|—||Attachments, Rainbow Rowell (via stellablu)|
|—||Tracee Ellis Ross (via wordsthat-speak)|
What do you think about all the people who don’t understand feminism? Especially the women who supposedly “are against feminism because they don’t hate men”? Should we argue or is it a lost cause?
No, we shouldn’t argue. We should teach. We should enlighten. We should in the friendliest of spirits and without the slightest trace of condescension drop so much fucking knowledge on those people that it crushes their flawed and simplistic understanding of gender politics.
We should be patient in the face of ignorance until we know for sure that it is willful. We should give them every opportunity to change their minds, because at the end of the day, very few people are built around a core of malignant, incurable misogyny. Very few people have a world view so grotesque that they actually believe women should be subjugated. Very few people will openly admit that equality isn’t a noble pursuit — especially women for whom so often their only fault is being misguided about the fundamental concepts.
No one is a lost cause until we find out for sure that their identity is tied to an aggressively misogynistic belief system, and when we come across those broken souls, we don’t argue. That’s wasted breath. We simply mark them with red flags and keep them at arm’s length, because those are the ones who aren’t safe to be around.
While we celebrated LGBT Pride in June, four trans women of color were murdered across the country.
|—||Junot Diaz (via virginalvalour)|
- date the kind of people who will still respect you when you no longer love them
- date the kind of people who will still respect you when they no longer love you
- do not waste your emotional capacities on people whose respect for you is conditional
this is terribly important
either you’re a blessing
or a lesson.
|—||Frank Ocean (via goldenspine)|
One of my least favourite dialogue tropes is when a man tells a woman “you can’t do that” or “I wouldn’t do that if I were you” and she says “why? because I’m a woman and therefore too weak to handle this/can’t take care of myself?” or something to that extent and the guy replies with “no, because everyone who tried that ended up with a bullet in their brain” or something equally reasonable and not gender specific that paints him as the rational not sexist guy and the woman as irrational paranoid feminist who searches for sexism in everything. This whole scenario is built on the idea that sexism is over and women’s fears and suspicions don’t have a leg to stand on. It’s also self-congratulatory pseudofeminism bc it’s supposed to make the viewer/reader/listener feel that in this specific work of fiction women are treated respectfully and as equal with men.
I think it’s dangerous to talk about ‘Oh, that character just happens to be gay’ as some kind of goal for us and our literature. The important thing is to show as much of the spectrum as possible, and to continue to investigate it.
|—||David Levithan in an interview with the Associated Press on the representation of LGBTQ teens in YA (via diversityinya)|
bring back raj singh 2k15
There is a difference between:
a queer character whose story doesn’t revolve around them being queer
a queer character whose story completely ignores the fact that they are queer