I Don’t

Bonjour, cool cats!

I just started reading The Meaning of Wife by Anne Kingston. It is pretty awesome. And, like all good books should, it started me thinking. Even if I were allowed to, I don’t plan on getting married. There’s just too much stigma attached to it for my taste. Marriage was conceived as a way to use women as currency, disguised as a religious commandment. Even with the religious background, though, in its early days, marriage’s ownership overtones wasn’t disguised that heavily.

In our current PC days, though, that would like, so not fly with those feminists. You know, the angry ones with hairy armpits from the 70s? They would be pissed. So how to convince generations of women to keep getting married? Tell them that marriage is the ultimate form of love, because every wants to be loved! And even I have to admit that the idea of getting dressed up in pretty clothes and swearing you’ll love each other until the end of time is honestly sweet. Don’t get me wrong; there are lots (hopefully most!) of married couples that adore each other. And I think commitment is important, especially if you want to have children (nothing against divorce; my mom has been divorced twice and it hasn’t killed me yet). But marriage in and of itself is not the ultimate form of love. And I don’t see the point in continuing a tradition that originally, had nothing to do with love, in the name of love. Does anyone else see why I think this is odd?

In addition to the tradition of wife-as-property, the wedding industry is eeeeviiilllll. *spooky voice* Consumerism is one of the main ways society subverts women. The obsession with having the “perfect wedding” leads to a year-long shopping spree, often with purchases of items that cost exponentially more because they have the word “wedding” tacked to the front. (Wedding Port-a-Potties!) Not to mention the completely exploitative shows like “Bridezilla”.* And (blarrrgggh) the belief that every little girl dreams about her wedding? When I was a little girl, I was fantasizing about having a pet dragon and riding it to school and all the other kids would be soooo jealous. The only thought I ever gave to marriage was being really sad that I’d have to give up my last name, which I was apparently extremely attached to, because I just assumed I was going to get married one day.**

And there is something about “wife” that connotes a certain personality. Type-A, tidy, with it, probably nagging, if not speed freak cheerful frighteningly cheerful about something. For something that is supposed to be able to include all women, that sounds pretty narrow (and unrealistic). In The Meaning of Wife, they mention that women actually try to change to seem more wifely. Er. As in, acting more demure, doing more dishes, etc. etc. Maybe taking some time to purchase a pink frilly apron. Guess what? Their husbands didn’t like this. Yeah, maybe because they married a human being who suddenly MORPHS INTO WIFE-BOT! Transformers, sexists in disguise! While I disdain the genre of humor consisting of middle-aged dudes complaining about how they married some hot lady who is now UGH! Letting herself go! Nagging! Wearing granny panties! Maybe there is a tiny kernel of truth to it. (That sentence hurt to write) If wives feel so much pressure to conform to this 50s, Feminine Mystique-esque stereotype that they’re actually trying to become that, they’re probably losing themselves. And the men who married them probably miss that old self, because you can’t love a stereotype. You can’t love the stress that comes with trying to be someone you’re not. You can love a partner who lives with you and shares chores with you and maybe raises kids with you and keeps house with you and sleeps and cuddles with you. But after all the problems that “husband and wife” have had in the past, it seems that “wife” is having a damn hard time adjusting to being a person who just happens to do all those things with their significant other as well.

And for Pete’s sake, keep your name or hyphenate. Please?

*I have never even seen this show. I would probably puke.

**No, little Rabbit! You don’t have to give up your last name! You can keep it! Or hyphenate! Or even not get up-and-marriaged at all!

Advertisements

Yo, Sluts

Hello! Today’s edition of Rabbit the Feminist is brought to you by the letter S, for “slut” and also “shaming”. Let’s talk about slut-shaming, shall we? We can begin with a simple definition.

Slut-shaming is calling someone a slut, skank, whore, etc. because of how they act, dress, or whom they sleep with. Slut-shaming is when you assume someone is trashy, trampy, “low-class”, stupid, boy/girl-crazy, etc. etc. because they have a lot of sex. Not necessarily with the same person. Slut-shaming is when you say someone was “asking for it” because they were wearing a low-cut dress, or had had a few drinks, or are a stripper. Slut-shaming is the dehumanization of sex workers. Slut-shaming is attributing a set of negative traits to someone who happens to like sex. Slut-shaming is applauding virgins for keepin’ their legs closed. Slut-shaming is abstinence-only education, claims that birth control rarely works and that masturbation isn’t a viable alternative to sex/total abstinence. Slut-shaming is assuming that guys jack off but that girls have less knowledge of their nether regions than I have of the history of the lumber industry in Tibet. Slut-shaming is the belief that open marriages/relationships are devoid of real love and that being poly is just for greedy people. Slut-shaming is all this and a hell of a lot of other things as well, all bad.

