This is what it’s like when I go on someone’s blog and a playlist starts playing.
how the fuck did they film that scene
they threw a radio at his face
There are a few possibilities…
I’d guess they had the radio on wires based on how it moves and moved it at his face pretty slowly, then sped up the video 10-15% in editing.
It may also be a foam / padded where it makes contact with his face.
FEMINISM DOES NOT ADVOCATE EQUALITY FOR EVERYONE. It, by definition, only focuses on WOMEN’S rights. If you want to advocate equal rights for EVERYONE, become an Egalitarian. But stop claiming that feminism is for human equality, when it’s only for female equality!
You’ve not looked into intersectional feminism, I assume?
It is still feminism, though. Feminism as an umbrella ideology can’t be made to fit every instance without becoming, as it has now become, fractured and self defeating with “that isn’t REAL feminism” being the default position during debates. It doesn’t work for religion and is doesn’t work in politics.
So everything feminism has achieved, every victory and all the good it has done becomes pointless, because feminism was created by human beings, which makes it imperfect? I don’t know.
Yup. Because how it performs in a debate setting is the ideal barometer of the efficacy of any movement or philosophy.
Feminism isn’t an entity unto itself. Saying “it doesn’t advocate for everyone” is like saying “Target doesn’t like the taste of butter.” Target is a business, not a person. It doesn’t have taste preferences.
Feminism is a movement and an ideology. More importantly, it’s a word—a word that has a meaning that can grow, change, evolve. Saying “I’m a feminist” is not tantamount to saying “I’m a feminist…and only a feminist." Many self-identifying feminists very much do advocate equality for all.
You have two problems. One is a problem with a specific group of people who would put their own “equality” before others—which is too absurd to have to explain why these people shouldn’t be taken seriously. This happens to be why I think putting “intersectional” before this and similar movements seems redundant—one shouldn’t have to explain that yes, in fact, they do advocate equality for all human beings. Why wouldn’t you?
The other problem is semantics.
"Feminism" as it’s popularly used may not be inclusive enough for you. Fine. But the definition of the term and is not restrictive (as I pointed out above). Being a feminist does not preclude one from being any number of other things, or from behaving "egalitarian" as a "feminist."
At any rate, it seems to me to be a waste of efforts and energy to attack allies in an important cause over semantics—labels—rather than work together, with them, to change the meaning of that popular, widely used term to mean exactly what they say it does (what you currently say it doesn’t).
In other words, who cares what you call it, if the goal and hopefully the results are the same?
It’s surprising how often I find myself in a group of women and they apologize for talking about some specifically female experience…
it may be a bodily function,
or not actually an experience specifically only to females, but they apologize for talking about it in front of me. THEY APOLOGIZE.
Think about that.
When was tue last time you remember a group of men apologizing to a woman for talking about something they care about?
“I AM ANGRY, SHORT, AND I HAVE MORE MOVIES THAN YOU. RESPECT ME. STEVE. STEVE. STEVE.”
Oh god, Tony looks so fucking done. “I AM TONY FUCKING STARK. I SHOULD BE TALLER THAN ALL OF YOU. GODAMMIT. PEPPER, GET ME A FOOTSTOOL.”
PEPPER, GET ME A FOOTSTOOL.
I’LL GET YOU 12% OF A FOOTSTOOL.
You guys realize he’s like 3-4 feet behind them, right? Perspective is making him look not just shorter, but smaller in general. Look at their feet / Tom’s elbow.