH.

Well, I guess this’ll be the last time I post any of my doodles anywhere on the internet because they’ll offend someone

I bet you didn’t think twice about offending me, but that’s okay because I’m a white majority and I don’t get any kind of racism. I hope you read what your followers are adding, it makes me feel so important, especially all of the insulting shit about me being an ignorant ”whitey”

And since you’re so unwilling to teach me, I don’t even fucking want to learn. Why would I do research on people who are now rudely putting me down? You tell me to not be so ignorant, then you don’t even tell me what I should do to fix it? Honestly, just because you’re a minority means you can walk all over people, even when they offered to compromise? It’s not like I was planning on offending people, I realize that’s how you deal with some people but why are you taking out your anger on me? You don’t know me at all as a person, and if you couldn’t tell from my last response I just want to understand.

I know you won’t believe me but I’m literally crying right now because you did this in probably the rudest way possible. Thanks for ruining my week.

If you want me to take it down I fucking will, but it looks like now that you’ve drawn everyone’s attention on the “ignorant whitey” everyone has seen it anyway.

I like reblogging passive aggressive shit on my tumblr. I hope no one missed this. Because it’s easily one of my fave posts ever. 

Just…everything I bolded. Wow.

omg.

EDUCATE ME

NEVER MIND I DIDN’T WANT TO LEARN ANYWAY

PASSIVE-AGRESSIVE RAMBLINGS.

I’M TOTALLY CRYING WHITE TEARS.

I HOPE YOU’RE HAPPY.

end scene.

OP—and others who express similar sentiments— it’s important to “do research on people” even after they’ve criticized you because you need to understand

  • why what you did was wrong (ie, how it upholds stereotypes of women of color as hypersexed arbiters of doom)
  • why the people you are mis-representing are mad about it (because they’ve been actively oppressed by policies and interpersonal prejudices due to the above stereotypes for decades now—and they’re pissed about it, and they’re pissed when we white folks refuse to get it, and it’s not their responsibility to swallow their hurt or anger to appease us when our entire culture already appeases us. And please note, I say “us” because I am also white)
  • how your message that “one person possibly of Hindu descent criticized me, so I get to ignore all Hindu people forever” follows a long history of white folks taking criticism from one person of color as evidence that their entire race or ethnic group(s) are bad/angry/crazy and deserve to be insulted, marginalized, or repressed, and is actually the textbook example of racism

OP, from one white person to another, it’s important to hear the criticisms being levied your way and turn it into an opportunity to educate yourself. Putting up this wall of defensiveness is hurting a lot of people of color, and making it that much more difficult for you to understand your role as an artist in a pluralistic, multicultural world. Check out some resources on white privilege and anti-racism and check in with us later. 

January 26, 2012
"Speaking from the perspective and the tradition of lesbians of color, most if not all rationales for excluding transsexual women are not only transphobic, but also racist. To argue that transsexual women should not enter the Land because their experiences are different would have to assume that all other women’s experiences are the same, and this is a racist assumption. The argument that transsexual women have experienced some degree of male privilege should not bar them from our communities once we realize that not all women are equally privileged or oppressed. To suggest that the safety of the Land would be compromised overlooks, perhaps intentionally, ways in which women can act out violence and oppressions against each other. Even the argument that “the presence of a penis would trigger the women” is flawed because it neglects the fact that white skin is just as much a reminder of violence as a penis. The racist history of lesbian-feminism has taught us that any white woman making these excuses for one oppression have made and will make the same excuse for other oppressions such as racism, classism, and ableism."

— Emi Koyama’s “Whose feminism is it, anyway?” (via wewantrevolutiongirlstylenow)

(Source: eminism.org, via feral-femme)

January 24, 2012
So I’m wondering, will a black woman get sympathy for being made cry by a racist white person?

sourcedumal:

Because I’ve had plenty of scenarios happen to me where I wanted to cry, and nobody batted a fucking eye.

Like freshman year when I was the only black person on my floor, and somebody wrote NIGGER on my white board.Yep. Somebody wrote that shit on my white board. And I didn’t get a single fucking apology from the white bitch whose friend did it.

