elodieunderglass:

tabathagfitzgerald:

gustacos:

themodernmisandrist:

If men stopped working…the world would continue on.

If women stopped working, then things would get ugly.

What?

there has been an instance where this happened.
it was 1975 and icelandic women decided not to work for one day. 

working as in cooking, cleaning, taking care of the children, doing chores and so on, not only “not showing up to your workplace”. women did nothing that day, except showing up in reykjavik and protesting for gender equality, equal pay and equal representation in parliament, you know, cool stuff. 

you know what happened? havoc. men were left with food to cook and children they never took care of to pick up from kindergarden and entertain for the day. they went en masse to the food shops buying sausages because they could cook nothing else, they had to bond with children they never spent more than a couple hours a day with. they struggled combining their work day and the domestic tasks they had to sort out. and this just for one day.

iceland in 1975 stopped working and things indeed got ugly.
so ugly that women in the following decades became woke AF and soon it happened that women became president, took half of the seats in parliament and achieved one of the best living environments in the world.

is your astonishment solved now?

We already know what happens to countries when the majority of the male workforce is removed. It is called “war.”

If you want to read Highly Documented and Very Historical accounts of how countries function without internal male labor, you can start by diving in to World War 1 and World War 2! (I’m just gonna talk about the Allied forces because my English is best
and I know the most about them, but the Axis powers had similar
dynamics!)

See, when the warring civilizations threw every able-bodied man they could at war fronts all over the planet, this left enormous labor vacuums. Not only did the countries have to function without male labor, but they also had to funnel vast amounts of food, clothing, ammunition and weapons to the men in combat. By WW2, women were needed in every possible role that didn’t include active combat.

If you send millions of men to combat, then the resulting millions of empty, necessary, “male” jobs must be done by women. That’s just how it works.

This is an British WW1 poster from 1917. It says it succinctly – every woman who takes a “male” job in the military, frees up that man for active combat.

One thing that you can’t get enough of in war is bullets! With men spending bullets but not making them, the women need to do it. These WW1 posters from around 1918 are pretty cool – the woman “doing her bit” has shades of Art Nouveau, I think.

Here’s an American WW1 poster in which the women are dressed as mechanics, train drivers, military support, manufacturers, farmers and nurses. I like the cool Victorian shoes and the baggy trousers. Isn’t it funny to think that this happened between the Victorians and the flappers?

In WW1, you couldn’t even afford to spare able-bodied men to drive ambulances in warzones. Ambulance drivers on the Front were largely women. They picked up the wounded and dying men and took them to field hospitals staffed largely by women.

By WW2, the women of the Allied nations were SO ON TOP OF THIS.

Here is a Canadian lady from the 1940s. Women in Air Force support were vital – men were the fighter pilots, women were transport pilots – as well as doing the support roles like aircraft maintenance and preparation, parachute packing, communications and intelligence, managing the radar, plotting the weather, and, of course, doing the catering. The language on this poster shows that the woman does all of this necessary work to get the fighter pilots in the air. Every non-combat military job that a woman took meant one more fighter pilot and soldier in active combat.

Back at home, people functioned fairly well without men in WW2. Everyone’s seen this American WW2 poster, you know she’s encouraging women to get into the factories and make All The Stuff!

HEY WE STILL NEED LOTS OF FOOD TO EAT AND THERE ARE NO MEN TO MAKE THE FOOD, SHOULD WE STARVE?

NO WE SHOULD NOT

THIS AUSTRALIAN LADY IS GOING TO FARM ALL THE THINGS

Land Armies (staffed by Land Girls) were super necessary to feed everyone at home PLUS everyone at war. Land Girls were used in both WW1 and WW2. While farming was a “protected occupation” (male farmers wouldn’t be forcibly drafted into the military, because their jobs were too important to a functioning society) the majority male farmworkers decided to enlist voluntarily. This left  elderly or disabled male farmworkers to do intensive work. By WW2 they had some tractors to help, but most farming was still done by hand or with draft animals, especially since the steel and fuel for the tractors was more needed on the Front.

This American lady found a cool old-timey tractor, which is just as good as an ambulance…

But this British lady has to do her plowing with a draft horse! The weathered old farmer, too old for combat, is very grateful.

FOOD COMES FIRST!

okay but LOOK at some of these other Plushy Man Jobs, Necessary To Prevent the Downfall of Society, that American women needed to do RIGHT NOW TO BEAT THE NAZIS:

AMERICAN WOMEN! THESE ELEVATORS AREN’T GOING TO OPERATE THEMSELVES

I CAN KEEP GOING FOREVER

TAKE THE JOBS FROM MEN!! TAKE THEM!! SEIZE THEM!! DRILL THE THING

Oddly, even without men at work, “women’s work” still got done.
Children were still mostly looked after. Large communal childcare programs were set up (they were quickly closed after WW2, though.) Food was prepared. Households
ran. Single women stayed single. The countries functioned. The world still turned. MILLIONS OF MEN
were WIPED OFF THE PLANET but the world still turned.

In fact, the Allies won both WW1 and WW2.

