Top ↑ | Archive | Ask me anything

(via sle4zy)

catandkitty:

do you know why feminism has a horrible image?

i’ll let you in on a secret here, it’s because people hate women

(via misandry-mermaid)

littlemissmutant:

kingjaffejoffer:

Remember this when you read reports of people ‘looting’ McDonalds tomorrow

I keep coming back to the fact that in Ferguson the protestors are doing everything police and other first responders are supposed to do - emergency first-aid, preventing break-ins at local businesses - and the police are doing the things that the police are supposed to prevent - murder, assault, intimidation, harassment, generally terrorizing this community.

(via misandry-mermaid)

"

Identifying victims of violent crime as “prostitutes” has a distancing effect: it makes “normal” women feel safe. This good girl/bad girl binary interacts with the normal man/client binary to create “extraordinary” circumstances within which this violence can occur. Arguably, when “good” women are murdered by men, this creates a threat to all women and a woman’s place/space of work or how outside of normalised sexual activities she steps is no longer relevant […]

The term “prostitute” does not simply mean a person who sells her or his sexual labour (although rarely used to describe men in sex work), but brings with it layers of “knowledge” about her worth, drug status, childhood, integrity, personal hygiene and sexual health. When the media refers to a woman as a prostitute, or when such a story remains on the news cycle for only a day, it is not done in isolation, but in the context of this complex history.

"

-

Dehumanising sex workers: what’s ‘prostitute’ got to do with it?       

(via stripperina)

Same goes for those racially-coded phrases like “high risk lifestyle”… ignoring every instance of racialized and gendered violence and schlupping the blame onto the victim for being associated with drugs, or sex work.

(via misandry-mermaid)

(via sle4zy)

The Walmart/McDonalds employees are paid so low because there positions require a minimum 1 month of on-the-job training. Just about anyone can get hired at these places, because ANYBODY can do it. The Walton family started their own business and got where they are at by working hard and taking big financial risks. If you want things, you have to give. Not giving but taking is called selfishness. If you want money you better know something most other people don't. This is called personal value.
Anonymous

wintergrey:

:

Oh, stuff it.

The Waltons would be NOTHING without those food stamp eligible workers a the store level, who get the shelves stocked and customers cared for. The Waltons, at this point, aren’t doing anything to sustain the business. 

As far as giving and taking, what the fuck is working retail and food service if not giving? Have you ever worked that sort of position? It’s grueling. It’s physically demanding. It’s taxing on your time and resources, especially when managers pull shit like scheduling you to close one night and open the next morning.

And you’re expected to put up with it for $7.25/hr??? Please.

And then you get food stamps to help supplement your substandard income - food stamps being a program that YOU ALSO PAY INTO WITH THE TAXES TAKEN OUT OF YOUR OWN MEAGER PAYCHECK - and you get called “lazy” and “a taker”.

God, fuck that.

Meanwhile, the CEO of the corporation you work for accepts MILLIONS of dollars in corporate welfare. And pays himself millions upon millions of dollars. And nobody bats a fucking eyelash. Because that’s the acceptable kind of welfare.

Go do a basic Google search on corporate welfare, then get back to me about “not giving but taking” and selfishness.

Obviously there’s a need for those workers. People need to eat, our culture determines that certain meals are eaten outside the home, and that we shop in certain types of market, and so on. The skill level is irrelevant. There is a need for that work to be done. Therefore the workers should be paid in an amount that allows them to do that job a humane number of hours a day, safely and reasonably and securely.

To suggest that people deserve to starve or suffer because the jobs they work don’t require a certain level of ‘skill’ is inhumane and disgusting and anyone who claims a thing like that should be ashamed of being such a shitty human being. This is not Animal Farm. Some animals are not more equal than others. You, no matter how much skill your work entails, are not more entitled to a living wage and a safe work environment than any other human being.

And let me tell you, as someone with a university degree, now a working writer, who regularly worked retail and food service in the past—there is a lot of skill involved in quickly and efficiently and cleanly serving the public. It is hard work, it is physical labour, and it is valuable. Someone who is serving you in some way is doing so because you are not doing it for yourself, they are your proxy for that task, they are equal to you, they are not your servant or your serf or your inferior. If you went into a “high paying” profession in hopes of being deemed a “more equal” animal, you have failed.