This Is my Feminist Hat

[chasingtides]

This is for your daily dose of rage:


Stamford Marriott claims woman was negligent in her own rape

Fricker sexually assaulted the woman for several minutes, pointing the gun at her and her children and threatening to sexually assault one of her children.

The hotel also claims as a special defense that the acts were unforeseen and beyond their control, that the woman and her children failed to properly "mitigate their damages," and that the hotel had not been notified about Fricker.

She was negligent in her own rape. Her children failed to mitigate the damages. FUCK THIS SHIT. He had her at fucking gunpoint, you dumb shit. What the hell was she supposed to do? I don't know how else you fucking mitigate damages in that kind of god damned situation.

Way to feed on the shame that already comes out of this kind of situation in our culture. It's not the rapist's fault that he fucking raped and almost assaulted your children. No, it's your fault, you woman, for going out of the house and daring to not treat every person on the street as a potential murderer and rapist. It's your fault you got hurt, your children got hurt. (However, if you do treat every person as a potential murderer and rapist, society will treat you like you're crazy and man-hater. See? Let's just make sure you can't win in this situation, women.)

Fuck you, Marriott. Fuck you. You are never, ever getting another penny from me.

Woman Fired For Not Wearing Make-Up
"I have never worn makeup in my life. I just don't like it," Vild said. "When (the boss) told me I need to dress like I am going out with the man of my dreams, that did it for me."

The 9th district court then rules that it is not discriminatory to make women wear make-up.

I nabbed the link via beauty101 but I don't advise looking there unless you want your head to explode.

First of all, I agree with some of the beauty101 posters: if it is mandatory for women to wear make-up, it should also be mandatory for men to do the same. One of the posters, however, says this:

In many job establishments, men aren't allowed to wear earrings, but women are.
Men often can't have their hair past a certain length, but women can have it as long as they please.
In a lot of construction jobs, men are required to buy their own tools.
Men are often required to wear ties when women aren't.
Sometimes men have to be clean shaven, while women can keep that peach fuzz above their upper lip.

I honestly have no idea how the construction jobs feature into this. Presumably, women in those jobs also have to buy their own tools. I also think that the rules about earrings/hair are outdated and problematic. However, that does not make the discrimination against women okay.

Telling men to have shorter hair and not wear earring is not at all the same fucking thing as telling women that in order to be professional, they must display themselves as sex objects. These are not at all the same. Telling a woman that she needs "to dress like [she] is going to meet the man of [her] dreams" is turning an employee and a professional into a sex object.

Also, if you don't wear make-up to work, then you probably don't wear it on dates. Often, when I'm going on a date, I wear no make up at all. I wear make-up at my whim and fancy. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. I don't think that when I wear my black eyeliner and hot pink lipstick and dark eyeshadow that I look as professional as when I'm bare-faced. Especially if it's day-time, I'm bare-faced. Urgh. I am not a sex object. You do not have the right to tell me that to hold a job, I need to make myself into one (even if it is fucking legal).

You've probably already heard of johncwright's fear of teh homosex. (FYI, if you haven't, I'm a pedophilic goat-fucking rapist.) As an update, those of us who disagree with him and think he's an ass are Pervertarian Jacobin zealots and homosexuality is just like alcoholism, guys.

Now, I would like to bring up some things brought up in a community post about him and in his own journal. He says, Let us notice one other thing. The Left has successfully created a nation of whiners. People these days are thin-skinned, and cannot stand to hear a spade called a spade. If you use a perfectly normal English word like "pervert" of "sodomite" to refer to, well, perverted sodomites, the people hearing those words will actually be wounded. while others said that people shouldn't complain about a personal journal.

In his own words, he called me an incestuous goat-fucking rapist who likes little children in a sexual manner. I'm not being the PC-police, as he so delicately put it, when I am prepping to spread the word that he's a homophobic asshole. I'm not not being the PC-police when I say, "That is not fucking on!" Do you know why? Because he called me an incestuous goat-fucking rapist who likes little children in a sexual manner.

Nevermind the trite slippery slope argument. (Homosexuality is like incest is like pedophilia is like bestiality is like rape therefore homosexuality is like raping puppies.) He calls my sexuality "this disordered appetite." I oppose him because he is equating my being - my being that appreciates the male and female form equally, my being the simply isn't attracted on the basis of gender or on plumbing (whereas I am sure that Mr Wright would not consider transwomen women and would, thusly, be far more genital and bodily-focused than most who read this journal) - with crimes against people. That, good sir, I what I fucking oppose*.

*In addition to a goodly number of other things. However this post is already getting mighty long>