And the resulting power/gender/employment vacuums shaped the gender dynamics of most of Tumblr’s parents and grandparents.

How quickly did everyone forget all that?

Advertisements

formordor:

elemental-witch:

smelly-grl:

fucktheflagandfuckyou:

soloontherocks:

petrolgirls:

apple-pie-thighs:

deerhoof:

madamevengeance:

weirdcreep:

TRUTH!

THIS OH MY FUCKING GOD THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS
CAN I REITERATE…THIS

this is so incredible

TRUTH!!!!

this woman speaks all the truth about hardcore! 

this applies to literally every area of knowledge

hell, she’s talking about music and I’m over here like “when did she meet every male scifi nerd on the planet”

@one-determined-flash this is the video i took my sound clip from!!!!!!!!!!!

the end is the best tbh

‘You don’t only not know about it, you’re disinterested in it. You think it doesn’t exist, you don’t think it’s real knowledge. Because it’s women. Women aren’t real knowledge.’

❤️❤️❤️ HER!! 💯💯💯

lovelovelovelove this

Progressive

sadydoyle:

Let’s start, this time, with a story. This is about Hillary Clinton – everything I write seems to be about her these days – but it’s about me, too. It’s about what it means, to be a feminist, or a woman on the left, and whether it matters. So before I get to her, let’s give you a good look at me. 

I’m at a job interview. It seems like I actually have a shot at this one. Someone who likes me knows the boss here, and has talked me up to him in person. I can show him my most recent performance review, in which I’m described as “a joy to work with,” that “my editors fight over who gets to edit my pieces,” and where the “places for improvement” section mentions they actually have to “wrack their brains for something I could do better.” I’ve come prepared to talk about my strong, built-in reader base, which I built from the ground up; the fact that I’ve led several social media campaigns that received national or international press attention and raised substantial funds, one of which was enthusiastically endorsed by several pro-choice members of Congress; my award for social media activism, from a prestigious women’s media organization, which I won by popular vote; the fact that I wind up at or near the top of my magazine’s “most-read” traffic list every time I publish a new piece.

I can mention other things, basic work-ethic things. I can mention that I have not voluntarily taken a vacation day or a sick day for the past 18 months, and that the last sick day I took was only because I was hospitalized. (I do have to take the day off on federal holidays, but on those days, I usually write for fun.) I can mention that I have never been late filing a piece. I can mention that the copy comes in clean, doesn’t require much editing, and gets turned around quickly, with maximum co-operation. I can talk about all that, at my job interview. Those are the questions I’m prepared to answer.

I’m not prepared for the question they ask.

“We’re a progressive site,” the man across the table begins, “And our readership, as with most progressive sites, is mostly men. You’ve focused a lot on women’s issues. Would you be comfortable writing something that men would be able to read?”

Keep reading

calmmanning:

“So perhaps it just speaks to the heartiness of women, that put on
your boots and put your hat on and get out, slog through the mess that
is out there.” – Senator Lisa Murkowski (R – AK)

On January 26, 2016, two days after a large blizzard in DC, something was different in the US Senate. No men showed up. For the first time ever, the entire present Senate staff was female. (video)

amuseoffyre:

deadcatwithaflamethrower:

dubiousculturalartifact:

can we stop giving all the credit to JJ Abrams for the cool female representation in TFA, & start giving more to the fact that six out of the eight people involved in developing the film where female, the president of Lucasfilm is Kathleen Kennedy, a woman, & she works with a 50% female executive team?

JJ Abrams is fine sometimes, but like, it’s important to also look at who he worked with & the choices he makes when nobody argues different.

Like, example…

This is the guy who made two Star Trek films (You know. The franchise that’s meant to be built on equality & progressiveness? that one?) where the only time the Bechdel test was even slightly passed, across two moviesBoth women were in their underwear, they were still talking about a man, & one of the women died offscreen a couple scenes later.

(Oh, and that woman was an alien whose hair colour is on record as having been changed to red from the canonically established hair colour of black for her species, because the makeup design guy thought it looked hotter that way, & it was pitched to production on those grounds. Yikes.)

In fact, the only female characters with any lines of dialogue not shown in her underwear are both mothers, one of which was fridged, the other of which only scene was a birth scene. 

A scene which the male writers are again on record, as having put in the film because the male writers decided that, since they had a underwear scene ‘to appeal to the male fanbase’, they need a birth scene. Because all women love babies & how else would men convince their wives to come see the movie?

Actually.

So yeah. Captain Phasma? The amount of agency & humanity that Rey had? How commanding Leia was, or how cool Maz? The total lack of sexualized costumes for women, the amount of female extra & supporting characters we got the screen?

Probably not on JJ.

Kathleen Kennedy is on record at pointing to the amount of women who worked on the movie as being integral to the way that women are represented in the film.

 “Having a balance of men and women in the room changes the story… The dialogue, the point of view.”

Stop crediting JJ for Kathleen Kennedy’s (and everyone else’s) work.

Once more, a dude being given all the credit when women are involved across the board.