Possibly an unpopular opinion.
But I just think it’s mildly unfair for people (perhaps mainly social liberals) have this whole thing with thinking men shouldn’t have a say in the birth control debate, yet scorn the men who leave their female partners who are carrying/raising their children.
It’s just a double standard. Men certainly shouldn’t have more of a say in the matter of contraception than women do, but they should be able to have some say, especially if they are basically ostracized if they don’t remain 100% faithful and attentive to their child’s mother during the child-rearing process. Women can’t just say “my body my baby my choice” half the time and say “support me and our baby” the other half.
This is all meant to come off as very egalitarian as far as contributions of the sexes to the issue of reproduction, not as any rejection of a woman’s right to her body. I’m very pro-choice, I’m just pointing out where I see a problem with the way things are sometimes viewed by those who are deeply entrenched in this contraception debate.
There’s a difference between being sexually active and being a (man)whore.
I’m all for people having sex. As long as it’s safe and consensual, I think people should be able to have sex until the cows come home. If someone wants to have sex with a few or more different people, then that is totally their prerogative and I won’t say a single bad thing about them. However, in my humble opinion, a person is only a (man)whore if he or she doesn’t distinguish between people who are acceptable to sleep with and people who are not. What I mean by this is that if you have sex with people who are completely single and have absolutely no romantic, emotional attachments to anyone else (at least as far as you’re aware), then that’s not whore-ish. But if you have sex with someone who has other stuff going on (they are the object of someone else’s affections, for example), then just back the fuck up! If you need sex that badly, there are plenty of other people for you to sleep with. Go find them. It’s better for the person you don’t sleep with, and it makes people hate you less.
This is probably one of my more poorly written rants… it’s much more convincing in person. Nonetheless, I encourage sexual freedom. Just do it with the right people. Not that hard.
Just doing some thinking out loud.
A few days ago, I posted this article from CNN.com about whether whites are facing racial oppression. The group of whites specifically discussed was poor whites. A friend of mine posted this article on Facebook where it received a significant amount of scorn for its content. While there is a lot of bull in this article coming from Glenn Beck and the like about white Republicans being an oppressed minority, there are also some points which I do not think should be so easily dismissed.
Poor whites, for example, are not benefited by any of the numerous minority scholarships that are available to nonwhite people. So, if a poor white wants to go to college but cannot afford it, their only hope lies in either getting a grant, a merit scholarship or going to a cheaper community college with less resources and fewer opportunities. This places them at a clear socioeconomic disadvantage as a result of their race than their rich and poor minority peers, one which is only magnified by the institution of affirmative action. Is this not somewhat unjust?
I am not suggesting by any means that poor whites have endured the same social, political, or cultural oppression that other racial minority groups have. I am saying that it is entirely possible that the situation is headed in that direction.
Following years of reinforcement, whites in America have come to see themselves as the norm rather than just another, slightly larger racial entity. Thus, this concept of white privilege has developed. The idea that, since white is considered by whites to be the norm, whites have constructed society in a way that they are the privileged ones. But now there is a growing demographic of whites who live at or below the poverty line. And where are they to turn? Who will be their advocate?
The way I see it, they have no advocate. Among whites, some have the desire to help, but not the means or the power. Those who have the means and the power often fall into the category of those individuals or groups who hold prejudices against the disadvantaged. Or, they fall into such categories as colleges who are so focused on creating racial and ethnic diversity that they let socioeconomic diversity fall by the wayside. Rare is it that a person possesses the desire, means, and power to make significant changes in the social landscape. There is a large reliance on individuals for this. Of course, there also exists a looming caution among whites when it comes to advocating for their own race (when race is the issue) that any self-proclaimed support of the white race is equivalent to white supremacy or the like. And few racial minority groups are likely to advocate for poor whites by sheer fact that they are white, part of the privileged majority.
Here we see a group that is both powerless and friendless, a group that is at a clear disadvantage in society. For poor whites, there is a strong likelihood that they will become severely oppressed as a semi-direct result of their race. I am not proposing that we should expend large amounts of resources in order to remedy this situation, as I am aware that there are much more pressing issues at hand and many other oppressed groups to be addressed. I am only saying that racially oppressed whites DO exist and it is not something to be ignored, just as no other form of oppression should be ignored. Race is, after all, merely a social construct, and those persecuted on such a basis deserve attention and assistance.
NOTE: I refer to whites as “them” throughout this post, while in reality I am white as well. The words were just coming from an academic/conceptual place in my brain so I didn’t feel like saying “we” was quite right. But I am aware that I am included in the white race.