Pastel Tumblr Themes
"The original Lolita—the twelve year old Dolores Haze, protagonist of Vladimir Nabokov’s 1955 novel—was a rather different girl. As the feminist scholar Alyssa Harad put it, “Lolita is the archetype of a special category of girl who seduces without knowing it, who works her charms unconsciously, even unwillingly, who attracts without necessarily being, in any of the most obvious ways, attractive.” It is clear in the book that she is the powerless victim of her predatory stepfather Humbert Humbert. Nabokov’s Lolita is a nuanced character whose sexuality is complex—like many preadolescent girls, she is sexually curious—but she has no control over relationship with Humbert, which is abusive and manipulative. Yet the care with which Nabokov presents her case, and his emphasis on Humbert’s malfeasance, has been overlooked in the years since the novel’s publication. It is though as the very fact of Lolita’s sexuality—the public acknowledgement that a preteen girl could be sexual, the bold focus on an incestuous liaison between grown man and little girl—has made her into a fantasy figure, an image of Humbert’s projection rather than the sexually abused and tragic figure of the novel."
-The Lolita Effect: The Media Sexualization of Young Girls and What We Can Do About It by M. Gigi Durham, Ph.D (via thechocolatebrigade)
"

This society is going to become more supremely racist when it is apparently not racist. And that’s where it’s moving to at this point. When a white man tells you, “let’s not put race into this,” he is being the most racist at that point.

You can have a society that removes all public expression on racism. You can have a society were people no longer overtly express racial hatred, and racist statements and behavior is outlawed, but you can still have a system that destroys millions and millions of Black people. Colin Powell and others are the signs of that kind of racism where the Black middle class will be sitting in these jobs and positions defending the system.

You must recognize that racism is not an attitude. It is not a feeling of hatred toward another people. You must understand that racism and white supremacy is in the very structures and values of the institutions of the society itself. And until you revolve and change those structures and attitudes and values you will always be under the bottom.

"
-

Dr. Amos N. Wilson explaining racism and predicting the future almost twenty years ago (early 90’s).

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Izr1wxUgB-Q&list=PLBhR-EIi2zEVp8z25b8z7jIkUG7kJv2H1&index=14

(via disciplesofmalcolm)

silversarcasm:

my favourite word privileged people say is ‘if’

'if someone came up to me and said…'

'if i got bullied for who i was…'

'if the roles were reversed…'

like we don’t get ifs, we are getting harassed on the street, we are getting attacked, we are in the marginalised group who you have power over I don’t care about your hypothetical fucking situation

justjasper:

"i’m not a feminist i just support equality" is 99% of the time code for "i support everyone shutting the fuck up about oppressive systems for the illusion of peace so i don’t have to feel guilty about my benefit from them and my reluctance to effect changes that begin with me"

"I’ve encountered people constantly assuming sex is good and that having sex is just something you do in healthy relationships. This creates a situation where hating sex is a character flaw caused by those terrible sex-negative tropes society presses on you, and obviously only Bad People don’t consent to sex.

That’s rape culture. This is what environments that assume sex is unambiguously a good thing do. Saying, “It’s consensual sex that’s good” doesn’t actually fix the problem. It just creates a situation where you must be consenting to sex, because if you aren’t, you’re not having enough sex and then you’re “sex-negative”.

See, it only fixes a problem where you’re like, “Well I don’t really want to do this right now”. It does not do anything at all to help people who find sex painful. It does nothing at all to help a person who doesn’t want sex, but thinks they do because it’s been so heavily normativized they have to have sex, and have to have it in this specific way. All the, “But make sure it’s consensual!” thing does is tells the person, “Well maybe if you don’t want sex this time it’s okay, but remember you still must be having it some of the time!”

See, to actually fight rape culture you need to say “Sex is always optional. You are never obligated to have sex.” You must always be concerned with consent, and that means you must accept that the answer may very well always be no, despite the fact there’s this belief sex is the greatest thing ever.

And if someone never wants sex, then sex can’t really be a good thing to them, because it’s always unwanted.
"
-

Sex Positivity is Rape Culture in Disguise (via youlittlearsonist)

Really like this. We need to find ways of transforming real sex positivity to promote choice in sex, not uncritically promote sex itself. (via swankivy)

This. All of this. (via elementalsight)

 (roachpatrol)

This is something that I really believe in and I dislike that “sex-positive” has such bad history and current problems as well. When I first learned about it, I really thought about it was focused on what this passage is describing, that it is okay to want sex and it is okay to not want sex. Hopefully, my followers know I am all for whatever a person is comfortable with.

(via foryoursexualinformation)

"

History is not a long series of centuries in which men did all the interesting/important things and women stayed home and twiddled their thumbs in between pushing out babies, making soup and dying in childbirth.

History is actually a long series of centuries of men writing down what they thought was important and interesting, and FORGETTING TO WRITE ABOUT WOMEN. It’s also a long series of centuries of women’s work and women’s writing being actively denigrated by men. Writings were destroyed, contributions were downplayed, and women were actively oppressed against, absolutely.

But the forgetting part is vitally important. Most historians and other writers of what we now consider “primary sources” simply didn’t think about women and their contribution to society. They took it for granted, except when that contribution or its lack directly affected men.

This does not in any way mean that the female contribution to society was in fact less interesting or important, or complicated, simply that history—the process of writing down and preserving of the facts, not the facts/events themselves—was looking the other way.

"
-

Tansy Rayner Roberts

I actually recommend the entire post, especially if you like history or fantasy or writing. 

(via rebelwomen)

anogoodrabblerouser:

The odds of being attacked by a shark in the US are 1 in 11,500,000, but no one gets mad at people who want to avoid the ocean.

The odds of a woman being sexually assaulted in her lifetime are 1 in 6, but if she doesn’t feel safe around strange men she’s a stereotyping bitch.

Strange old world we live in.

"People want to believe gender is something that’s essential, and people repeat these essentialist ideas all the time. “Oh, women do that” and “Oh, men do that” and the reality is that all women don’t anything. We as individuals do what we do, you know, and sometimes that’s informed by gender and sometimes it’s just who we are. And I think all that just makes people really, really uncomfortable because they don’t want to think about who they are."
-Laverne Cox (via lucrezialoveshercesare)