My name is Brenda and I'm working on my MA in Women's Studies. I'm pansexual, poly, and kinky. Many things will make more sense with reference to my partner. She/her/hers please.
Reblogged from metanoianmayhem  74,973 notes
lindseywalnut:

utterlyfubar:

rcmclachlan:

doodlyood:

spinachandrice:

theonewholovesbooks:

thatfilthyanimal:

fawnthefeminist:

Young women are having difficulty accessing tubal ligation, despite it being a relatively safe (death rate is 1-2 per 100,000) and elective surgery.

There is a waiting period of 30 days for women seeking tubal ligation, yet no waiting period for men seeking vasectomies. 
(Source)


Young women are often discriminated against when seeking sterilization. Many doctors ask offensive questions (“What if you met a billionaire who wanted to have kids with you?”), state categorically that their patients are too young to consider the surgery, and generally act as though, as one woman who tried unsuccessfully to be sterilized at the age of 21 in the U.K. put it, ”just because I was a woman, I’d reach a point where an urge to breed would overcome all rational thought.” (Perhaps unsurprisingly, that woman’s 25-year-old husband faced no such presumptions when he asked his doctor for a vasectomy. The procedure was quickly approved.)
(Source)


Say that at 18 I slap down enough money so I could have my whole body covered head-to-toe in tattoos, piercings all over myself, a mountain of cigarettes, plastic surgery, and plan to have like 20 babies… but if I try at all to safely make it impossible for me to breed for the sake of my health suddenly its like WOAH THERE SLOW DOWN MISSY YOU’RE NOT READY FOR THIS KIND OF COMMITMENT YET

I have stage III Endometriosis, which means I have to get my uterus removed because I literally have terrible cramps ALL THE TIME and not just when I’m on my period. Now, I’ve always said I don’t want any children for personal reasons and I don’t need my uterus, really. I am not worried about that surgery and I don’t feel any kind of nostalgia over an organ I won’t ever use. 
The thing is, my doctor is a ‘man’. This ‘man’ told me I had to get pregnant right now before it’s too late. I told him I didn’t want to get pregnant and explained the multiple reasons but what, do you ask, did my doctor have to say about this? 'Well, better have a kid now because just imagine how depressing it must be being a thirty-something woman without children and a husband?'
I was diagnosed a year ago. I should have gone through surgery six months ago and I still can’t find a doctor that will perform the surgery without trying to force me to have children first. Basically, if you’re a woman you don’t have a say in what can and cannot be done to your body without a shitload of people getting in the way AND I’M FUCKING SICK OF IT.

Women are getting non-consensually sterilized in prison but no doctors in my area while tie my tubes at 24 because I might regret it? Fuck you, doctors. I have more purpose in life than dropping babies. Some of those women in prison are probably great moms and I have no interest in parenting. Let us have a say!

A dear friend of mine wanted to have her tubes tied.  She was about to give birth to twins and the doctors wouldn’t consent because she wasn’t 21 yet.  She had already had children and they still refused to let her have the procedure.

My friend got a vasectomy a week after asking his doctor for one, no problem. He was 25.
Me? I’ve asked 4 different doctors for some kind of permanent sterilisation—tubal ligation or Essure or whatever—and I get a pat on the head and a “You’d regret it if you did.”
Oh, DIDN’T REALIZE YOU HAD A DIRECT LINE TO MY BRAIN.

On the flip side, as a vagina-having person who had her tubes tied at the age of 26 (after having 4 children, however):
MY HUSBAND HAD TO SIGN A CONSENT FORM IN ORDER FOR ME TO HAVE THE PROCEDURE DONE.
How many times have we heard stories about husbands having vasectomies behind their wives backs and never telling them, letting those wives wallow in guilt and misery, thinking it’s their fault that they can’t get pregnant?
And yet I had had to get my husband’s permission to have my tubes tied.
(Obviously this was a decision we’d talked about extensively beforehand, so it’s not like he was about to say no, but we both couldn’t believe the fucking audacity of the hospital, asking HIS permission for ME to do something with MY body.  In fact, he said as much to the nurse that brought in the forms.)