Guess who slut-shaming happens to? Women. Because when men sleep around, they get high-fives. Guess what? I like high fives too, and I’m a girl.

Assuming that most of you are sane, kind people with half of a brain open-minded folks who don’t believe in calling gay people “fag”, “dyke” etc. etc. in a derogatory manner, let’s use this example. If you aren’t one of these people, either suck it up or leave, thankyoubye.

Calling someone a slut/skank/whore/etc. is like calling someone a faggot/dyke/other anti-gay slur. You are shaming them for their sexuality. It is none of your business who they get it on with/how they get it on/how many people they get it on with unless they really want to share with you. These are basic manners, peeps. Wast thou raised by wolves?

Also, guys rarely get slut-shamed. Sometimes they get called man-whore, but that’s more of a joke than anything else. Slut, skank, whore, etc. just don’t apply to men. Like I said, boys just get high-fives from their pals.

Gimme my high fives, dammit.

Women: The New Slabs of Meat

Hey, chum-buddy hoo-hoos! So, I was wondering… how sexist do you think it is to compare a woman to a hunk of meat?

Pretty bad, huh? Like, on a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being neutral and 10 being a dress outlining a lady’s sexy-bits in a way that compares her to a chunk of dead cow meat? Because I was thinking this is pretty sexist.

Oh look! It has a huge sign saying “Rack”! How very clever and not at all creepy. But, seriously? What self-respecting lady WEARS this? What self-respecting lady has the burning desire to compare herself and her sexuality with a dead animal’s flesh for sale? Yeesh. I think this one kind of speaks for itself.

And is it just me, or does this seem sort of serial-killer-y? I feel like a serial killer who has a girlfriend who has no idea he is actually a murderer (“He always seemed so normal!”. Yeah, honey. That’s what they all say) would want his ladyfriend to wear this during their sexytime. And then he fantasizes about chopping her up into itty-bitty pieces, starting with her “RACK”, maybe moving along to her “SHANKS” then carving out a nice “RIB”. Shiver.

Sexism for the Kiddies

All women need to be taught from an early age that staying fit, freakishly skinny and perky is pretty much our goal in life. Oh wait– we shouldn’t be taught that? Whoops, Skechers made a boo-boo. Because for some reason that is beyond my comprehension, Skechers has decided to market their “shape-ups” to little girls, letting them know that it’s never O.K. to be anything other than twig-thin! YAY for corporate America!

Speaking of corporate America, the haters amongst thou might be wondering why this is such a big frugging deal. After all, it IS corporate America. I shouldn’t be surprised that the fat men in tuxedoes wearing top hats and smoking cigars are trying to sell as many of a product as possible, even if that means marketing it at kids. But I can be pissed off that they decided to market it to only little girls. Because, children, boy’s bodies are generally just fine the way they are, but girls need to undergo heavy modification from the time they are born! If Skechers was just trying to make a profit they’d be selling these shoes they’d be selling them to boys too, but NOOOOO. No, they insist that paying $50-$75 to give your sweet lil’ princess body image issues is the logical way to go.

So how is Skechers trying to remedy this? By sending out a spokesperson to claim that they’re just trying to cure childhood obesity! Which is a huge epidemic in case you hadn’t noticed! See! We’re just like Michelle Obama! Remember? She did that “Let’s Move” thing to try to help childhood obesity? So now that’s what WE’RE doing!

Ah-hem. Well, for one thing, Mobama isn’t aiming for little girls. She is aiming at the entire demographic of rugrats. And Michelle was more about actually getting healthy, which, for your information, Skecher’s Shape-Ups don’t help you do. In fact, they will fuck. You. Up. Buttloads of people have complained about hurting themselves in various, unfortunate ways, like having stress fractures in your hips, rolled ankles and other miscellaneous problems with your little tootsies (by that I mean feet). So, the moral of today’s story is… no matter what age you are, if you’re a woman you’re never skinny enough and GETTING skinny enough is worth cracking your hips? I shalt pass on this one, kthnxbai.

