usually unpopular opinion puffin pisses me off but this is so important
ALL OF THIS
for fucking real though
do you ever need a five minute hug but only from like a specific person
Supposedly invented by the Chinese, there is an ancient form of torture that is nothing more than cold, tiny drops falling upon a person’s forehead.
On its own, a single drop is nothing. It falls upon the brow making a tiny splash. It doesn’t hurt. No real harm comes from it.
In multitudes, the drops are still fairly harmless. Other than a damp forehead, there really is no cause for concern.
The key to the torture is being restrained. You cannot move. You must feel each drop. You have lost all control over stopping these drops of water from splashing on your forehead.
It still doesn’t seem like that big of a deal. But person after person, time and time again—would completely unravel psychologically. They all had a breaking point where each drop turned into a horror. Building and building until all sense of sanity was completely lost.
"It was just a joke, quite being so sensitive."
"They used the wrong pronoun, big deal."
"So your parents don’t understand, it could be worse."
Day after day. Drop after drop. It builds up. A single instance on its own is no big deal. A few drops, not a problem. But when you are restrained, when you cannot escape the drops, when it is unending—these drops can be agony.
People aren’t sensitive because they can’t take a joke. Because they can’t take being misgendered one time. Because they lack a thick skin.
People are sensitive because the drops are unending and they have no escape from them.
You are only seeing the tiny, harmless, single drop hitting these so-called “sensitive” people. You are failing to see the thousands of drops endured before that. You are failing to see the restraints that make them inescapable.
It would be easy to say, as a man with a full dollar in your pocket, that everyone should have the same amount of money. But that’s ambiguous. Generic. It has no goal, no task, no specific channel of action. We need to be specific — we need to be able to point to that woman sitting right there and say, “Godfuckingdamnit, how do we put more money in her pocket?” It’s like being in a room with a locked door. Someone needs to pick the lock to escape, so it’s worthless to say, “Well, I think all doors should be open.” Yeah, that’s super-fucking great as a theory, but seriously, we need to deal with the door standing in our way first.
Now, add to the fact that, really, men are already more equal than equal.
The door is open to us. We have the key. Again, it’s really nice to say, I think all people should have this key, except there you are, still holding onto it. You’re not handing it off. You’re not sharing it.[…]
So, it sounds galling to be the ones who have the lion’s share and say, “I think all people should share in the spoils, not just women.” In other words, you’ve included yourself in that generic, unfocused “everybody” group. And this is where equalism / humanism / egalitarianism feels wifty, wonky, lazy, weak — it’s a pie’s eye view, a gesture with a limp noodle fingers, “Sure, sure, yes, we should all be equal, and we should all have ponies, and let them eat cake. The ponies and the people. Let the ponies and the people eat cake, in case I wasn’t clear.”
Feminism is there to address a very specific set of deficits. But it’s not exclusive. You can be feminist while being for the correction of other imbalances, too. You can be an EQUALITY FOR ALL person while still being someone who supports the particular cause of correcting these deficits.
If you want to right these specific wrongs — then you’re a feminist.
If you don’t want to correct them — then you’re not.
And if you’re not a feminist…
…then you’re really not much of an equalist, or a humanist, or an egalitarian. Meaning, it’s hard to say you’re for all SHAPES if you won’t be there for SQUARES in particular, you see what I mean? Being a feminist is part of it. As I see it, being a feminist isn’t taking anything away from anybody. It’s there to give, not remove — it’s all additive, not subtractive. And that, gents, is why I’m #HeForShe, and not just #WeForWe. I don’t need to confirm a world where you share with me, because the flow of power has already gone the other way. We need to learn to share.
|—||Why I Prefer The Word “Feminist” Over “Equalist” « terribleminds: chuck wendig (via nudityandnerdery)|