Why this male radical feminist would like to see an end to pornography (and masculinity) – Robert Jensen / Scroll.in

Why this male radical feminist would like to see an end to pornography (and masculinity)

Author-academic Robert Jensen, another one of my heroes, talks about his views on feminism, politics and sex-based industries with Scroll.in.

Source: Why this male radical feminist would like to see an end to pornography (and masculinity)


Why are men afraid to talk about sexual harassment? / CBS This Morning

From my hero Jackson Katz’s appearance on CBS This Morning ( Click to see video ) :



| The #MeToo movement is not only bringing the issue of sexual harassment to light, but also highlighting what role men have in the discussion. For decades, author and educator Jackson Katz has called on men to set the tone and speak out. Katz, founder and president of MVP Strategies who provides sexual harassment and violence training for several sports teams and the military, joins “CBS This Morning” to discuss why violence against women is a men’s issue, what men can do to change the social norms of male culture, and why it’s crucial for men to speak up.



Donald Trump is the emperor with no clothes—and the media’s playing along — Heather Timmons / Quartz



(Lorenzo Fonda for Quartz)



Great post from Heather Timmons for Quartz about our current emperor with no clothes – Donald Trump.

Not so long ago, there was an Emperor so exceedingly fond of attention that he spent all his time making his subjects focus on him. He cared nothing about reviewing his soldiers, going to the theater, or going for a ride in his carriage, except to show off. He had a remark for every hour…

via Donald Trump is the emperor with no clothes—and the media’s playing along — Quartz


The Perils of Mixing Masculinity and Missiles – Carol Cohn / Op-Ed,The New York Times

Lilli Carré

I posted this brilliant January 5th, 2018 Op-Ed piece from Carol Cohn for The New York Times in its entirety below :

President Trump makes the job of a feminist security analyst almost too easy. No subtle teasing out of subtexts required with this guy.

Something seemed to click for people across the political spectrum this week, even among those least inclined to see the world through a gendered lens: When Mr. Trump tweeted, “I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!” the nuclear saber-rattling at Kim Jong-un of North Korea sounded a lot like, well, penis-measuring.

Sad. But significant? From most commentators, the response has been an eye-rolling dismissal of Mr. Trump’s tweet as “juvenile” — yet one more impulsive, impolitic, dangerous and unpresidential act by a president like no other. But methinks not only that the president doth protest too much about his “Nuclear Button,” but also that many commentators are still missing the point. This is not simply a trivial, if embarrassing, sideshow.

Ideas about masculinity and femininity matter in international politics, in national security and in nuclear strategic thinking. Mr. Trump — with his fragile ego and his particularly obsessive concern with his reputation for manliness — may have brought these dynamics to the surface, but they have been there all along, if in less crude and lurid ways.

I started thinking about this over three decades ago, when I was working among civilian nuclear strategists, war planners, weapons scientists and arms controllers. What struck me was how removed they were from the human realities behind the weapons they discussed. This distancing occurred in part through a professional discourse characterized by stunningly abstract and euphemistic language — and in part through a set of lively sexual metaphors.

The human bodies evoked were not those of the victims; instead, there were conversations about vertical erector launchers, thrust-to-weight ratios, soft lay downs, deep penetration and the comparative advantages of protracted versus spasm attacks — or what one military adviser to the National Security Council called “releasing 70 to 80 percent of our megatonnage in one orgasmic whump.”

But it quickly became clear that the role of gender in national security discourse went deeper than not-so-subtle metaphors. Even more disturbing was how it shaped what could be said, or even thought, within the confines of these male-dominated spaces. “What are you, some kind of wimp?” was an insult readily lobbed at anyone who urged restraint in responding to a provocation or attack. Discussion of whether political leaders “had the stones for war” suggested that the desire to solve a conflict through nonmilitary measures would mean you were less than fully manly. During the Cuban missile crisis, when Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Nitze disparaged some of President John F. Kennedy’s more cautious decisions by calling him a “pantywaist,” he made it clear that anyone who let himself be governed by fear of setting off a nuclear war was a sissy.

Overt impugning of masculinity is still only the most surface level at which ideas about gender play out in strategic thinking. They work in deeper, more subtle ways too. The culturally pervasive associations of masculinity with dispassion, distance, abstraction, toughness and risk-taking, and of femininity with emotion, empathy, bodily vulnerability, fear and caution, are embedded within the professional discourse.

And there they function to make some kinds of ideas seem self-evidently “realist,” hard-nosed and rational, and others patently inadmissible, self-evidently inappropriate. (One white male physicist told me that he and colleagues were once modeling a limited nuclear attack when he suddenly voiced dismay that they were talking so casually about “only 30 million” immediate deaths. “It was awful — I felt like a woman,” he said.)

