(hell, yeah) Scarleteen

so very much more at: scarleteen.com
we heart it.
Asker Anonymous Asks:
Why are people so against young pregnancy even when your able to support the baby? I have a 16 year old friend who recently had a baby and adults see it as a horrible thing because of her age (it would be the same if she was in her early 20s). I have another friend who was born when his mum was 16 and he's fine.
hellyeahscarleteen hellyeahscarleteen Said:

fyseq:

Because raising a child can be so difficult, expensive, and stressful many people believe that young people aren’t prepared enough to take care of a baby. However, many young people can be more prepared for a baby than older people. Part of what I want to teach is respect of teen and young adult parents because that disrespect just makes parenting more difficult. There are many resources available to teen and young parents or single parents, and educating about that is part of what I consider my job. Of course, there are groups of people who don’t like that these programs exist. Although it’s true that government programs like these cost more to our economy than say free birth control and comprehensive sex education, the government is supposed to help out those in need. The fact that many government systems are set up to keep poor people poor means that these programs are necessary. If it were easier to get a well paying job, especially for young people, that took pregnancy and parenting into consideration and offered things like parent leave, decent health care, and child care, and if our education programs and childcare programs weren’t so messed up, we wouldn’t have a need for many of these programs. 

If anyone should be against anything it should be the way the government is set up. Young people who have support, especially support of wealthy parents, have many resources available to make sure they’re able to raise a child just as easily if not easier than many adults (especially adults who are of a lower income).

-FYSE

dirtybrian:

Using the asterisk after trans* seems inclusive until you actually look at its history and what trans women and nonbinary people are saying about it. Here are some links about the nonbinary erasure and transmisogyny.

EDIT: @b-binaohan brought to my attention the original posts that I couldn’t find when I first made this post, so I’m belatedly editing to add what I’ve now been informed is the first post about this subject:

http://b.binaohan.org/blog/on-transasterisk/

To learn more, you can read the links from this post.

All links (except to b-binaohan) go to posts on my own blog so they won’t go dead like the links in the last link-gathering post I saw on this.

(via relearningsexed)

ethiopienne:

beautifullybirdy:

loveandzombies:

This fall, New York City becomes the first city in the nation to tackle the issue of girls’ self-esteem and body image. Recognizing that girls as young as 6 and 7 are struggling with body image and self-esteem, (over 80% of 10-year-old girls are afraid of being fat and by middle school, 40-70% of girls are dissatisfied with two or more parts of their body), New York City is launching a self-esteem initiative to help girls believe their value comes from their character, skills, and attributes – not appearance. 

HOLY SHIT DISABILITY REPRESENTATION IN A MAINSTREAM BODY ACCEPTANCE CAMPAIGN

and girls of color!

(via fuckyeahbodypositivity)

Growing up, I didn’t read novels by women. It’s not that I didn’t want to. It’s almost like I didn’t think that I needed to or, I guess, I didn’t know that I needed to. I was perfectly happy in a world contained by men. I adopted the posture of the brooding male as my own. I was Salinger, I was Kerouac, I was any male protagonist in a novel that one of my boyfriends recommended. I didn’t know that there was a specific female sadness so I was content with relating to a generalized one. And in a way, reading these novels was less of a way to relate and more of a way to learn how to be the type of girl that these male novelists liked. One of my first ambitions wasn’t to be a writer – it was to be a writer’s muse.
Gabby Bess, in Dazed (via electric-cereal)

(via sorayachemaly)

gradientlair:

#NotJustHello is a recent Twitter dialogue (started by @Karnythia) on how street harassment is not just about men not being able to say “hello” to women (though all who experience street harassment aren’t necessarily “women” or ID as such). Above are some of my tweets during that conversation. The idea that it is women “preventing” hello is not just a violently gross lie, but a mass oversimplification of the verbal/physical abuse and even sexual assault/murder that comes about via street harassment. 

Anyone who thinks all I describe above is okay clearly supports violence. None of these actions (and I’ve experienced much worse; some I don’t even discuss online) above are about saying “hello.” It’s one of the reasons why I included "so I can’t say hello?" in my Street Harassment and Street Harassment + Misogynoir BINGO card, that I included again in this post.

The first time I posted the BINGO card is in my recent post about my experiences, my writing on street harassment as experienced as a Black woman and the anti-street harassment chat #YouOkSis (by @Russian_Starr and @FeministaJonesscheduled for Thursday, July 10th at 12pm. In this aforementioned post (and within my years of writing on the topic) I address why some people want Black women silenced on this topic (and in general) and how the racist and anti-intersectional mainstream media framing and centering of White women as the only victims of street harassment with Black men as only perpetrators removes other men’s culpability and again, silences Black women. This is a time and space for Black women to speak our truths.