Golden Showers

By a show of hands, I’d like to see how many of you think peeing on women is hilarious, clever, and not hateful towards women IN THE SLIGHTEST. I am going to go ahead and assume that none of you raised your hands, because I’m assuming that as you are intelligent enough to be reading this, you are intelligent enough to realize peeing on women is neither hilarious, nor clever, and it is certainly hateful.

So why is it there are so many freaking urinals shaped like women? What kind of assbag frat-boy thought this up? Women are turned into urinals and peed on objectified all. The. Time. And if you don’t believe it, I have proof. Warning: pictures are NSFW.

Oh, I see what you did there! Ha! See, it’s funny because you’re peeing into what looks like an old whore’s vagina. Totally not hateful or misogynistic at all, because sluts aren’t people anyway, so it’s O.K. to pee on them. Well, unless you have a soul, or a heart, or a conscience, but you’ve probably sold all those on the black market by now anyway. But sometimes you aren’t out to indulge in disgusting rape/pee fantasies. Sometimes you just need an ego-boosting. You know what the best way to boost your ego is, men? Have a pretty lady tell you your dick is nice. That’s what I do when I’m feeling a little down on myself, anyway.

So isn’t this convenient? A wide array of passive (cuz, you know, they’re pictures, not real women), conventionally pretty, white ladies to ogle, measure, eye seductively and snap a shot of (to show the grandkids!) your dick. All while you pee on them.

Ah, gee! Y chromosome carriers sure are thoughtful. For these, they’ve helpfully removed any part of the female body not totally pornified by society (so, that leaves only the boobs, ass, and legs, charmingly clad in thongs and garters) so that men don’t have to deal with women as human beings. Because treating people like people is so hard! Why, it’s much simpler to subvert an entire gender and treat them as inanimate sex toys! You know, like dildos and stuff. Woman, vibrator, it’s all pretty much the same, doncha think?

Sometimes, though, you need something classier. Something that doesn’t scream “we chopped some stripper’s heads off and Krazy-Glued them to the wall”. And there is nothing, I repeat NOTHING, that doesn’t scream class like peeing in someone’s mouth. I mean, check out that expertly applied lipstick! This level of class doesn’t come easily. I mean, we’re talking Audrey Hepburn-, Fred Astaire-level shit here, guys.

Honestly, this pisses me off, pun not intended. Don’t say it’s meant to be a joke. Well, obviously it’s meant to be a joke. And it’s funny– you know, in the same way that Holocaust jokes, or racist jokes, or rape jokes are funny. Funny in the kind of way that maybe you laugh at, but if (in this case) you’re a woman, they make you feel a little sick or a little uncomfortable and maybe you’re not sure why.

Until you realize that, “Oh hell. That’s me they’re joking about pissing on.” Because all of the “women” represented (well, they’re fake but you get my drift) are anonymous. They are not specific (not that that would be any better). They are supposed to represent something– someone. Who are they representing?

Women. The joke is merely that pissing on women is funny, and not to be taken seriously, despite the utter disrespect it shows. If you are a woman, all of the above urinals are jokes about peeing you, all of the above urinals are a show that you are, in fact, lesser. That you are something less than human, and because of that, disrespecting you is A-O.K. happy-fun-times.

I am so tempted to glue Lorena Bobbitt’s face over the women in the second picture’s faces. Also, super-glue knives into their hands. That sounds funny to me!

Why?

Today one of my friends told me she didn’t really agree with feminism. I tried to restrain myself from launching into a short verbal essay and/or roundhouse kicking her. I think I answered tactfully. I said something along the lines of, “Feminism is just the belief that women are human beings.” which is really pretty weak and certainly isn’t changing anyone’s minds anytime soon. But it’s hard to defend something you believe in so strongly to someone you care about. Especially because– well, how does one explain feminism?

Of course, pretty much everyone and their cousin knows sort-of what feminism is. But it seems like so many people have such a screwed-up idea of feminists. We’re man-haters, we have no sense of humor, we’re all lesbians (O.K. I’m queer but I don’t speak for all feminists), and we should just get over ourselves because the battle is over. And in a situation like that, you need a quick comeback. Not necessarily something clever that will leave them speechless with pure awe and shame, but have you ever tried to explain double-standards, the beauty myth, the virgin/whore complex, rape apologism, the rift society creates between women, and why yes, heels are actually a symbol of oppression, regardless of how adorable they are*? It’s impossible to sum up how women are oppressed in 140 characters or less. And you have to admit “feminism is just the belief that women are human beings” isn’t going to make a radical feminist out of anyone, let alone inspire them to read the books and figure out what is really is.