This is fucked up. Your body is no one’s business but your own. Even if there’s no law against young sterilization, women still suffer just from societal expectations, which influence doctors who are unable to be objective. People think they’re being caring but are actually just afraid of anything that goes outside of their preconceived notions of what people should do with their lives. 

lindseywalnut:

utterlyfubar:

rcmclachlan:

doodlyood:

spinachandrice:

theonewholovesbooks:

thatfilthyanimal:

fawnthefeminist:

Young women are having difficulty accessing tubal ligation, despite it being a relatively safe (death rate is 1-2 per 100,000) and elective surgery.

There is a waiting period of 30 days for women seeking tubal ligation, yet no waiting period for men seeking vasectomies. 

(Source)

Young women are often discriminated against when seeking sterilization. Many doctors ask offensive questions (“What if you met a billionaire who wanted to have kids with you?”), state categorically that their patients are too young to consider the surgery, and generally act as though, as one woman who tried unsuccessfully to be sterilized at the age of 21 in the U.K. put it, ”just because I was a woman, I’d reach a point where an urge to breed would overcome all rational thought.” (Perhaps unsurprisingly, that woman’s 25-year-old husband faced no such presumptions when he asked his doctor for a vasectomy. The procedure was quickly approved.)

(Source)

Say that at 18 I slap down enough money so I could have my whole body covered head-to-toe in tattoos, piercings all over myself, a mountain of cigarettes, plastic surgery, and plan to have like 20 babies… but if I try at all to safely make it impossible for me to breed for the sake of my health suddenly its like WOAH THERE SLOW DOWN MISSY YOU’RE NOT READY FOR THIS KIND OF COMMITMENT YET

I have stage III Endometriosis, which means I have to get my uterus removed because I literally have terrible cramps ALL THE TIME and not just when I’m on my period. Now, I’ve always said I don’t want any children for personal reasons and I don’t need my uterus, really. I am not worried about that surgery and I don’t feel any kind of nostalgia over an organ I won’t ever use. 

The thing is, my doctor is a ‘man’. This ‘man’ told me I had to get pregnant right now before it’s too late. I told him I didn’t want to get pregnant and explained the multiple reasons but what, do you ask, did my doctor have to say about this? 'Well, better have a kid now because just imagine how depressing it must be being a thirty-something woman without children and a husband?'

I was diagnosed a year ago. I should have gone through surgery six months ago and I still can’t find a doctor that will perform the surgery without trying to force me to have children first. Basically, if you’re a woman you don’t have a say in what can and cannot be done to your body without a shitload of people getting in the way AND I’M FUCKING SICK OF IT.

Women are getting non-consensually sterilized in prison but no doctors in my area while tie my tubes at 24 because I might regret it? Fuck you, doctors. I have more purpose in life than dropping babies. Some of those women in prison are probably great moms and I have no interest in parenting. Let us have a say!

A dear friend of mine wanted to have her tubes tied.  She was about to give birth to twins and the doctors wouldn’t consent because she wasn’t 21 yet.  She had already had children and they still refused to let her have the procedure.

My friend got a vasectomy a week after asking his doctor for one, no problem. He was 25.

Me? I’ve asked 4 different doctors for some kind of permanent sterilisation—tubal ligation or Essure or whatever—and I get a pat on the head and a “You’d regret it if you did.”

Oh, DIDN’T REALIZE YOU HAD A DIRECT LINE TO MY BRAIN.

On the flip side, as a vagina-having person who had her tubes tied at the age of 26 (after having 4 children, however):

MY HUSBAND HAD TO SIGN A CONSENT FORM IN ORDER FOR ME TO HAVE THE PROCEDURE DONE.

How many times have we heard stories about husbands having vasectomies behind their wives backs and never telling them, letting those wives wallow in guilt and misery, thinking it’s their fault that they can’t get pregnant?

And yet I had had to get my husband’s permission to have my tubes tied.

