Favorite fruits for breakfast. 🍍
Becca (21) Appalachian native.
Mother. Partner to Nathaniel.
Baby car mosh
"Women are coerced into hair removal, indoctrinated by society to see it as a necessity. They are making decisions as to what type of razor they use, whether they use cream or wax, whether they get a professional to do it, but these are secondary decisions; the initial choice is whether to remove hair at all, and this decision was made by someone else, long ago, with little thought as to our best intentions. Along with the decisions about whether body hair is attractive, or hygienic. Of course, we all have personal preference, but when every channel in society tells you that body hair is repulsive, there is only one conclusion to come to. It is near-impossible to have a true preference. And until women are no longer chastised, mocked, and insulted for their body hair, we cannot say that we have that choice."
I don’t know how I feel about this line of reasoning. There’s a difference between cultural criticism and wholesale denying an individual’s autonomy. ESPECIALLY in the name of feminism. This ideology feeds into the “proper feminist” myth.(via newwavefeminism)
I think this kind of thinking is important. We’ve got to start realizing that out autonomies are exercised within frameworks we have not personally created or consciously agreed with. This is true and has been recognized as being the case with gender- presented with two options posited as opposites, most people will choose one or the other rather than question the legitimacy of either, or create a new option which still posits the entire system named gender as valid.
There are choices we are not encouraged to make, and which most people never consider. And recognizing that does not remove autonomy. It just asks us to further question the decisions which are often made for us.(via queercommunist)
You know what the scariest thing about loving someone is?
The fact they could just be lying the whole time about how they feel. Its just their words against the feelings flowing through your body. And one day they could just decide that they’re tired of lying, and they leave you empty and cold and they’ll take your heart with them and never look back.
"Moreover, popular narratives about the end of [legally sanctioned black, U.S slavery] erase[s] the agency of black people themselves.
And, I suppose we can say that if Lincoln did not really free the slaves, he was shrewd enough to recognize that the only hope of winning the civil war resided in pre-aiding the opportunity for black people to fight for their own freedom.”
Anonymous asked: I've been studying anarchist communism recently, I agree with everything but one idea. I don't understand why we would Abolish wage labor? How would society function if we abolish wage labor? Does this mean ancoms are against the $15/hour wage system? (In USA idk what country you live in) forgive me for being ignorant I'm just trying to make sense of it.
Kropotkin made a strong argument for abolishing wage labour in his book, The Conquest of Bread.
All wealth in society is created by the collective labour of all workers. It is impossible therefore to determine whose labour should be valued more than others.
Let’s take an example: Think of a hospital. Who should be paid more? The doctors who’s expertise literally save lives or the nurses for whom the hospital could simply not function without their labour? What of the porters, the cleaners, the admin staff? Should they recieve less of a wage than doctors? The hospital would fall apart without them, so surely that makes them as vital as the doctors, should they not then be paid just as much?
But let us imagine then a society where all work is paid an equal according to hours worked. It would be absurd to suggest that what one person produces during one hour’s work is equivalent to what another produces in another industry. There are those who spend an entire day crafting a single product in a workshop whereas a single-person in a factory may produce thousands of similar products in a couple of hours.
Should the craftsman therefore be paid more than the factory worker despite the massive disparity in production? Let us take an opposite example: Say you have two workers. One works in a mine digging coal (we would hope that such a dangerous profession would be eliminated after capitalism but for the purpose of this example it shall continue) while the other works in an office. Imagine the miner works less hours, due to the dangerous nature of his job, should he be afforded less despite his labour arguably offering more to the community?
The only logical conclusion is to abolish the wage system because it can only exist on the foundation that some labour is worth more than another. The only fair system is to do away with wage altogether. All should be the common property of everyone, for it is the common labour of everyone that created it in the first place.
Currency merely acts as a means of preventing worker’s from gaining access to the fruits of their labour. That is why we communists demand an end to money and with it all forms of wage labour.