So my question is: is it worth it to try to explain? Do you have any fallback replies to things like this? How do you explain to someone your perception of feminism? Please leave a reply in the comments. In the meantime, here’s a picture of Lady Gaga from the “Judas” video (which, by the way, I have watched at least a million times).

P.S.: DO NOT say “women and men are just different”. Having a vagina vs. a dick doesn’t have anything to do with whether your hair is long or short, you wear skirts, you like to shop, your friends are men or women, etc. etc. Plus, “women and men are different” can justify anything. “Women should stay home! They’re different! They have babies, and men don’t, and babies stay at home!”, “Men and women are just different. THAT’S why women are weak”, “Men and women are different! Men are BUILT to be in positions of power over women!”

*I have nothing against heels in general, besides the fact that they often hurt like hell. But why is it that painful and restricting shoes/garments are relegated to women? Oh yeah the world hates us and wants us to be unable to run away from rapists ha ha I forgot about that for a moment.

Women: They’re Just Too Sexy

Fun Fact of the Day: Women are just too sexy for the public. It’s true. That seems to be the super-Orthodox Hasidic newspaper Der Tzitung’s point of view, anyway. Violating guidelines explicitly stated on the official White House flickr page, they decided to go ahead and photoshop the only two women (Hillary Clinton and Audrey Tomason) out of an image of a counterterrorism conference.

Whuh?

Apparently, Hillary Clinton’s yawn or cough or whatever was just too “sexually suggestive” to be seen by the public. Seriously, have you ever seen a picture more pornographic than this? I mean, this is the kind of stuff teenage boys hide under their mattresses. But… what was poor Audrey Tomason doing? Just standing there, looking… like a woman. Come on! You can’t even see their boobs!

The Original Picture

The newspaper eventually printed this crock of shit photoshopped picture instead.

According to the magazine, they don’t believe that pictures of women should ever be printed. I, obviously, have a problem with this.

I understand that many religions have a focus on chastity and modesty. O.K, that’s one thing. But Hillary wasn’t dancing in her skivvies on the table to “Sexyback”. She was not sucking a lollipop and winking seductively at the journalist. NO! She was yawning, or coughing, or something. The fact that merely having women in the picture was too sexually provocative asserts that men are the target demographic (I’m assuming the readers are straight for convenience’s sake. Also, if lesbians ran the world, this would never happen). Out of a group of straight readers, who are the ones who might find Hillary and Audrey provocative? Men. Nobody is complaining that women might get lady-boners from Prez Obama’s intense stare. Because women can’t read! Women aren’t interested in politics! Hahahahaha! What a silly idea. There is a constant double standard in our society; there is one accepted way to be a woman, and myriad different accepted ways to be a man. And guess what? The one way to be a woman? It’s impossible, guys. Nobody can be that thin– but not anorexic. Nobody can be that giggly and sweet– and mean it. Nobody can have perfect hair, or perfect boobs, or always be in a good mood, and nobody WANTS to always defer to men (I hope). And Hillary and Audrey have strayed off that perfect path just by being powerful women in the same room as powerful men. They are just as much a part of history as any of the men in that room. They have just as much of a right to be in that picture. It is the constant portrayal of women as “other” that means people can see a woman as merely a sex symbol, instead of a respected professional. Because if women were truly seen as human beings, then people would see them as politicians, not as constantly sexual.

And there is just something about the whole idea that reeks of rape apologism. The idea that women, just by existing in a room, can incite lust? Can make men lose control? Like I said, Hillary and Audrey weren’t exactly doing a burlesque routine. They were appropriately dressed and behaving just like all the men in the room. But because they are women, they are too sexual. This kind of mindset just furthers that if men are turned on, they lose control of themselves, they aren’t responsible. The newspaper is just perpetuating the myth that it is the woman’s fault for inciting lust, and that she deserves punishment; in this case, being photoshopped out. In a real life situation, being raped. Not only does this hurt women, it just seems downright insulting to men. It seems a little insulting to say that men are all beasts who have no self control. We are all human– women are not sex symbols, but people. Men are not sex-machines, but people.

Can we all start thinking that?

Oh, and by the way– even if Hillary were to come to work in a cardboard box with eye holes she would get bad P.R. If she’s not sexy enough, they say she’s frumpy and letting herself go. If she’s too sexy, they say she’s inappropriate for a politician. Such is the life of a powerful woman. Hey, even if Hillary was in sweatpants and a sweatshirt she’d look better than that guy right behind Obama, and no one’s yelling at him for letting himself go.

