iwillnotshavemyvagina:

There are a few posts floating around with a list that makes points like:

-If you don’t like gay marriage, don’t have one!
-If you don’t like cigarettes, don’t smoke one!
-If you don’t like Justin Bieber, don’t listen to him!
So basically, if you don’t like something, ignore it because it…

I have problems with the “don’t like it? don’t do it!” argument, and I’m going to throw out an extreme example, but hey, it’ll make my point.

If you don’t like rape, then don’t have one!

In other words - sometimes, it’s not as simple as having a choice to simply not do this thing or partake in this activity. Cigarettes are a great example. I don’t like them, so therefore I don’t smoke. But if I’m out with friends that smoke or hey, if I’m out in public at all and there are smokers smoking anywhere near me, they completely take away my choice to smoke or not by filling the air around them, and therefore around me, with their cigarettes smoke. I can’t select what air I breathe. I can’t choose not to be raped.

It’s just not as simple as “If you don’t like it, don’t do it.” I don’t like that my government is arguing about whether or not birth control should be covered by insurance, or whether I should have to pay extra for it. But I personally can’t just choose not to be part of the argument, simply because I don’t like it.

Edit: in other words, I completely agree with OP

backleftlitz:

Fifteen hours ago two hundred friends and acquaintances and three thousand eight hundred strangers sat in sweltering (which is a cliched adjective to place before the word) heat in a stadium generally reserved for football games I never watched, and listened to an MSNBC correspondent dispense…

i saw you today at homegrown

that’s all!

4llj00zombies:

caffeinatedfeminist:

I am rereading Angels and Demons now that I’m a) not in 8th grade and b) been to Rome.

Was it really fucking necessary as a literary tool for him to inform us that the woman character we were just introduced to has small breasts?

No. No it was…

Just to point out - Provocatoria’s repost where she indicated that describing a female’s character’s breasts was akin to describing a male character’s penis was inaccurate.

Like must be compared to like: if Dan Brown described a female character’s crotch region or vagina, that would be tantamount to describing the size of a male character’s penis.

Describing the size of a female character’s breasts is much more like describing a male character’s pecs or chest; it is not uncommon for it to be mentioned that a male character has a defined chest or pecs. It may be less common than an author mentioning a female character’s breasts, and I will admit that - but if this is true, in that case this focus on female breasts would be sexism, not misogyny; misogyny is hatred of women, and it’s hard to see how describing or even focusing on female breasts is directly or even indirectly related to blatant, apparent, definite women-hatred. Sexism, yes, definitely. Misogyny?  That’s an exaggeration and inaccurate, and why I reacted so negatively to the post. If there were a Venn diagram to explain this, sexism would be a big circle, and misogyny would be a little circle completely included within the circle of sexism.

I really wanted to point this out - but now, if possible, I think it’s a good time to end this discussion, as at best I only see it perpetuating a fair amount of negativity. I’m not trying to mud-sling and I’m not being sexist or anti-feminist - far from it. I’m just demanding that females be treated as equal to males, and claiming female breasts are equivalent to male reproductive organs is both incorrect and inequal.

Thanks for listening.

eb

edit: OH DAMN BITCH THAT SHUT YOU UUUPPPP