Or the times when old white ladies BARRELED INTO ME while I was minding my own damn business in the mall because I had the NERVE to be there with a gay white friend of mine.

Or the time I essentially was groped by a white man in a nightclub and tried to tell security, but they wouldn’t listen to me.

Or when I was 11 and got called a thieving nigger because I was eying the candy section too long for one white man’s liking.

Where the fuck is my sympathy? Where the fuck are the droves of people saying that those people should feel bad??

I didn’t get any. None. And neither have the millions of POC who have experienced the SAME SHIT and even worse. So why the fuck SHOULDN’T we get to laugh at a privileged white bitch who won’t even have anything remotely close to that ever happen to her again?

January 24, 2012
"Patriarchy and racism make a lot of room for exhibiting, holding space for, talking about, ritualizing and affirming white transmasculine identity and experience. Trans guys are absolutely centered in queer communities we’re part of, which is connected to rampant femmephobia, sexism, making fun of lesbians, and is a straight-up reflection of the dominant culture’s valuing of masculinity and demonizing of femininity."

— Savannah Jane, one of the creators of “Shit (Young, White, Class-privileged, City-based) “Radical Queers” Say to Each Other”, on transmysogyny, femmephobia, and its intersections with race (and class and location).

January 18, 2012
So fucking tired of postmodernist douchefucks trying to tell me that all labels must go cuz somehow that’ll magic away oppression.

genderbitch:

silentpunk:

flapjackstate:

genderbitch:

HEY, IF WE JUST DON’T GIVE FIRE A NAME, IT STOPS BURNING US. LOL.

Get this a lot for mental health diagnoses, I find.

“You’re just grasping for excuses/labels!”

(OP is talking about trans people, I don’t intend to derail that).

Those people are shitty… saying those things is not in any way related to postmodern theories btw… 

Well yeah. They operate under the Hot Topic version of postmodernism.

Guh. Postmodernism. “There is no such thing as truth” goes down easy for folks who’ve had the power to define truth, morality, ethics, logic, and beauty for the last 400-2000 years. 

Pre-modernity: “Hey u guyz we decided ur being woman/Black/Brown/queer/etc means this and is totes bad, so we’re gonna go ‘head and withhold access and agency from u and ur peeps, and totes kill u or imprison u if u dun like it, and that’s the troof.”

Post-modernity: “LOL J/K Y U MAD BRO”

January 14, 2012
phrynozoid:

getsnarly:

fuckyeahsexeducation:

(TW: Forced Sterilization and Rape)
sexxxisbeautiful:

hickies-n-hotpants:

dichotomydestroyingparty:

nbcnews:


Elaine Riddick was 13 years old when she got pregnant after being raped by a neighbor in Winfall, N.C., in 1967.  The state ordered that immediately after giving birth, she should be sterilized.  Doctors cut and tied off her fallopian tubes.
Riddick was never told what was happening.  “Got to the hospital and they put me in a room and that’s all I remember, that’s all I remember,” she said.  “When I woke up, I woke up with bandages on my stomach.” 
Her records reveal that a five-person state eugenics board in Raleigh had approved a recommendation that she be sterilized. North Carolina was one of 31 states to have a government run eugenics program.  By the 1960s, tens of thousands of Americans were sterilized as a result of these programs.

To read more about this story, click here. Dr. Nancy Snyderman’s full broadcast report, ‘State of Shame’, airs Monday, November 7, at 10pm/9c on NBC’s Rock Center with Brian Williams.

holy fuck. 

RAGE.

I recently started learning about the history of eugenics and the correlation between the history of birth control in America. It’s some freaky fucking shit I tell you, full of examples of the classism, racism, and ableism rampant in society. How convenient that only poor people/people of color/mentally disabled people were sterilized! /sarcasm/
P.S. If I remember correctly IQ tests were originally used to determine if someone was “feeble-minded” enough to be sterilized.


Reproductive Justice is NOT just about being allowed to have abortions. Forced sterilization is a huge issue as well, that is hardly ever talked about, if even known about. Educate yourself.