Now Your Clothes Can Defend You From Rape

So apparently in Japan they made an “anti-rape” dress. It actually looks like a skirt, and basically it turns into a giant vending machine costume so that women can hide from would-be rapists. Oh Japan! You so crazy. 

Let’s just point out the obvious flaws with this first, shall we? First of all, most vending machines don’t billow in the wind, outlining a female form. And while the concept of sentient vending machines sounds like an adorable plot for a heartwarming Pixar movie (or a horrific idea for a sci-fi thriller about evil A.I. technology, depending on your point of view), most do not have feet.

But I have to say, I really don’t like this idea.

For one thing, why must it be marketed as an “anti-rape” dress? I get why it is marketed at women; while I don’t have a problem with it, I get that the majority of men don’t wear skirts on a day-to-day basis (and certainly not butt-ugly giant table-cloth orange ones). Ignoring the fact that it is way too obvious to actually help someone hide from attackers, why “anti-rape”? The vast majority of rapes are committed by someone the victim knows. If you’re with your boyfriend who’s trying to rape you, he’ll probably notice when you turn into a massive vending machine with toes. This dress would only be (conceptually) effective if the attacker was a stranger who saw you on the street, which, as already mentioned, happens less than rape by someone you already know. So that’s problematic.

And also, just like everything else in our culture (OK, I realize this is from Japan but same idea) it is trying to stick the responsibility on the woman. Nobody has ever asked a victim of attempted murder whether they said no. Nobody has ever taken a victim of a mugging’s “morality” into question (because as everyone knows, you can’t rape a slut, because she was asking for it). Nobody says a victim of a mugging was “asking for it” because they looked rich and had a nice watch in a bad neighborhood. Women are expected to order their lives around keeping themselves safe from rape. Nobody is expected to be constantly careful not to be murdered. And if someone is killed, the murderer is always held responsible. There is no gray haze in murder, muggings, assault, etc. Rape is a violent crime just like murder, muggings, and assaults, and rapists need to be held responsible for it.

Being safe is one thing. It is good to be aware of your surroundings, and know how to take care of yourself. But nobody’s coming out with “anti-murder” ties. This is one more thing that puts responsibility on the woman instead of the rapist. “Well, ma’am, you may have been raped– but you could have avoided it, if you’d been wearing this anti-rape skirt”. Obviously that’s an extreme example, but a rapist in Italy got off because his victim was wearing jeans. JEANS, for Chrissakes. Because apparently the woman must have helped him take her pants off, as jeans are too hard to remove forcibly. You know what? Even if she’d been buck naked and ready to have sex, if she changed her mind and said no it would still be rape.

So while I do not approve of putting responsibility for rape on women’s shoulders, this is still a fucking awesome dress. Seriously, it would be so cool to wear this to finals week and just get up in the middle of the test and turn into a vending machine. OH! I know. I’d sing the Transformer’s theme song while transforming. Transformers, robots in disguise… I’ve got class.

Rabbit Does More Than Fume

In my recent post, Rabbit Fumes In the Back Row, I yelled about someone making a “go make me a sandwich” joke during an school council election speech; one that I’m pretty sure has to be approved by teachers. This made me really, really, really angry. Like, time to bring out the feminist adamantium claws angry. (If you didn’t get that, go read Rabbit Fumes in the Back Row). It pissed me off to such an extreme degree, in fact, that I decided to do more than yell on my blog.

Yep! I wrote a letter. I am still communicating with teachers to figure out how to send it to the right people, but I’ve started to figure it out. I’m actually a little shaky because I got this huge adrenaline rush writing it. Talk about a feminism nerd. Then again, I’m the girl who wears her homemade Betty Friedan and Kathleen Hanna pins pretty much every day.

Speaking of Kathleen Hanna, I want to thank Bikini Kill and my mom. Because you know I had on my headphones on and was growling along to “White Boy” as I wrote the letter. And also, my mom is pretty much Awesome Feminist Mom and she helped me figure out who to send it to and such. Seriously, though, my mom is sitcom-mama levels of awesome. You know how on cheesy sitcoms the sidekick will have a parent that represents a minority or “very special issue”? Like the sidekick’s dad will be gay and explain on the show how gays are just like everyone else* or the mom will be a feminist? Yeah, well my mom isn’t a creepy sitcom mom, but she’s pretty great. I would not be a feminist without her. And no, she didn’t brainwash me by reading me The Female Eunuch while I was still in utero or something. She just happens to be a asskicking strong woman who I admire and who is awesomely independent and who even let me play with Barbies and read Seventeen until I went on my walkabout in the Australian bush and met my spirit animal. My spirit animal is Simone de Beauvoir, by the way. I sort of wish it had been a bear or something though. Simone de Beauvoir is much harder to carve into a totem pole than a bear, or fish, or eagle or something.