(Obviously this was a decision we’d talked about extensively beforehand, so it’s not like he was about to say no, but we both couldn’t believe the fucking audacity of the hospital, asking HIS permission for ME to do something with MY body.  In fact, he said as much to the nurse that brought in the forms.)

This is fucked up. Your body is no one’s business but your own. Even if there’s no law against young sterilization, women still suffer just from societal expectations, which influence doctors who are unable to be objective. People think they’re being caring but are actually just afraid of anything that goes outside of their preconceived notions of what people should do with their lives. 

Reblogged from iphotographlove  3,138 notes
iphotographlove:

theblackoaksyndicate:

lakotapeopleslawproject:

Become a member at http://lakota.cc/1kvf8ka. This is just an example of the corruption that South Dakota DSS perpetuates. Learn more about the Mette Case at http://lakotalaw.org/special-reports/the-mette-affair. There are many stories like this, which is why we are assisting the Lakota tribes to create their own foster care system. Free the Mette Children! The South Dakota Dept. of Social Services placed 7 Lakota foster children into foster care with a non-Native, known molester. In what appears to be a common situation, the state of South Dakota placed 7 Lakota children into a foster family with a known molester, Richard Mette, and his enabling wife, Wendy Mette, from 2000 to 2013. The DSS knew of the accusations against Mr. Mette, but still placed Lakota foster children with him. The state ignored MULTIPLE complaints of sexual and physical abuse, and pleas for help from the children. 1. In 2001, the state ignored the foster boys’ complaints of molestation, and simply made the Mette adoptive parents sign a contract pledging to discontinue any illegal behavior. 2. In 2007, one of the girls told the police how she was sexually molested by Mr. Mette. She reported that Mrs. Mette knew about the molestations. Again, the DSS defended the Mette foster parents, and allowed the children to stay in the home. 3. Afterwards, Kelly, the older foster sister who had aged out of the Mette foster family, was getting reports from her younger siblings that the sexual and physical abuse was increasing and intensifying. She reported this to the South Dakota DSS, who ignored it and said they did not believe the children. Yankton Doctor sees bruises and reports abuse. In October 2010, the only boy among the Mette foster siblings at that time went to see a doctor at the Human Services Center in Yankton, S.D. The child, covered with bruises, disclosed abuse occurring in his adoptive home. He also detailed how Richard Mette, the adoptive father, was molesting the girls. The doctor contacted the authorities at once.  Brandon Taliaferro, the Assistant State’s Attorney responsible for criminal child abuse cases in Brown County, immediately began an investigation. The police search the Mette house and find more evidence of sexual abuse, including enough pornography to “pack a store”, including “family incest” porn. The children revealed they had been subjected to physical abuse, sexual molestation and threats of being beaten if they did not comply with the molestation or if they told anyone. In addition, the children explained that they were often given a choice between “b***jobs or beatings”. The children say they were forced to watch incest porn with Mr. Mette. The children were told that the porn, with titles like “Family Heat”, is how families are supposed to act.  The disgusted police charged Mr. Mette with 23 counts of child rape and incest, and Mrs. Mette with 11 counts of physical abuse and enabling. The State prosecutor, however, first attempted to drop all charges, and charged sexual predator Mr. Mette with only one count of “spanking”. When the State was not allowed to do this, they decided to charge Mr. Mette with only one count of rape of a child under 10. The other 22 charges of aggravated child rape and incest were dropped. The State then dropped all charges against Mrs. Mette, who the children said knew about and enabled the abuse. Children are now back with Mrs. Mette, where they can’t sue the State DSS. As the state’s DCI agent explained, South Dakota fears that they will face an expensive lawsuit by the seven Lakota foster children whose complaints of sexual abuse were ignored by the state for 10 years. Since they are now minors in the custody of Wendy Mette, the person who enabled the abuse, they cannot sue the state without her permission and support. What can we do?  Please call Tony West, the Associate Attorney General of the United States, and let him know that the federal Department of Justice needs to Free the Mette Children immediately!  (202) 514-9500 Learn more: www.lakotalaw.org/special-reports/the-mette-affair

SIGNAL. FUCKING. BOOST.


