squidsticks:

deanoru:

I’m so tired of every show that takes place in the past (wild west, medieval, pirates etc) ALWAYS having so much sexual violence towards women like writers can cry “oh it’s realism” all you want but it’s very transparent how realism only applies when you want to hurt women on screen. If we’re talking staying realistic, why doesn’t everyone have brown teeth? Or bad skin? Or dying of dysentery? Just admit y’all want an excuse to brutalize women on screen lol

This pisses me off so much. A lot of the time if you mention realism would also involve women having unshaved legs or pits, or bushy eyebrows, or syphilis, the answer is often “well that’s gross, no one wants to read about/see that” and like…. If you think that women being ugly is grotesque, but brutal depictions of rape aren’t, then I don’t really know what to say to you other than stay the fuck away from me.

athenakeene:

teratomarty:

the-real-seebs:

the-rain-monster:

w0manifest:

Here’s a cool trick to see if a man actually respects you: try disagreeing with him

A friend of mine did something with online dating where, before meeting a person, she’d say no to something minor without a reason for the no. For example: “No, I don’t want to meet at a coffee shop, how about X?”, or “No, not Wednesday”, or “No, I don’t want to recognize each other by both wearing green shirts”. She said how the potential dates reacted was a huge indicator of whether she actually wanted to meet them, something I readily believe.

I’ve mentioned this to a few people and sometimes I get very annoyed and incredulous responses from guys about how are they supposed to know that it’s a test if the girl is being unreasonable? How are they supposed to know that and let her have her way? I find it difficult to explain that if you find it unreasonable for someone to have a preference of no consequence which they don’t feel the need to explain, then you are the one being unreasonable. You can decide for yourself that it sounds flaky and you don’t want to date her, but you don’t have a right to know and approve all of her reasons for things in order to deign to respect that she said no about it. Especially in the case of someone you haven’t even fucking met yet.

The point isn’t to know it’s a test, the point is that if you would only say “yes” if you knew it was a test, then what if it’s not a test, but because she hates coffee shops, or because she’s attending a funeral Wednesday and doesn’t know you well enough to want to share that, or whatever else? Because if you’re making rules for when other people can have preferences and not explain why… yeah, that is a thing they can reasonably want to avoid.

@ all the angry dudes in the replies: the point is not to trick or manipulate men. The point is to see how a potential romantic partner reacts to a minor inconvenience.  If they say, “oh, ok, would seven work instead?” or “well there’s this Armenian tea house I’ve been meaning to try out, want to go there?” then that’s a good sign that they’re safe to date.  If they throw a fit and/or demand to know every little detail about your rationale over something as simple as rescheduling dinner plans, that’s a bad sign. A really bad sign.

It’s like this, dudes. Women in Western society are socialised to cooperate and compromise. Some men are socialised to get all their own way, all the time.  These dudes are incredibly dangerous to women their partners,* and the only way to tell them apart from the OK guys is to pay close attention to how they react.  If you’re one of the OK ones, this isn’t about you. Learn to take “no” for an answer, and you’ll be fine.

*Updated to reflect the fact that abusive men can target any gender, and the fact that I used this screening tactic to good effect during my Big Gay Slut phase.

This also works for finding out if your friends are good friends or not. If someone constantly blows up at you for minor inconveniences, or who tries to guilt you into keeping something your problem, then they’re not a good friend to have.