The text of my letter is below, although I censored some stuff. While normally I am entirely against censorship, I would prefer not to give away anyone’s names or the school I go to, because for all I know you are a creepy stalker. So I will have to settle for writing myself a stern letter about the harms of censorship.

To Whom It May Concern:

During yesterday’s assembly, a comment was presented as humorous; however, I found it to be personally offensive as well as sexist and degrading. In (student name)’s speech, she suggested that we create incentives for students to attend events; she quoted several students, including one who claimed that an incentive for them would be “a woman who would make them a sandwich”. The connotation of this joke is that a woman’s voice is not important, and that their role is to shut up and serve men. This is a pretty common “joke” that is always inappropriate, oppressive, and intended to silence women.

I was surprised and concerned that no (school name) adults made any effort to intervene and that it was passed off as humorous. At (school name), we pride ourselves on our tolerance and I know that no comments that were similarly oppressive, such as a racist joke, would never be allowed. As a young feminist, I was appalled and offended that this was allowed. I don’t feel safe in an environment that would support sexist comments without any reprimand. Jokes that demean my worth as a young woman do not make me want to attend (school name) events, and it is debasing to all the young women at (school name) to hear these kind of misogynistic comments in a supposedly fun environment like an assembly. I hope that this can be addressed soon.

 

(Rabbit)

 

*This would be great, if I didn’t hate sitcoms as a general rule. And the “very special episodes” are always super patronizing.

 

Rabbit Fumes in the Back Row

If you attended my high school and went to the assembly we had today, and happened to glance into the back row about halfway through, you would have seen me with steam blowing out of my ears and a feminist lecture upon my lips. Because some utter asshole decided it would be a great time to bring up the sandwich thing.

Let’s get this straight. Feminists have nothing against sandwiches. I’m sure there are even feminists who like sandwiches. Hell, I’ve been known to enjoy the occasional peanut-butter-and-chocolate-chip myself. Sandwiches are not the problem here. Sandwiches are an innocent snack or meal.

But feminists will bare their teeth, unsheath their claws*, and shriek a vicious war cry when that tired old, “make me a sandwich” line is pulled out from its dusty place in a closet in Patriarchy HQ. Yes, during the election speeches given during the assembly today, someone actually mentioned the sandwich thing.

A girl whom we shalt call ‘O’ was explaining how she would add incentives for people to attend school events. This is all howdy-doody, but then she proceeded to give examples of what people considered incentive. “So-and-so would go to a game if we gave everyone a bowl of Cheerios, what’s-his-face would attend a play if there was free food. And Sir Asshole Toolster would attend a game if there was a woman to make him a sandwich.”

At this point I turned in my seat and told my friend K, “And Rabbit would go if she got to slap the ass who told a woman to make him a sandwich.”

And yes, I realize: time and time again it has been proven that high school boys are 99% more likely than most other human beings (with some exceptions, mainly for frat boys) to be misogynist sacks of hormones and woman-hate. And I realize someone is probably going to write me an angry comment telling me that is was “just a joke, God, feminists are all so serious, learn to laugh”. But none of the administration thought it was a problem for someone to put such an obnoxiously sexist piece into their speech? The subjugation and degradation of women is not a joke; calling it so is a) further demeaning to women and b) belittles the fight for gender equality. One would think that a group of adults trusted to run a hothouse of teenage hormones should be the most sensible, intelligent people on the planet. The kind of sensible, intelligent people who realize that making jokes at women’s expense is NEVER OK, even if it does make jocks laugh. I have the right to go to school and not have my entire gender insulted by someone who knows nothing about women and girl’s struggles.

I am considering complaining to someone, but if somebody could give me advice on how to continue, that would be great! I am not exactly sure how to bring up that this upset me, who to talk to (the principal?), how to complain, so any help with this (just leave a comment) would be wonderful.

*All feminists have adamantium claws, just like Wolverine. Because feminists are X-(WO)MEN AND WE ALL KNOW IT OK?