hold on I just have one more smartass comment

What I really hate seeing is a divisive subject that makes people go oh, I like this person, and you pointed out something (or vice versa) and that mean I now hate you forever & always & will come up with all sorts of uncreative ways to silence you and/or engage in blatant apologism. Because believe me, that’s nothing I haven’t heard before. The misgendering, the name-calling, the talking-over-my-head-when-you-should-be-talking-to-me. I shall not — and will not — legitimise any of these derails by engaging with them. I have very, very limited spoons that I save for offline life because I live in a very unsafe space. It so happens that even in a space I am supposed to be engaging meaningfully with people results in the same derails, the same silencing, and the same, tired, old shit. 

Alas, douchefuckery transcends everything. It reaches the boiling point and you see just how many of your “allies” are willing to silence you because they feel uncomfortable with something you’ve said. & it’s not meant to make people comfortable, damnit. Discomfort is nothing compared to the shit the person who calls out goes through to even work up the courage, and frankly, they have every right to be afraid of the reaction. Healthy cultural paranoia. “Allies” do not understand this fear. They never do. & that doesn’t make them unwilling to listen, but when the proverbial shit hits the fan, you see what happens.

Face it, there is a lot of asshattery that goes on in this corner of tumblr. Always, my OCD screeches at me for the horrid format. Most days, I can manage to shut it in a cupboard and try to write.

No more.

It’s not worth it.

There’s other ways.

You know where to find me.

Goodbye.

allaboutmary:

Ya Oum Allah (Oh Mother of God) by the Lebanese singer Fairouz.

The song is an Arabic Christian hymn in honour of Mary, who is very revered by the various Christian denominations of Lebanon, as well as Muslims.

In Lebanon the feast of the Annunciation is celebrated by both Christians and Muslims under the title ‘Together around Mary, Our Lady’. This makes Mary a unique symbol of unity between the two religious communities.

The Singapore public sector doesn’t allow people with depression to work for them? o_____________O
No, it doesn’t. Nobody with an invisible disability can. If you so much as see a therapist even, it goes on your record and these are publicly accessible to employers (which allows them to freely discriminate).

a fool sees not the same tree |

WTF. How is that even legal. Yeah OK it’s the public sector, it’s the people that make the rules. But surely there’s some law about patient privacy or discriminatory hiring or something. Some international treaty they’re a signatory to. SOMETHING. It seems so daft, to begin with.

I can’t imagine Malaysia being this finiky - and Malaysia really doesn’t have a great grasp of mental illness - but that’s more because I don’t really trust them with recordkeeping. :P

But still. @_@

(via tiaramerchgirl)

Forgot my source: my best friend is a psychologist who currently has a job as a prison rehabilitation worker. She is very familiar with local legal framework for mental health provisions. 

In light of this (strong trigger warnings)? Not surprised, really.

Posted on March 26, 2011

Reblogged from: Creatrix Tiara

Notes: 5 notes

whathunter:

[Picture: Background: 8 piece pie style color split with red and teal alternating. Foreground: White guy with glasses and light shadow wearing a sweat shirt over a button down and short black hair. Has a smug, arrogant facial expression and crossed arms. Top text: “If you don’t want people to attack you” Bottom text: “maybe you shouldn’t provoke them by standing up for your rights.”]
The things some people think they have the right to say to me, I swear.

Always relevant.

whathunter:

[Picture: Background: 8 piece pie style color split with red and teal alternating. Foreground: White guy with glasses and light shadow wearing a sweat shirt over a button down and short black hair. Has a smug, arrogant facial expression and crossed arms. Top text: “If you don’t want people to attack you” Bottom text: “maybe you shouldn’t provoke them by standing up for your rights.”]

The things some people think they have the right to say to me, I swear.

Always relevant.

The Singapore public sector doesn't allow people with depression to work for them? o_____________O - creatrixtiara

No, it doesn’t. Nobody with an invisible disability can. If you so much as see a therapist even, it goes on your record and these are publicly accessible to employers (which allows them to freely discriminate).

Cheers,

Thursday.

commuknits:

iwillnotshavemyvagina:

Gender: Socially constructed behavioral roles
Sex: Biological parts.
Gender is NOT intrinsic to sex.

Kelner!

commuknits:

iwillnotshavemyvagina:

Gender: Socially constructed behavioral roles

Sex: Biological parts.

Gender is NOT intrinsic to sex.

Kelner!

Words that I don’t think should be banned or censored:

stuffsickpeoplehavetoputupwith:

  • deaf (including figurative use)
  • Deaf
  • the deaf (including figurative use)
  • the Deaf
  • cripple (including figurative use)
  • crippled (including figurative use)
  • insane (including figurative use)
  • disabled (including figurative use)
  • disability
  • lame (including figurative use)
  • blind (including figurative use)
  • idiot (including figurative use)
  • stupid (including figurative use)
  • dumb (including figurative use)
  • lunatic (including figurative use)
  • crazy (including figurative use)
  • nuts (including figurative use)
  • paralyzed (including figurative use)
  • limp(ing) (including figurative use)
  • challenged (“)
  • limited (“)
  • disease(d) (“)
  • sick (“)
  • simple (“)
  • etc.

Here’s what I think of the language-policing that seems to have originated in various feminist communities and, unfortunately, is spreading. I think it’s not helpful.

