all i want

all i want

"

If a woman is sexually overt is she still feminist? It’s a question that…obviously for me, the answer is yes. But also in a larger sense, I’m not interested in policing feminism either. I have such a problem with the idea of people saying things like, ‘Oh she’s not feminist because of blah blah blah.’

Whoever says they’re feminist is bloody feminist. And I just feel like we live in a world where more people need to be saying it and we shouldn’t be looking to pull people out of the feminist party. And I think the reason I find myself reacting so strongly to questions of female sexuality is…there’s something very disturbing to me about the idea that a woman’s sexuality somehow is not hers. So when certain feminists who will say, it’s about the male gaze, it’s for the man, there a kind of a self-censoring about that that’s similar to what they’re fighting.

So as long as women have the choice…why shouldn’t women own their sexuality? Why shouldn’t a woman who does whatever with her sexuality identify as feminist?

"

Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

Quote is from Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie Defends Beyoncé: ‘Whoever Says They’re Feminist is Bloody Feminist’ on Clutch Magazine, referring to Chimamanda’s defense of Beyoncé and feminism itself, especially for Black women. 

Some White women are using racism and unfortunately some fellow Black women are using the politics of respectability (which connects to performing acceptability for the White Gaze anyway) to determine who is feminist or not, where more than anything, sexuality is the rubric. Feminism is not a club where some women get to approve the membership of others, especially when this approval is based on the very same type of oppression that a feminist should seek to dismantle. This doesn’t make Beyoncé’s or even Chimamanda’s feminism perfect. But this right off the bat "X is not a feminist because they are Black or because they are not "respectable" thing is utter crap. Even Black female artists deemed “respectable” like Janelle Monáe reject the politics of respectability altogether and have womanist messages in their music. 

Owning sexuality means that presentation, experience, desire, and sexual orientation (including asexual as a sexual orientation) is acceptable to that person and expressed or not expressed however they choose. It is not one-sided where whatever is deemed “respectable” is “feminist” or whatever is overtly sexual only in response to what is deemed “respectable” is “feminist.” It is rejecting reacting to binaries and a clear anti-oppressive stance on sexuality.

Now, I know the quote itself appears ”generic" so many Whites will be eager to erase my commentary so that Chimamanda’s words can center White women since "women" is always read as "White." Of course doing so will once again prove my point about racism and feminism. Such is the irony. Race cannot be erased from intersectionality.

(via wocinsolidarity)

danielodowd:

andreasholm

danielodowd:

andreasholm

ARTIST: Stromae

TRACK: Humain à L'eau

ALBUM: Racine Carrée

PLAYS: 8,677

thirstiest:

nentindo:

hokeyfright:

can the science side of tumblr explain this

image

swag • per • a • tion /swaəgpərashion/

adj. To channel the swagger inside of you and turn it into pure teleportation energy.

i.e. “dude, this party blows, i’m swagperating out of here”

this person wrote a noun, listed it as an adjective, and defined and used it as a verb

greaterland:

Norway

if there was ever a way to christen a new week, it should be with this banana bread 👌

if there was ever a way to christen a new week, it should be with this banana bread 👌

(Source: o-bee)

and then sometimes, faith in humanity is restored  #allmylovetolourdes  (at 🙇)

and then sometimes, faith in humanity is restored #allmylovetolourdes (at 🙇)

"Well, I think what happens at certain points in my poems is that language takes over, and I follow it. It just sounds right. And I trust the implication of what I’m saying, even though I’m not absolutely sure what it is that I’m saying. I’m just willing to let it be. Because if I were absolutely sure of whatever it was that I said in my poems, if I were sure, and could verify it and check it out and feel, yes, I’ve said what I intended, I don’t think the poem would be smarter than I am. I think the poem would be, finally, a reducible item. It’s this “beyondness,” that depth that you reach in a poem, that keeps you returning to it. And you wonder, The poem seemed so natural at the beginning, how did you get where you ended up? What happened? I mean, I like that, I like it in other people’s poems when it happens. I like to be mystified. Because it’s really that place which is unreachable, or mysterious, at which the poem becomes ours, finally, becomes the possession of the reader. I mean, in the act of figuring it out, of pursuing meaning, the reader is absorbing the poem, even though there’s an absence in the poem. But he just has to live with that. And eventually, it becomes essential that it exists in the poem, so that something beyond his understanding, or beyond his experience, or something that doesn’t quite match up with his experience, becomes more and more his. He comes into possession of a mystery, you know—which is something that we don’t allow ourselves in our lives."

Mark Strand, from The Art Of Poetry (via violentwavesofemotion)