“But remember, there are two ways to dehumanize someone: by dismissing them, and by idolizing them.”

– David Wong

proctalgia:

girls dont want you to be nice to them because they’re girls they want you to be nice to them because they’re human beings and you should be nice to everyone wtf is wrong with you

cishettears:

idk why police officers being monitored to make sure they’re performing their duties ethically and within legal parameters is such a controversial topic because if I recall they’re a fan of using the whole “if you’ve got nothing to hide you’ve got nothing to fear” shtick to justify harassing civilians it’s almost like they’re full of bullshit

A school superintendent in Noble, Oklahoma allegedly asked a female student to bend over during a dress code check on the first week of school and claimed, “If you’re not comfortable with bending over, we might have a problem.”

Students at Noble High School report that the superintendent, Ronda Bass, kicked off a school assembly by saying, “Have y’all ever seen any ‘skanks’ around this school…I don’t want to see anyone’s ass hanging out of their shorts.” She later completed another dress code check, singling out just the female students.

Several students were sent home “crying and humiliated,” KFOR reports, and now parent are also raising concerns over how their daughters were treated. They’ve started a petition demanding that she step down.

For her part, Bass denies doing anything inappropriate and says she was trying to protect her students from the names others were calling them. “The message I wanted to send to them was I don’t want them to be called those names,” she told KFOR. “I want us to be known as the classy lady Bears.”

baeddeldeer:

Why do ppl get so mad when girls like themselves

wearethefourthwave:

 

wearethefourthwave:

 

rosalarian:

senilesnake:

thinksquad:

Cops have been put on notice: Let the cameras roll.

Camera-shy cops across the city were reminded they can’t legally take action to stop someone from filming them while they’re on the beat, the Daily News has learned. The refresher was provided in a memo the chief of department’s office distributed to all police commands Wednesday.

“Members of the public are legally allowed to record police interactions,” the memo states. “Intentional interference such as blocking or obstructing cameras or ordering the person to cease constitutes censorship and also violates the First Amendment.”

Cops can take action if videographers and shutterbugs “interfere with police operations,” the memo notes.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nypd-cops-told-memo-filmed-article-1.1898379

spread this like wildfire

when you see abuse, take out your phone and film that shit. 

Post it on youtube, send it to the news, let the whole world hear about it.

You don’t have to be any kind of official journalist. Anyone can do this. Never let them tell you differently.

kittydoom:

exgynocraticgrrl:

Breaking The Male Code: After Steubenville, A Call To Action

 (Left to Right): Peter Buffett, Jimmie Briggs, Joe Ehrmann, Tony Porter,
 Dave Zirin and Moderator Eve Ensler.

MIC DROP

morivan:

My dream for the 2016 presidential election is not having to choose which human rights I’m feeling like compromising on.

afro-dominicano:

Brain Scans Link Concern for Justice With Reason, Not Emotion


  People who care about justice are swayed more by reason than emotion. That is the unexpected finding of new brain scan research from the University of Chicago department of Psychology and Center for Cognitive and Social Neuroscience.
  
  Psychologists have found that some individuals react more strongly than others to situations that invoke a sense of justice — for example, seeing a person being treated unfairly, or with mercy. The new study used brain scans to analyze the thought processes of people with high “justice sensitivity.”
  
  “We were interested to examine how individual differences about justice and fairness are represented in the brain to better understand the contribution of emotion and cognition in moral judgment,” explained lead author Jean Decety, the Irving B. Harris Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry.
  
  Using a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain-scanning device, the team studied what happened in the participants’ brains as they judged videos depicting behavior that was morally good or bad. For example, they saw a person put money in a beggar’s cup or kick the beggar’s cup away. The participants were asked to rate on a scale how much they would blame or praise the actor seen in the video. People in the study also completed questionnaires that assessed cognitive and emotional empathy, as well as their justice sensitivity.
  
  As expected, study participants who scored high on the justice sensitivity questionnaire assigned significantly more blame when they were evaluating scenes of harm, Decety said. They also registered more praise for scenes showing a person helping another individual.
  
  But the brain imaging also yielded surprises. During the behavior-evaluation exercise, people with high justice sensitivity showed more activity than average participants in parts of the brain associated with higher-order cognition. Brain areas commonly linked with emotional processing were not affected.
  
  The conclusion was clear, Decety said: “Individuals who are sensitive to justice and fairness do not seem to be emotionally driven. Rather, they are cognitively driven.”
  
