- 21 year old White Male
- Calgary, Canada
- works at Real Canadian Superstore
- takes photos of his boss
One of his submissions to r/creepshots:
He posts his own photo to reddit with his age:
Since this guy lives in Canada, he broke the law, right?
Because in Canada posting pictures of people online without their consent is illegal.
so let me get this right. a straight man refuses to believe it when queer folks say they’re being persecuted. he “pretends” to be gay for a year like it’s some costume and everyone heralds him as a hero, for being so understanding?
“no no, i, as a straight white man pretending to be gay, have felt oppression so it must be real!” the experiences of queer folks weren’t enough proof for you?
it’s troublesome that people like him get acknowledged when queer stories are constantly erased out of the public view.
Chipped nails betray nerves while bright red lipstick gives impression candidate is power-crazed
“Too little make-up also raised employers’ concerns.
A shortage of mascara suggested the woman could be an emotional wreck who wastes no time in putting on what will inevitably be cried off…
It almost feels like I’m in 6th grade again!
(I don’t know what’s up with Meme Generator not capitalizing the word “smart”.)
oh my god I thought the last one was a JOKE, jfc
THE LAST ONE IS NOT A JOKE. REPEAT THE LAST ONE IS NOT A JOKE. PLEASE DEAR GOD STOP ROMNEY FROM BEING PRESIDENT.
Yeah, just to clarify: no part of #9 is a joke. All those things sound like gross exaggerations that would be unfair, horrible things to say about a person were they not true. Unfortunately, every single one of them is.
Actually, I’d like to clarify something about #9.
The man who was assaulted was attacked by Mitt and a few of Mitt’s friends, yes, but he was not gay. That’s what makes it worse. He was NOT gay, but Mitt and his friends suspected he was gay simply because he came to school with what can only be described as an 80s-appropriate hairstyle. Because his bangs were longer than the hair at the back of his head, they decided it was a clear indication that he was a homosexual and they sought to “fix” that by forcibly cutting his hair. The man, however, was not gay and due to the bullying he received from Mitt, Mitt’s friends, and several people in the aftermath of what Mitt and his friends did, the man committed suicide.
I would also like to note that this occurred while Mitt Romney was in college.
It wasn’t elementary school, when you could at least blame parents and school faculty for not intervening. It wasn’t even during high school, when you’re expected to be completely immature and there’s still enough accountability to assign to parents and teachers that chose not to intervene. It was during college. They were all adults and they behaved that way toward someone they suspected could be gay because of their chosen style of hair.
When Mitt was confronted with the fact that the man went on to kill himself as a result of having no self-esteem or self-worth after having been so cruelly taunted, bullied, and assaulted, he brushed the subject off and said, “kids will be kids.” Except you weren’t a child, you weren’t even a teenager. You were an adult and you went unpunished for your criminal assault of another human being, and that person is now dead because of the things you and your friends drilled into his head. Negative infinity points for Romney.
I am not yet old enough to vote but please please please if you are 18, register and vote. It does matter. I sound like those MTV campaigns but I don’t care. VOTE. No really, seriously. V O T E.
mitt romney. literally. caused somebody’s death.directly.
^^ what they said.
Out of every 100 rapes:
- 46 are reported to the police
- 12 rapes will resort in an arrest
- 9 rape cases are prosecuted
- 5 rape cases lead to a felony conviction
- Only 3 rapists will ever spend a day in jail
In a survey of 11-14 year-old boys:
- 51% believed rape was acceptable if a boy spent a lot of money on a girl
- 31% believed rape was acceptable if a girl had past sexual experience
- 65% believed rape were acceptable if a girl and boy had been dating for more than 6 months
- 87% believed rape were acceptable if the woman and man are married
A woman might not even have grown up understanding what rape is…because in a survey of 11-14 year-old girls:
- 41% believed rape was acceptable if a boy spent a lot of money on a girl
- 32% believed rape was acceptable if a girl had past sexual experience
- 47% believed rape were acceptable if a girl and boy had been dating for more than 6 months
- 79% believed rape were acceptable if the woman and man are married
In a survey of college males:
In yet another survey of college males:
- 35% admit - anonymously - that they would rape under the circumstances that they could get away with it
- 1 in 12 admitted to committing acts defined as rape, but 84% of rapists did not recognize those acts as rape
[x] [x] [x] I could go on, but attitudinal surveys and acceptance of rape myths are far more telling than legal statistics.
- 43% of college-aged men admitted to using coercive behavior to have sex, including ignoring a woman’s protest, using physical aggression, and forcing intercourse.
