After the After Party

June 1, 2012 at 11:03pm
11,732 notes
Reblogged from lostgrrrls

You want to say Hi to the cute girl on the subway. How will she react? Fortunately, I can tell you with some certainty, because she’s already sending messages to you. Looking out the window, reading a book, working on a computer, arms folded across chest, body away from you = do not disturb. So, y’know, don’t disturb her. Really. Even to say that you like her hair, shoes, or book. A compliment is not always a reason for women to smile and say thank you. You are a threat, remember? You are Schrödinger’s Rapist. Don’t assume that whatever you have to say will win her over with charm or flattery. Believe what she’s signaling, and back off.

If you speak, and she responds in a monosyllabic way without looking at you, she’s saying, “I don’t want to be rude, but please leave me alone.” You don’t know why. It could be “Please leave me alone because I am trying to memorize Beowulf.” It could be “Please leave me alone because you are a scary, scary man with breath like a water buffalo.” It could be “Please leave me alone because I am planning my assassination of a major geopolitical figure and I will have to kill you if you are able to recognize me and blow my cover.”

On the other hand, if she is turned towards you, making eye contact, and she responds in a friendly and talkative manner when you speak to her, you are getting a green light. You can continue the conversation until you start getting signals to back off.

The fourth point: If you fail to respect what women say, you label yourself a problem.

There’s a man with whom I went out on a single date—afternoon coffee, for one hour by the clock—on July 25th. In the two days after the date, he sent me about fifteen e-mails, scolding me for non-responsiveness. I e-mailed him back, saying, “Look, this is a disproportionate response to a single date. You are making me uncomfortable. Do not contact me again.” It is now October 7th. Does he still e-mail?

Yeah. He does. About every two weeks.

This man scores higher on the threat level scale than Man with the Cockroach Tattoos. (Who, after all, is guilty of nothing more than terrifying bad taste.) You see, Mr. E-mail has made it clear that he ignores what I say when he wants something from me. Now, I don’t know if he is an actual rapist, and I sincerely hope he’s not. But he is certainly Schrödinger’s Rapist, and this particular Schrödinger’s Rapist has a probability ratio greater than one in sixty. Because a man who ignores a woman’s NO in a non-sexual setting is more likely to ignore NO in a sexual setting, as well.

So if you speak to a woman who is otherwise occupied, you’re sending a subtle message. It is that your desire to interact trumps her right to be left alone. If you pursue a conversation when she’s tried to cut it off, you send a message. It is that your desire to speak trumps her right to be left alone. And each of those messages indicates that you believe your desires are a legitimate reason to override her rights.

For women, who are watching you very closely to determine how much of a threat you are, this is an important piece of data.

— an excerpt from Phaedra Starling’s “Schrödinger’s Rapist: or a guy’s guide to approaching strange women without being maced” (via lostgrrrls)

(via homoerotics)

9:58pm
350 notes
Reblogged from maozedongisnotcool

In The Demise of Guys, Professor Zimbardo argues that young men are struggling: emasculated by dominant women and infantilized by parents whom they continue to live with, young men are eschewing work, marriage and responsibility in favor of porn, video games and online friendships. The bleak picture that Zimbardo paints is attributed to changing social structures and “the dramatic rise of gals.” Masculinity, it seems, is in crisis. Again.

— 

Mark McCormack, The Demise of a Particular Type of Guy

GOD, IT MUST BE SO HARD FOR YOU. See: Zimbardo’s The Demise of Guys

(via maozedongisnotcool)

Why do manarchist tears taste so disgusting?

(via mohandasgandhi)

I disagree. I think they taste delicious. Every time I see a man blame women for his gender’s shortcomings, I like to sprinkle some over a Lean Cuisine and cackle maniacally.

Nothing says “men are too irresponsible these days” like following it up with “and it’s totally someone ELSE’S fault.” God forbid they take responsibility for their lack of responsibility.

(via stfuconservatives)

(via homoerotics)

May 26, 2012 at 10:43pm
1,370 notes
Reblogged from pinerosolanno

(Source: pinerosolanno, via high-on-fashion)

May 19, 2012 at 7:47pm
755 notes
Reblogged from fuckyeahvintage-retro

(via -killerqueen)

May 18, 2012 at 9:11pm
12 notes
Reblogged from elegantescapism

(Source: elegantescapism, via venuslacy)

May 17, 2012 at 12:02am
99,541 notes
Reblogged from keyyu

(via queerandloathing)

May 16, 2012 at 11:58am
503 notes
Reblogged from thingssheloves

(via thingssheloves)

May 15, 2012 at 6:07pm
9,898 notes
Reblogged from trulyquotable

Never waste your time trying to explain who you are to people who are committed to misunderstanding you.

— 

Dream Hampton (via battle-studies)

Good advice. I should take it more often.

(via kiriamaya)

(Source: trulyquotable, via loveyourchaos)

May 13, 2012 at 10:51pm
2,744 notes
Reblogged from sacredwoman

Ancient moon priestesses were called virgins. ‘Virgin’ meant not married, not belong to a man-a woman who was ‘one-in-herself.’ The very word derives from a Latin root meaning strength, force, skill; and was later applied to men: virle. Ishtar, Diana, Astarte, Isis were all all called virgin, which did not refer to sexual chasity, but sexual independence. And all great culture heroes of the past…, mythic or historic, were said to be born of virgin mothers: Marduk, Gilgamesh, Buddha, Osiris, Dionysus, Genghis Khan, Jesus-they were all affirmed as sons of the Great Mother, of the Original One, their worldly power deriving from her. When the Hebrews used the word, and in the original Aramatic, it meant ‘maiden’ or ‘young woman’, with no connotations to sexual chasity. But later Christian translators could not conceive of the ‘Virgin Mary’ as a woman of independent sexuality, needless to say; they distorted the meaning into sexually pure, chaste, never touched. When Joan of Arc, with her witch coven associations, was called La Pucelle-‘the Maiden,’ ‘the Virgin’ - the word retained some of its original pagan sense of a strong and independent woman. The Moon Goddess was worshipped in orgiastic rites, being the divinity of matriarchal women free to take as many lovers as they choose. Women could ‘surrender’ themselves to the Goddess by making love to a stranger in her temple.

— Monica Sjoo and Barbara Mor in the book “The Great Cosmic Mother -Rediscovering the Religion of the Earth”  (via lesvoyageursperdus)

(Source: sacredwoman, via farahjoon)

May 11, 2012 at 7:49pm
5,375 notes
Reblogged from pip1up

(Source: pip1up, via i-spill-kisses-with-love)