Now Playing Tracks

Research Shows SJWs Defeat Their Own Movements

idetesteverything:

idetesteverything:

hermitical-inequality-pacifist:

Read it and weep, snowflakes.

Oh my god, this is perfect.

For the dearies who didn’t want to, or didn’t have time to research, here’s a brief summary:

—-Negative Stereotypes—-

From a Q&A with one of the researchers, we learnt that activists (like feminists) “were perceived as militant, aggressive, forceful, argumentative and abrasive.”

By aggressively promoting change and advocating unconventional practices, activists become associated with hostile militancy and unconventionality or eccentricity.

In one study, 17 male and 45 female undergraduate students were randomly assigned to read a profile about a student who was a “typical” feminist (described as conforming to the stereotypes), an “atypical” feminist (described as not conforming to the stereotypes) or someone whose commitment to feminism was not described. All participants then rated the extent to which the stereotypical traits belonged to character they read about, as well as if they were interested in being associated with the character.

The most common traits for “typical feminists” included “man-hating”, “eccentric”, “militant” and “unhygienic”.

—-Aversion to Association—-

Another study, featuring 17 male and 45 female undergraduates, confirmed the pervasiveness of those stereotypes. It further found participants were less interested in befriending activists who participated in stereotypical behavior (such as staging protest rallies), but could easily envision hanging out with those who use “nonabrasive and mainstream methods” such as raising money or organizing social events.

“We found that participants were less motivated to adopt pro-gender equality behaviours when the article was ostensibly delivered by the ‘typical’ feminist rather than by one of the other message sources,” says Bashir.

The results of three additional studies suggested this aversion to perceived stereotypical behavior impacts people’s behavior. They don’t want other people to view them in the same negative view and consequently be attributed with commonly perceived negative stereotypes.

Due to these negative stereotypes, people are reluctant to adopt the behaviours that these movements (like feminism) promote.

“Furthermore, this tendency to associate activists with negative stereotypes and perceive them as people with whom it would be unpleasant to affiliate reduces individuals’ motivation to adopt the pro-change behaviors that activists advocate.”

In contrast, the studies also showed that people are more receptive of the message when it comes from an individual who does not conform to these negative stereotypes.

What does this mean? Are all activists this way?

“It’s important to keep in mind that this research is focused on how activists are perceived by others, rather than how they actually are,” Bashir says. “The militant and eccentric characteristics do not necessarily describe the actual personality traits possessed by activists.”

In conclusion, negative stereotypes are limiting the influence of what are supposed to be progressive and benign social movements.

So how do we deal with the problem of negative stereotypes?

The researchers suggest that the general public “may be more receptive to advocates who defy stereotypes by coming across as pleasant and approachable.”

But there is some value to activists in considering that people do perceive them negatively and maybe they do need to tweak their strategy a bit to take into consideration the way they’re coming across to people.

—-Additional Comments—-

This is a feminist’s response to the research, in which she actively encourages the reader to completely disregard the stereotypes, ignoring the harm the stereotypes are inflicting to their own cause, and the advice given by the researchers (to be more considerate). Feminists should simply ‘fight back’ instead (thereby inadvertently reinforcing those negative stereotypes). Her reasoning being that it’s the privileged people who are censoring activists and smearing the name of feminism.

The solution to that, Mr. Jacobs, isn’t to turn around and waggle fingers at the feminists for being insufficiently smiley (and in doing so to reinforce the false assumption that feminists are… what was the word? “Overwhelmingly negative”?). The solution is to instead push back against the people trying to use their privilege to control the conversation; to push back against the many, many people who use their political, media, and social power to smear the name of feminism in order to intimidate people from claiming that term for themselves.

Not only is she promoting actions that would consequently reinforce the stereotypes she’s offended about, but she is blatantly refusing to acknowledge the militant feminists that exist in great numbers in her movement, and are considerably the most vocal group.

So I implore you, dear keyboard warrior feminists, to realize that saying this

and doing this

is not helping your cause at all.

All you’re doing is proving the negative stereotypes to be true.

Don’t blame The Patriarchy™ if ever your movement ends up in flames incited by your own reckless actions.

Sources:

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/26/study_everyone_hates_environmentalists_and_feminists_partner/

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/09/27/they-were-even-seen-as-terrorists-why-people-seem-to-hate-activists-but-not-what-they-stand-for/

http://www.psmag.com/blogs/news-blog/feminism-maybe-feminists-ewww-66918/

http://www.artsci.utoronto.ca/main/newsitems/negative-stereotypes-activists-research

And special thanks to anti-feminism-pro-equality, from whom I stole a couple of screenshots. (Sorry! <3)

starfire828:

cutiespookybooty:

japaneesee:

THIS IS IMPORTANT, PLEASE DON’T FEED THESE TREATS TO YOUR DOGS
My mom bought these recently and they have made both of my dogs really sick. She later saw an article online about duck and sweet potato treats made in China(these fit the description) killing dogs and the FDA is doing nothing about it. Apparently over the last few years 600 young, healthy dogs have died after eating these treats and I don’t want anymore to suffer or be killed so please spread the word and don’t let your dogs have these!