Related Post: Street Harassment Is Violence (Essay Compilation)

(via sorayachemaly)

If white American feminist theory need not deal with the differences between us, and the resulting difference in our oppressions, then how do you deal with the fact that the women who clean your houses and tend your children while you attend conferences on feminist theory are, for the most part, poor women and women of Color?

What is the theory behind racist feminism?

thismighthurt:

A Curse On My Exes

We will likely be quiet and pretty inactive on all our social media channels for the next week or so.

Our much-loved and intensely-used UBB — the first direct service we created, and still our most utilized, with close to 70K in registered users! — has not only been dying a slow death, it’s been trying to take other parts of our site with it to the grave. (It’s been acting like one seriously pissed-off zombie.) This has been, as it turns out, the primary cause of our technical issues lately.

So, it is time for us to let it go in peace and create a new message board system. Because summer for us involves both more traffic, but also often less volunteer availability, we already have our hands very full during the summer as it is.  We would not have picked this time to make such a big change and do such a big project, but ultimately, we don’t have a choice.

So, we’re limiting what other efforts we can to hopefully get this up and running, put our dear, old UBB in its final resting place (we can’t migrate any of the data or accounts, but it will be made a read-only archive in perpetuity) and get our site back at its usual zippy speed and functionality.

We’ll be back on all our channels soon, and appreciate your patience! :)

hobbitkaiju:

realsocialskills:

People who struggle interpersonally, who seem unhappy, or who get into a lot of conflicts are often advised to adopt the approach of Nonviolent Communication. 

This is often not a good idea. Nonviolent Communication is an approach based on refraining from seeming to judge others, and instead expressing everything in terms of your own feelings. For instance, instead of “Don’t be such an inconsiderate jerk about leaving your clothes around”, you’d say “When you leave your clothing around, I feel disrespected.”. That approach is useful in situations in which people basically want to treat each other well but have trouble doing so because they don’t understand one another’s needs and feelings. In every other type of situation, the ideology and methodology of Nonviolent Communication can make things much worse.

Nonviolent Communication can be particularly harmful to marginalized people or abuse survivors. It can also teach powerful people to abuse their power more than they had previously, and to feel good about doing so. Non-Violent Communication has strategies that can be helpful in some situations, but it also teaches a lot of anti-skills that can undermine the ability to survive and fight injustice and abuse.

For marginalized or abused people, being judgmental is a necessary survival skill. Sometimes it’s not enough to say “when you call me slurs, I feel humiliated” - particularly if the other person doesn’t care about hurting you or actually wants to hurt you. Sometimes you have to say “The word you called me is a slur. It’s not ok to call me slurs. Stop.” Or “If you call me that again, I’m leaving.” Sometimes you have to say to yourself “I’m ok, they’re mean.” All of those things are judgments, and it’s important to be judgmental in those ways.

You can’t protect yourself from people who mean you harm without judging them. Nonviolent Communication works when people are hurting each other by accident; it only works when everyone means well. It doesn’t have responses that work when people are hurting others on purpose or without caring about damage they do. Which, if you’re marginalized or abused, happens several times a day. NVC does not have a framework for acknowledging this or responding to it.

In order to protect yourself from people who mean you harm, you have to see yourself as having the right to judge that someone is hurting you. You also have to be able to unilaterally set boundaries, even when your boundaries are upsetting to other people. Nonviolent Communication culture can teach you that whenever others are upset with you, you’re doing something wrong and should change what you do in order to meet the needs of others better. That’s a major anti-skill. People need to be able to decide things for themselves even when others are upset.

Further, NVC places a dangerous degree of emphasis on using a very specific kind of language and tone. NVC culture often judges people less on the content of what they’re saying than how they are saying it. Abusers and cluelessly powerful people are usually much better at using NVC language than people who are actively being hurt. When you’re just messing with someone’s head or protecting your own right to mess with their head, it’s easy to phrase things correctly. When someone is abusing you and you’re trying to explain what’s wrong, and you’re actively terrified, it’s much, much harder to phrase things in I-statements that take an acceptable tone.

Further, there is *always* a way to take issue with the way someone phrased something. It’s really easy to make something that’s really about shutting someone up look like a concern about the way they’re using language, or advice on how to communicate better. Every group I’ve seen that valued this type of language highly ended up nitpicking the language of the least popular person in the group as a way of shutting them up. 

tl;dr Be careful with Nonviolent Communication. It has some merits, but it is not the complete solution to conflict or communication that it presents itself as. If you have certain common problems, NVC is dangerous.

hobbitkaiju said:

Thank you so much for writing this. NVC was really helpful for me in learning to communicate better with my darling partners and most trusted friends, with whom I did sometimes need help in phrasing so that we wouldn’t hurt each other accidentally. I do still suggest NVC for that to people who are interested. But all these critiques are so valid and are issues I’ve been thinking about without being able to frame/verbalize/find words for until now. I really appreciate this. 

(via oberlinsic)