What.  The. Fuck.

iphotographlove:

theblackoaksyndicate:

lakotapeopleslawproject:

Become a member at http://lakota.cc/1kvf8ka. This is just an example of the corruption that South Dakota DSS perpetuates. Learn more about the Mette Case at http://lakotalaw.org/special-reports/the-mette-affair. There are many stories like this, which is why we are assisting the Lakota tribes to create their own foster care system.

Free the Mette Children!

The South Dakota Dept. of Social Services placed 7 Lakota foster
children into foster care with a non-Native, known molester.

In what appears to be a common situation, the state of South Dakota placed 7 Lakota children into a foster family with a known molester, Richard Mette, and his enabling wife, Wendy Mette, from 2000 to 2013. The DSS knew of the accusations against Mr. Mette, but still placed Lakota foster children with him.

The state ignored MULTIPLE complaints of sexual and physical
abuse, and pleas for help from the children.

1. In 2001, the state ignored the foster boys’ complaints of molestation, and simply made the Mette adoptive parents sign a contract pledging to discontinue any illegal behavior.

2. In 2007, one of the girls told the police how she was sexually molested by Mr. Mette. She reported that Mrs. Mette knew about the molestations. Again, the DSS defended the Mette foster parents, and allowed the children to stay in the home.

3. Afterwards, Kelly, the older foster sister who had aged out of the Mette foster family, was getting reports from her younger siblings that the sexual and physical abuse was increasing and intensifying. She reported this to the South Dakota DSS, who ignored it and said they did not believe the children.

Yankton Doctor sees bruises and reports abuse. In October 2010, the only boy among the Mette foster siblings at that time went to see a doctor at the Human Services Center in Yankton, S.D. The child, covered with bruises, disclosed abuse occurring in his adoptive home. He also detailed how Richard Mette, the adoptive father, was molesting the girls. The doctor contacted the authorities at once.

Brandon Taliaferro, the Assistant State’s Attorney responsible for criminal child abuse cases in Brown County, immediately began an investigation.

The police search the Mette house and find more evidence of sexual abuse, including enough pornography to “pack a store”, including “family incest” porn.

The children revealed they had been subjected to physical abuse, sexual molestation and threats of being beaten if they did not comply with the molestation or if they told anyone. In addition, the children explained that they were often given a choice between “b***jobs or beatings”.

The children say they were forced to watch incest porn with Mr. Mette. The children were told that the porn, with titles like “Family Heat”, is how families are supposed to act.

The disgusted police charged Mr. Mette with 23 counts of child rape and incest, and Mrs. Mette with 11 counts of physical abuse and enabling.

The State prosecutor, however, first attempted to drop all charges, and charged sexual predator Mr. Mette with only one count of “spanking”.

When the State was not allowed to do this, they decided to charge Mr. Mette with only one count of rape of a child under 10. The other 22 charges of aggravated child rape and incest were
dropped.

The State then dropped all charges against Mrs. Mette, who the children said knew about and enabled the abuse.

Children are now back with Mrs. Mette, where they can’t sue the State DSS. As the state’s DCI agent explained, South Dakota fears that they will face an expensive lawsuit by the seven Lakota foster children whose complaints of sexual abuse were ignored by the state
for 10 years. Since they are now minors in the custody of Wendy Mette, the person who enabled the abuse, they cannot sue the state without her permission and support.

What can we do?

Please call Tony West, the Associate Attorney General of the United States, and let him know that the federal Department of Justice needs to Free the Mette Children immediately!
(202) 514-9500

Learn more: www.lakotalaw.org/special-reports/the-mette-affair

SIGNAL. FUCKING. BOOST.

What. The. Fuck.