- 15% acknowledged they had committed acquaintance rape; 11% acknowledged using physical restraints to force a woman to have sex.
1. Does the image show only part(s) of a sexualized person’s body?BMW
2. Does the image present a sexualized person as a stand-in for an object?
3. Does the image show sexualized persons as interchangeable?
4. Does the image affirm the idea of violating the bodily integrity of a sexualized person who can’t consent?
5. Does the image suggest that sexual availability is the defining characteristic of the person?
6. Does the image show a sexualized person as a commodity that can be bought and sold?
Red Tape Shoes
(Source: , via fandomsandfeminism)
I had to share this with you all. (Forgive typos please)
When the DSM-III was being revised in the mid-80s (in the preparation of DSM-III-R), Robert Spitzer, the effective God of Prescriptive Psychiatric Policing and Supreme Arbiter of Crazy (Bitches), got dead gung-ho about trying to include a…
We look at women the same way we look at houses and sandwiches: as composites of attractive parts.
Problem: Few would argue that the objectification of women is a real thing — and a real problem — but as yet there’s been no cognitive explanation for it in a literal sense. Do we really look at women differently than we do men, and are they actually objectified in the eye — and brain — of the beholder?
Methodology: Images of average, fully clothed individuals were quickly flashed before the eyes of participants. After each one, the participants would then be shown two side-by-side images that zoomed in on one, “sexual” aspect of the individual (for example, a woman’s midriff) and asked to identify the version that hadn’t been modified. The experiment was also reversed, so that participants first looked at a specific part and then had to identify it in the context of an entire body. The test was designed to clue researchers in on whether the participants were using global or local cognitive processing while looking at the images — in other words, whether they perceived the individuals as a whole or as an assemblage of their various parts.
Results: Regardless of gender, participants consistently recognized women’s sexual body parts more easily when presented in isolation. Men’s sexual body parts, on the other hand, were more memorable as part of their entire bodies.
Conclusion: The cognitive process behind our perception of objects is the same that we use when looking at women, and both genders are guilty of taking in the parts instead of the whole. When we look at men, we use global processing to see them more fully as people.
The full study,”Seeing women as objects: The sexual body part recognition bias,” is published in the European Journal of Social Psychology.
I saw This Film is Not Yet Rated and this is true.
When a woman is shown on film enjoying sex, it’s more likely to get an NC-17 rating (which is basically the death knell for a movie’s success because a majority of cinemas won’t show NC-17 films and it’s harder to advertise them). Rape gets by so easily. There’s a GREAT quote by Kevin Smith:
If I were to create a rating system, I wouldn’t even put murder right at the top of the chief offenses. I would put rape right at the top, and assault against women. Because it’s so insanely overused and insulting how much it’s overused in movies as a plot device, a woman in peril. That, to me, is offensive, yet that shit skates. “
And he’s right about that. The movie Monster with Charlize Theron was one of the most disturbing films I’ve ever seen (TW: Rape). She’s raped several times in the film, once with a foreign object during an extremely graphic, violent scene and I saw that movie with my MOM in the theatre. It was so violent that my mom asked if I wanted to leave because I was so horrified.
That movie is rated R and it should have been rated NC-17 but it wasn’t because the majority of the “sex scenes” in the film are rape scenes or scenes where she is doing sex work and clearly not enjoying it.
And Ryan Gosling had a great quote about the NC-17 rating Blue Valentine got before the rating was challenged that hits the nail right on the head:
“There’s plenty of oral sex scenes in a lot of movies, where it’s a man receiving it from a woman — and they’re R-rated. Ours is reversed and somehow it’s perceived as pornographic. Black Swan has an oral scene between two women and that’s an R rating, but ours is between a husband and his wife and that’s NC-17?”
“You start to think, ‘How is it possible that these movies that torture women in a sexual context can have an R rating but a husband and wife making love is inappropriate.
Rebloggable was requested.
Also, if you get a chance to watch This Film is not yet Rated, do it. It’s an eye opening film and the members they reveal who make up the MPAA is fucking absurd based on the guidelines the MPAA claims to apply to its members.
SANTANA’S COMING OUT SCENE
Why the fuck would the delete that?
That one scene is more powerful then any of the other fucking shit that is I Kissed A Girl. ESPECIALLY I Kissed A Girl.
The best part was Sue and how it meant nothing changed.
For fuck’s sake.
This is the most disgraceful thing ever and takes away from such an important positive message.
This just makes me so angry.