rabbleprochoice:

annafromcraigslist:

Hey all, a good buddy of mine is conducting a survey through the Center for LGBTQ Evidence-Based Applied Research (CLEAR) at Palo Alto University.

Anyone can participate who is 18 years or older and whose current gender identity is different from their sex assigned at birth. Participants must be living in the United States or Canada.

 

 

If you could all signal boost this, that would be awesome!

Love,

Rabble

ihaveabsolutelynoidea:

Things that are not inherently awful or something you should feel ashamed of:

  • being white
  • being male
  • being cisgender
  • being straight or heteronormative
  • being able bodied
  • being neurotypical
  • being conventionally attractive

Things that suck and you should feel…

liquorinthefront:

A Series Of Questions

This ongoing body of work explores the power dynamics inherent in the questions asked of transgender, transsexual, genderqueer, gender non-conforming, and gender-variant people.

See more photos here.

(via fuckyeahsexeducation)

stfuconservatives:

goodreasonnews:

delrinn:

Being pro-life does not mean you’re sexist.

Whoever decided to throw that analogy out there should be punched multiple times in the face.

Like really? What?

I hate abortion. I see it as the destruction of the process of life, which, to me, is the most basic fundamental miracle of the universe.

Fundamental miracle? hmmm. Here’s the thing, kid: It is sexist, but in some cases, like yours, it’s not a commissive sexism, it’s more of an omissive sexism. In other words, you don’t necessarily consider yourself morally superior based on your gender identification, but your views express that.

See, here’s the real illusion about abortion that both the pro-choice and anti-choice sides are pushing: That the choice is up for debate. The choice exists, there’s no stopping that. The debate is over who gets to make it. People who are pro-choice support the individual’s right to make decisions regarding their bodies. People who call themselves pro-life are in favor of the government making the decision. You can call it a immoral and come up with reasons and justifications all day long and it’s a fun exercise in rhetoric, but at the end of the day there’s only one thing really up for debate here: Who’s choice is it, the individual’s or the government’s?

Let me add this: If it’s the government’s decision and not the individuals than should it not also be the government’s decision to donate one of your kidney’s to a needy relative? Say mom has two good kidneys and, through know fault of her own, daughters are failing. Shouldn’t the government prevent, what you see as, the destruction of life by forcing mom to give one of the good kidneys to save daughters life? If daughter dies because mom made the choice to keep the kidney, we can call it immoral and grandstand and feel better about ourselves, but if government makes the choice, …well, how do we feel about ourselves then?

(Also, quick note of acknowledgment that abortion rights apply to anyone with a uterus, that includes trans-men and girls, not just women).

Things that are sexist: promoting ideology and laws that would directly and negatively affect women and other uterus owners. Is that really so hard to understand?

Like GRN said, the truth is that the choice is always there. Remember, abortion rates are actually higher in places where abortion is outlawed. If you support pro-life laws and candidates, you’re not taking away pregnant people’s choice to terminate a pregnancy. You’re taking away the opportunity to do so safely. Read this Mother Jones article about what it was like for pregnant people in America before Roe v. Wade. Making abortion illegal is akin to advocating the death and mutilation of people with uteruses, and that shit is sexist.

-Jess

(via stfuconservatives)

christineleem:

^SEE PHOTOS with FULL DESCRIPTION^

Adam and Evelyn: They are both adults capable of making decisions; they are capable and can give consent. They are both US citizens and the government will recognize their marriage.

Adam and Steve: They are both adults capable of making decisions; they are capable and can give consent. They are both US citizens and the government will not recognize their marriage.

This is inequality…below examples are not.

Adam and his toaster: Adam is an adult capable of making decisions. Toasters are not capable of making decisions. Adam doesn’t get to give consent twice just because he owns the toaster. (Also, toasters can’t sign a marriage license).

Additional examples not like gay rights examples…

Billy: Billy is a 10 year old boy. He can not legally give consent or make life-altering decisions. He may feel love, but is not yet an adult. (Billy can’t legally sign a marriage license).

A Corpse: It much like the toaster cannot make decisions or give consent. It may have once been a US citizen but it is no longer. (A corpse can’t sign a marriage license).

A Dog: It could possibly feel love the way we do. However, it isn’t aware of its decisions. It can’t consent and is not a US citizen. (A dog can’t sign a marriage license).

Forever reblog.

landonftm:

The Documentary I was in on the OWN network. “transgender lives” 

Thank you so much for sharing this with us. 

(via fuckyeahsexeducation)

chasingdevon:

livelaughawesome:

I’m the co-chair, and organizer for a local outreach program that was just started in my town to help queer kids and allies.

I put together some “info handouts” and we’re all really excited about them.

Please let me know if you have ideas for more, or how we should change them to be even more inclusive.

Thanks everybody!

Read over this.

(via moonblossom)

zivadavid:

I thought this was like the “Idiot’s guide to Transgender” then I realized…most people are idiots when it comes to transgendered issues. 

(via saraabigale)