THIS is why when people say “The government should make people have to apply for a permit to reproduce!” and “There should be a law that makes it so only college graduates can have kids!” and things like that, I go apeshit. Since when has the government ever done a good job of being in control over people’s lives? Since when do you trust the government to be a good judge of who gets what? Really? You’d put the government in charge of everyone’s reproductive rights and think it wouldn’t turn into a total clusterfuck like everything else?!

Yup. Like another user posted above, the government has already messed with forced sterilization, and it is always targeted mainly against poor women, women of color (particularly indigenous women) and women with emotional and neurological disabilities (the clinical diagnosis of which was “moron”, for those who try to avoid ableist language). And these aren’t anomalies: the latter was legitimized in the Supreme Court decision Buck v Bell, which defended coerced sterilization on the grounds it halted things like “promiscuity”, and was applauded by eugenicists. Eugenicists, remember, advocate for racial cleansing—the most infamous example being carried out by Nazis against Jews, Slavs, the Roma, and gays, to the tune of six million people.
Excellent point about reproductive choice being the right to have children as much as it is about not having children. In looking around the Internet for sources for the above paragraph, I came upon the distinction of eugenics into two categories: 
Positive eugenics is aimed at encouraging reproduction among the genetically advantaged. Possible approaches include financial and political stimuli, targeted demographic analyses, in vitro fertilization, egg transplants, and cloning.[41] Negative eugenics is aimed at lowering fertility among the genetically disadvantaged. This includes abortions, sterilization, and other methods of family planning.[41] Both positive and negative eugenics can be coercive. Abortion by fit women was illegal in Nazi Germany.[42] via Wikipedia.
Thinking now of the ways housing, education, and food access determine who is considered “fit” and how “fit” has little to do with genetics, and more with policy.
Incidentally, OKCupid has a freaky-ass “match question” asking if the individual taking the test thinks sterilization is a good idea. Who in the hell answers that in the affirmative? Have two people found romance over that? *shudder*

phrynozoid:

getsnarly:

fuckyeahsexeducation:

(TW: Forced Sterilization and Rape)

sexxxisbeautiful:

hickies-n-hotpants:

dichotomydestroyingparty:

nbcnews:

Elaine Riddick was 13 years old when she got pregnant after being raped by a neighbor in Winfall, N.C., in 1967.  The state ordered that immediately after giving birth, she should be sterilized.  Doctors cut and tied off her fallopian tubes.

Riddick was never told what was happening.  “Got to the hospital and they put me in a room and that’s all I remember, that’s all I remember,” she said.  “When I woke up, I woke up with bandages on my stomach.” 

Her records reveal that a five-person state eugenics board in Raleigh had approved a recommendation that she be sterilized. North Carolina was one of 31 states to have a government run eugenics program.  By the 1960s, tens of thousands of Americans were sterilized as a result of these programs.

To read more about this story, click here. Dr. Nancy Snyderman’s full broadcast report, ‘State of Shame’, airs Monday, November 7, at 10pm/9c on NBC’s Rock Center with Brian Williams.

holy fuck. 

RAGE.

I recently started learning about the history of eugenics and the correlation between the history of birth control in America. It’s some freaky fucking shit I tell you, full of examples of the classism, racism, and ableism rampant in society. How convenient that only poor people/people of color/mentally disabled people were sterilized! /sarcasm/

P.S. If I remember correctly IQ tests were originally used to determine if someone was “feeble-minded” enough to be sterilized.

Reproductive Justice is NOT just about being allowed to have abortions. Forced sterilization is a huge issue as well, that is hardly ever talked about, if even known about. Educate yourself.

THIS is why when people say “The government should make people have to apply for a permit to reproduce!” and “There should be a law that makes it so only college graduates can have kids!” and things like that, I go apeshit. Since when has the government ever done a good job of being in control over people’s lives? Since when do you trust the government to be a good judge of who gets what? Really? You’d put the government in charge of everyone’s reproductive rights and think it wouldn’t turn into a total clusterfuck like everything else?!