Reblogged from analcheeses  2,540 notes

kuunakullanvalkeana:

tbh, i find the emergence of the concept of demisexuality very interesting, and i’m partial to thinking it’s a symptom of hypersexualized patriarchal culture that demands full sexual availability of women. wanting to develop an emotional bond before having sex is actually a very common and even normative thing, yet nowadays women seem to be under so much pressure to have casual sex that they strongly identify with demisexuality to justify the limits of their sexual comfort zone.

i wonder how the idea that not wanting to have sex with people you don’t know well needs its own label might be connected with the “sex-positive” movement and its ideas of “sexual empowerment”. we’ve conceptualized being sexual (as opposed to “half-sexual”) in very strict terms and reached a point where certain sexual behaviours, such as casual sex, are not just seen as normal and accepted but actually positioned as a required part of “full” sexuality, and by doing that we’ve abnormalized not wanting to have sex with people you don’t know well, which is alarming because there is an immense pressure on women to be sexually available to men.

Reblogged from hagar-972  3 notes

hagar-972:

missworthing:

I’m wondering about this and can’t find anything in what I’ve looked at online.  Are there pronouns/grammatical options for non-binary people in Hebrew?  I’ve looked and all I can find is posts detailing how there should be.  Which I definitely agree with, but it’s not exactly helpful when trying to accurately reflect the gender of people I am talking about.  Like I can’t figure out even how to talk much to people without assuming they are one of two binary genders.  I would prefer some other method, if available.

(Here via tag. Native Hebrew speaker.)

There is no gender-neutral anything in Hebrew. Some nouns can be referred to as either (e.g. sun [שמש; the word חמה is always female], knife), but the closest Hebrew managed to get to gender neutrality is clumsy, literally-impossible-to-pronounce forms like יכול/ה.

Drat.  I thought that was the case but hoped that there were some I just didn’t know about.  Thanks anyway for the help.

I’m wondering about this and can’t find anything in what I’ve looked at online.  Are there pronouns/grammatical options for non-binary people in Hebrew?  I’ve looked and all I can find is posts detailing how there should be.  Which I definitely agree with, but it’s not exactly helpful when trying to accurately reflect the gender of people I am talking about.  Like I can’t figure out even how to talk much to people without assuming they are one of two binary genders.  I would prefer some other method, if available.

Reblogged from vault-boy-101  46,506 notes

guopei:

today i was talking to some boys about how gender roles influence their minute-to-minute behaviours and they were all “not necessarily i mean not all-” and i said “one example is interrupting women when they talk and dismissing their ideas” and slience

Reblogged from racheltensions  19,710 notes
durnesque-esque:

observingkatherine:

giraffepoliceforce:

Still pretty proud of my response to this.

I was totally down with the change over already, but not knowing the backstory, this just convinced me so hard that Captain America needs to be a minority right now. 
Before, Marvel said, “This is what you want? Well fuck you, he isn’t going to help you.” 
Now Marvel is saying, “This is who you’re throwing under the bus? Who you’re tossing into prison like he doesn’t mean anything? Who you demonize regularly? Well fuck you, he’s going to save you anyway.”
And as far as the Thor thing, that whole, “If he be worthy part,” yeah, they’re giving the finger to the patriarchy right there saying, “Hey, women are worthy too.”
If these two things were spaced out, I might believe that they were just marketing ploy, but they come so close together at a time where this message is necessary, I can’t help but think that there are people at Marvel who get it and are going with it. 
I mean, if they were willing to fight Hitler during WWII, why not be willing to fight some of the evils of today? 

durnesque-esque:

observingkatherine:

giraffepoliceforce:

Still pretty proud of my response to this.

I was totally down with the change over already, but not knowing the backstory, this just convinced me so hard that Captain America needs to be a minority right now. 

Before, Marvel said, “This is what you want? Well fuck you, he isn’t going to help you.” 

Now Marvel is saying, “This is who you’re throwing under the bus? Who you’re tossing into prison like he doesn’t mean anything? Who you demonize regularly? Well fuck you, he’s going to save you anyway.”

And as far as the Thor thing, that whole, “If he be worthy part,” yeah, they’re giving the finger to the patriarchy right there saying, “Hey, women are worthy too.”

If these two things were spaced out, I might believe that they were just marketing ploy, but they come so close together at a time where this message is necessary, I can’t help but think that there are people at Marvel who get it and are going with it. 

I mean, if they were willing to fight Hitler during WWII, why not be willing to fight some of the evils of today?