This is VERY important! A lot of these animal treats made in China are killing dogs and cats. It’s not that the FDA isn’t doing anything about it, it’s simply that they don’t know why it’s happening.
They are conducting investigation after investigation, but the ingredients used in the food killing dogs (and 10 cats) is used in many different brands and companies that have been shipped, all from overseas. At this rate, a total recall and knowledge of where it’s coming from has proven very difficult. Just recalling one brand in particular will not solve the problem. Please conduct a thorough search about any brand of treats that have been made in China should you pick them up for your pet before you feed it to them. If all else fails, just buy local.
EDIT: Here is a list of food that has been recalled (so far) with more information 
Please PLEASE be aware that this isn’t only happening to dogs, but some cat treats, too!

This may save lives!!
Zoom Info
Camera
PANTECH P9070
Focal Length
3mm

starfire828:

cutiespookybooty:

japaneesee:

THIS IS IMPORTANT, PLEASE DON’T FEED THESE TREATS TO YOUR DOGS

My mom bought these recently and they have made both of my dogs really sick. She later saw an article online about duck and sweet potato treats made in China(these fit the description) killing dogs and the FDA is doing nothing about it. Apparently over the last few years 600 young, healthy dogs have died after eating these treats and I don’t want anymore to suffer or be killed so please spread the word and don’t let your dogs have these!

This is VERY important! A lot of these animal treats made in China are killing dogs and cats. It’s not that the FDA isn’t doing anything about it, it’s simply that they don’t know why it’s happening.

They are conducting investigation after investigation, but the ingredients used in the food killing dogs (and 10 cats) is used in many different brands and companies that have been shipped, all from overseas. At this rate, a total recall and knowledge of where it’s coming from has proven very difficult. Just recalling one brand in particular will not solve the problem. Please conduct a thorough search about any brand of treats that have been made in China should you pick them up for your pet before you feed it to them. If all else fails, just buy local.

EDIT: Here is a list of food that has been recalled (so far) with more information

Please PLEASE be aware that this isn’t only happening to dogs, but some cat treats, too!

This may save lives!!

mediapathic:

nextyearsgirl:

This is an enormous chain and I’m sorry, but I need to say this:

The laws in the Old Testament were set forth by god as the rules the Hebrews needed to follow in order to be righteous, to atone for the sin of Adam and Eve and to be able to get into Heaven. That is also why they were required to make sacrifices, because it was part of the appeasement for Original Sin.

According to Christian theology, when Jesus came from Heaven, it was for the express purpose of sacrificing himself on the cross so that our sins may be forgiven. His sacrifice was supposed to be the ultimate act that would free us from the former laws and regulations and allow us to enter Heaven by acting in his image. That is why he said “it is finished” when he died on the cross. That is why Christians don’t have to circumcise their sons (god’s covenant with Jacob), that is why they don’t have to perform animal sacrifice, or grow out their forelocks, or follow any of the other laws of Leviticus.

When you quote Leviticus as god’s law and say they are rules we must follow because they are what god or Jesus wants us to do, what you are really saying, as a Christian, is that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross was invalid. He died in vain because you believe we are still beholden to the old laws. That is what you, a self-professed good Christian, are saying to your god and his son, that their plan for your salvation wasn’t good enough for you.

So maybe actually read the thing before you start quoting it, because the implications of your actions go a lot deeper than you think.

This is a theological point that doesn’t come up often enough.

(Source: drunkonstephen)

supamuthafuckinvillain:

This makes me extremely content.

(Source: vinebox)

congenitalprogramming:

naturepunk:

These two pups are named Shentea and Diamond. They are in desperate need of a foster home, and if none can be found before the end of the week, they will likely face euthanasia.

Why?

Because their previous owner claimed that they were wolfdogs. They are not. They are likley German shepherd/husky mixes, and now their lives are on the line because of misrepresentation.

I’ve offered to foster these two if no other option can be found, but if you or anyone you know may be able to lend a hand, PLEASE contact me ASAP. They currently in Klamath Falls, Oregon, but I can help with transportation if need-be.

See what happens when you claim your regular dog is a wolfdog?

dichotomized:

Arthur Shawcross killed and cannibalized parts of eleven prostitutes in the Rochester area, but he recalls sparing the life of one:

“You know, I had her by the throat and you know I mean she was fighting me and she was telling me, “Please, I’m on medication.” She says, “I know you’re on medication.” And when she said that, I came out of what I was doing… and I sat down in the driver’s seat and I just hold my hands like this, trembling, and started crying. “What the hell am I doing?… It just shocked me. I just pulled away and said, “What the fuck am I doing?” You know? Then we talked for a while. Then she asked me could I take her home. I said all right.”

To Tumblr, Love Pixel Union