Yup. Like another user posted above, the government has already messed with forced sterilization, and it is always targeted mainly against poor women, women of color (particularly indigenous women) and women with emotional and neurological disabilities (the clinical diagnosis of which was “moron”, for those who try to avoid ableist language). And these aren’t anomalies: the latter was legitimized in the Supreme Court decision Buck v Bell, which defended coerced sterilization on the grounds it halted things like “promiscuity”, and was applauded by eugenicists. Eugenicists, remember, advocate for racial cleansing—the most infamous example being carried out by Nazis against Jews, Slavs, the Roma, and gays, to the tune of six million people.

Excellent point about reproductive choice being the right to have children as much as it is about not having children. In looking around the Internet for sources for the above paragraph, I came upon the distinction of eugenics into two categories: 

Positive eugenics is aimed at encouraging reproduction among the genetically advantaged. Possible approaches include financial and political stimuli, targeted demographic analyses, in vitro fertilization, egg transplants, and cloning.[41] Negative eugenics is aimed at lowering fertility among the genetically disadvantaged. This includes abortions, sterilization, and other methods of family planning.[41] Both positive and negative eugenics can be coercive. Abortion by fit women was illegal in Nazi Germany.[42] via Wikipedia.

Thinking now of the ways housing, education, and food access determine who is considered “fit” and how “fit” has little to do with genetics, and more with policy.

Incidentally, OKCupid has a freaky-ass “match question” asking if the individual taking the test thinks sterilization is a good idea. Who in the hell answers that in the affirmative? Have two people found romance over that? *shudder*

(via mnome)

January 7, 2012
cartoonpolitics:

thank goodness there’s still plenty of money for the really important things .. you know .. like wars of choice and militarizing the police ..

Reason #12938798 (besides overt white straight middle-class cismale privilege) that whole “If I were a Black kid I would go to the library and teach myself objective C” is so mindboggingly stupid.

cartoonpolitics:

thank goodness there’s still plenty of money for the really important things .. you know .. like wars of choice and militarizing the police ..

Reason #12938798 (besides overt white straight middle-class cismale privilege) that whole “If I were a Black kid I would go to the library and teach myself objective C” is so mindboggingly stupid.

(via fuckyeahmarxismleninism)

January 6, 2012
Dear Customer who stuck up for his little brother,

stfuconservatives:

purdoom:

socialistscum:

sweetupndown:

you thought I didn’t really notice. But I did. I wanted to high-five you.


Yesterday I had a pair of brothers in my store. One was maybe between 15-17. He was a wrestler at the local high school. Kind of tall, stocky and handsome. He had a younger brother, who was maybe about 10-12 years old. Thy were talking about finding a game for the younger one, and he was absolutely insisting it be one with a female charcter. I don’t know how many of y’all play games, but that isn’t exactly easy. Eventually, I helped the brothers pick a game called Mirror’s Edge. The youngest was pretty excited about the game, and then he specifically asked me.. “Do you have any girl color controllers?”

I directed him to the only colored controllers we have which includes pink and purple ones. He grabbed the purple one, and informed me purple was his FAVORITE.

The boys had been taking awhile, so their father eventually comes in. He see’s the game, and the controller, and starts in on the youngest about how he needs to pick something different. Something more manly. Something with guns and fighting, and certainly not a purple controller. He tries to convince him to get the new Zombie game “Dead Island.” and the little boy just stands their repeating “Dad, this is what I want, ok?” Eventually it turns into a full blown argument complete with Dad threatening to whoop his son if he doesn’t choose different items.

That’s when big brother stepped in. He said to his Dad “It’s my money, it’s my gift to him, if it’s what he wants I’m getting it for him, and if your gonna hit anyone for it, it’s going to be me.”

Dad just gives his oldest son a strong stern stare down, and then leaves the store. Little brother is crying quietly, I walk over and ruffle his hair (yes this happened all in front of me.) I say “I’m a girl, and I like the color blue, and I like shooting games. There’s nothing wrong with what you like. Even if it’s different that what people think you should.”

Big brother then leans down, kisses little brother on the head, and says “Don’t worry dude.”

They check out and leave, and all I can think is how awesome big brother is, how sweet little brother is, and how Dad ought to be ashamed for trying to make his son any other way.

Rad.

wow. I definitely teared up.

Again: why feminism still matters, to everyone.

(via flapjackstate)

January 6, 2012

(Source: goodleftund0ne, via callhergreen)