  According to Decety, one implication is that the search for justice and the moral missions of human rights organizations and others do not come primarily from sentimental motivations, as they are often portrayed. Instead, that drive may have more to do with sophisticated analysis and mental calculation.
  
  Decety adds that evaluating good actions elicited relatively high activity in the region of the brain involved in decision-making, motivation and rewards. This finding suggests that perhaps individuals make judgments about behavior based on how they process the reward value of good actions as compared to bad actions.
  
  “Our results provide some of the first evidence for the role of justice sensitivity in enhancing neural processing of moral information in specific components of the brain network involved in moral judgment,” Decety said.
  
  UChicago Psychology doctoral student Keith Yoder is a co-author on the paper, which was published in the March 19 issue of The Journal of Neuroscience.

afro-dominicano:

Brain Scans Link Concern for Justice With Reason, Not Emotion

People who care about justice are swayed more by reason than emotion. That is the unexpected finding of new brain scan research from the University of Chicago department of Psychology and Center for Cognitive and Social Neuroscience.

Psychologists have found that some individuals react more strongly than others to situations that invoke a sense of justice — for example, seeing a person being treated unfairly, or with mercy. The new study used brain scans to analyze the thought processes of people with high “justice sensitivity.”

“We were interested to examine how individual differences about justice and fairness are represented in the brain to better understand the contribution of emotion and cognition in moral judgment,” explained lead author Jean Decety, the Irving B. Harris Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry.

Using a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain-scanning device, the team studied what happened in the participants’ brains as they judged videos depicting behavior that was morally good or bad. For example, they saw a person put money in a beggar’s cup or kick the beggar’s cup away. The participants were asked to rate on a scale how much they would blame or praise the actor seen in the video. People in the study also completed questionnaires that assessed cognitive and emotional empathy, as well as their justice sensitivity.

As expected, study participants who scored high on the justice sensitivity questionnaire assigned significantly more blame when they were evaluating scenes of harm, Decety said. They also registered more praise for scenes showing a person helping another individual.

But the brain imaging also yielded surprises. During the behavior-evaluation exercise, people with high justice sensitivity showed more activity than average participants in parts of the brain associated with higher-order cognition. Brain areas commonly linked with emotional processing were not affected.

The conclusion was clear, Decety said: “Individuals who are sensitive to justice and fairness do not seem to be emotionally driven. Rather, they are cognitively driven.”

According to Decety, one implication is that the search for justice and the moral missions of human rights organizations and others do not come primarily from sentimental motivations, as they are often portrayed. Instead, that drive may have more to do with sophisticated analysis and mental calculation.

Decety adds that evaluating good actions elicited relatively high activity in the region of the brain involved in decision-making, motivation and rewards. This finding suggests that perhaps individuals make judgments about behavior based on how they process the reward value of good actions as compared to bad actions.

“Our results provide some of the first evidence for the role of justice sensitivity in enhancing neural processing of moral information in specific components of the brain network involved in moral judgment,” Decety said.

UChicago Psychology doctoral student Keith Yoder is a co-author on the paper, which was published in the March 19 issue of The Journal of Neuroscience.

hatzigsut:

very chilling topic on twitter right now. 

i have my own reasons for #WhyIStayed, and looking through this hashtag, i can see so many women and men who were lost, just as i was.

i stayed because it was the first time i felt important to anyone. he “loved” me. when he said he would die if i left him, i thought it passionate. when he started showing up unannounced at my house, because my friends told him my brother’s friends were over, i thought the jealousy was endearing.

then he tried to kill himself when i left town for two days. he was convinced that i would find someone else, in a town where i knew no one. i came back home, and promised i would never leave.

the manipulation and emotional abuse became physical—but only once. he slammed me against a wall after i made a joke about dumping him once i started college. i hid the bruises from my family, for weeks. that was the moment i decided to get out, no matter what happened. for some people, it only takes one time. others need more than one. and some people never make it out alive.

it is not always easy to “just leave.” it is a blessing if you are able to leave, with no consequences.

mulders:

all the white men you love will disappoint you

imnotamisandristbut:

I’m not a misandrist, but a few quick questions:

If men can’t even make their own sandwiches, why are they allowed to make bills in congress?

If men can’t control their own sexual urges, why are they allowed to control nations?

If a woman’s legs/shoulders are enough to distract a man, how can we trust them to stay focused on things like open heart surgery or judging a murder trial?

Again not a misandrist, some of my best friends are guys and i’m even dating one.