I think it’s unhelpful to chase after people and censor them from using words that a.) are linguistically and culturally embedded; b.) can have multiple overlapping and sometimes disparate or even contradictory meanings, including, but not limited to literal/figurative/contextually-based/etymologically-based meanings; c.) don’t by themselves automatically constitute or contribute to the oppression of anyone—-in other words, context matters.

Let me ask you a question: which of these is more conducive to promoting thoughtful analysis of a term like “cripple”?

1. Banning the word, never uttering or writing it yourself, and chasing after anyone else who utters, types, or writes it and admonishing them for being “ableist” merely by virtue of having used a word, regardless of context

or

2. Examining the particular context(s) in which the word is employed; researching, perhaps, the etymology of the word; and then studying the various ways in which it was/is used within certain specific socio-cultural and historical contexts and/or textual situations in order to better understand the nuances and implications of said word

?

I pick #2.

Henry Louis Gates Jr. conducted a thoughtful analysis of racist words (including the “n-word”) and tropes in his groundbreaking book The Signifying Monkey: A Theory of African American Literary Criticism. Elaine Scarry studied torture in The Body in Pain. Her work included detailed examination of transcripts from torture victims describing the various forms of brutality they endured. Recently, Julia Miele Rodas probed the usage of the term “blind” in an article entitled “On Blindness.” Her work involved exploring figurative uses of “blind” and how these contribute to cultural and social ideas about blindness and blind people.

When you see a random word and react by pointing your finger (or hitting your keyboard) and calling out: “ABLEIST! RACIST! SEXIST! DON’T USE THAT WORD!” etc. you shut down the conversation. You effectively foreclose the possibility of any kind of productive or meaningful discussion about the word or words in question.

Further—-and this part is really important: you contribute nothing meaningful to the ongoing critical conversation about, say, Disability Studies by engaging in this kind of knee-jerk, reactionary behavior, because what you’re doing is limiting your “analysis” (if it can even be called that) to: “THAT WORD IS BAD. STOP USING IT.” All you’ve accomplished is to end the conversation, and perhaps to make others wary of engaging in or even initiating any kind of future conversation on the topic for fear of being subjected to a similar reaction.

Finally, you participate in a process (again, censorship) that actually threatens to strip even disabled people of the very language we might otherwise use to describe ourselves and speak about our own experiences.

If I am in fact lame—-if I have a limp and normally choose to refer to this as being “lame”—-and you tell me I am forbidden to utter, write, or type the word “lame,” you are silencing me. By silencing me, you are committing a kind of violence against me. Know what’s far more “ableist” than merely uttering, writing, or typing a word? Systematically stripping people of the vocabulary to articulate their own experiences and worldview. Know what’s “ableist”? Silencing people. Banning language. Censoring.

I’d rather see a thoughtful, nuanced discussion of certain terms any day than a facile (yet always so triumphantly uttered!) declaration of: “Stop using that word. It’s ‘ableist.’”

Context matters.

Context actually does matter.

Calling people out is easy. It’s also not productive or helpful. It also contributes nothing meaningful to Disability Studies and, 9 times out of 10, actually contributes to the systematic silencing (and therefore oppression) of disabled people.

Language police: I’m not into you.

There is a difference between using language to affirm identities as PWDs, and using language either literally or figuratively to Other PWDs further. 

There is a difference between someone calling out a slur and someone using it to gain Good Activist Points. 

Linguistic and cultural embedding are a convenient excuse to avoid examining how words create hierarchies and feed/reinforce existing structures. & connotation+denotation matter just as much, if not more.

And you should really be concerned that the reblogs of your post are using it as an excuse to keep Othering. And THAT is what sick people have to put up with. 

When trans women who present femininely or assert a binary identity are blamed for perpetuating binary gender roles, while it’s forgotten that many or even more cis women do the same, that’s transmisogyny.

When trans women have every aspect of their presentation examined and labeled either hyperfeminine and therefore fake or not feminine enough and therefore male, while the same traits would be seen as normal in cis women, that’s transmisogyny.

When trans women are told that they are politically ignorant when they object to trans men “reclaiming” a derogatory term that has been used specifically against trans women and not against trans men, that’s transmisogyny.

When trans women are told that they need to stop being assertive and strong because it is a sign of male privilege - invariably by “feminists” who, of course, encourage cis women to be assertive and strong - that’s transmisogyny.

When queer women’s spaces have trans women inclusive policies, yet any trans women who attend are generally ignored or not included in discussions, that’s transmisogyny.

What Transmisogyny Looks Like

There’s so much more at the link, and I only included a few here.

(via blackenedbutterfly)

I would like to remind everyone that the Red Cross is an organisation with serious overhead issues, as well as homophobic and transphobic policies.

jaded16india:

ja-sei-namorar:

http://www.lauras-playground.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=16561

http://www.velvetparkmedia.com/blogs/how-help-haiti-after-70-earthquake#comment-45574

http://www.examiner.com/religion-social-issues-in-newark/homophobia-can-kill-heterosexuals-and-another-red-cross-scandal

Please donate to Doctors Without Borders instead. You won’t get a neat katakana Tumblr logo, but you will be helping Japan without providing resources to a deeply problematic organisation.

Important to remember. 

All these links refer to the USian Red Cross, it is an inaccurate picture of the International RC and Red Crescent. 

Top of Page