In other words, embedded ideas about gender in nuclear strategic discourse go beyond questions of whether a button is more than just a button. They act as a deterrent to more holistic, and therefore truly realistic, thinking about nuclear weapons and the holocaust that would result from their use.

Mainstream national security analysts have been reluctant to think seriously — or at all — about the ways that ideas about gender shape national security. So if Mr. Trump’s disparagement of Mr. Kim’s manhood somehow does not wind up bringing us yet closer to war with North Korea, then perhaps he has in one sense done us a favor. He has made it glaringly evident that while the literal button or penis size of Mr. Trump or Mr. Kim matters not at all, their need for the world to believe that they are manly men does.

What we now need to remember is that Mr. Trump is, in this respect, not an exception. Yes, the fear of being perceived as unmanly may be closer to the surface in Mr. Trump. And it may drive his statements and actions in ways less leavened by cognitive capacity and attention span, or by empathy and the ability to imagine the impact of one’s actions on others, or by intelligence or prudence.

But this is not about individual men or women. Ideas about masculinity and femininity already distort the ways we think about international politics and national security. And they matter. They mattered before Mr. Trump, they matter now, and they will matter after Mr. Trump, if he is somehow kept under control and there is an after. Most national security analysts, from the academy to the mass media to the executive branch, have ignored this reality for too long, to all of our peril.

Carol Cohn is the director of the Consortium on Gender, Security and Human Rights at the University of Massachusetts Boston.

Source :The Perils of Mixing Masculinity and Missiles – Carol Cohn / New York Times


Remembering The Man Who Fell to Earth, Two Years After David Bowie Returned to the Stars — Clint Worthington /Consequence of Sound


The Sunday Matinee takes a look at a classic or beloved film each weekend. This week, Clint Worthington revisits David Bowie’s debut role two years after his tragic passing. It’s been two years since David Bowie left us for his home planet, and we haven’t been the same since. Like Thomas Jerome Newton, the protagonist he portrays…

via Remembering The Man Who Fell to Earth, Two Years After David Bowie Returned to the Stars — Consequence of Sound


there are days / From My Poetry Blog -Johnny’s House of Poetry

Image result for middle finger

there are days

there are days

when I refuse

to surrender

a supreme act of

self defense

against the maelstrom

of daily life

I will not

go quietly

I will not

shut up

I will not


my individuality

just to maintain

the silence

or to placate you

like I said

there are days

when I refuse

to surrender

Source : Johnny’s House of Poetry


12 Little Known Laws Of Karma That Will Change Your Life / collectivelyconscious.net

What is Karma? Karma is the Sanskrit word for action. It is equivalent to Newton’s law of ‘every action must have a reaction’. When we think, speak or act we initiate a force that will react accordingly. This returning force maybe modified, changed or suspended, but most people will not be able eradicate it.

This law of cause and effect is not punishment, but is wholly for the sake of education or learning.

A person may not escape the consequences of his actions, but he will suffer only if he himself has made the conditions ripe for his suffering. Ignorance of the law is no excuse whether the laws are man-made or universal. To stop being afraid and to start being empowered in the worlds of karma and reincarnation, here is what you need to know about karmic laws.


– “As you sow, so shall you reap”. This is also known as the “Law of Cause and Effect”.
– Whatever we put out in the Universe is what comes back to us.
– If what we want is Happiness, Peace, Love, Friendship… Then we should BE Happy, Peaceful, Loving and a True Friend.


– Life doesn’t just HAPPEN, it requires our participation.
– We are one with the Universe, both inside and out.
– Whatever surrounds us gives us clues to our inner state.
– BE yourself, and surround yourself with what you want to have present in your Life.


– What you refuse to accept, will continue for you.
– If what we see is an enemy, or someone with a character trait that we find to be negative, then we ourselves are not focused on a higher level of existence.


– “Wherever you go, there you are”.
– For us to GROW in Spirit, it is we who must change – and not the people, places or things around us.
– The only given we have in our lives is OURSELVES and that is the only factor we have control over.
– When we change who and what we are within our heart our life follows suit and changes too.


– Whenever there is something wrong in my life, there is something wrong in me.
– We mirror what surrounds us – and what surrounds us mirrors us; this is a Universal Truth.
– We must take responsibility what is in our life.


– Even if something we do seems inconsequential, it is very important that it gets done as everything in the Universe is connected.
– Each step leads to the next step, and so forth and so on.
– Someone must do the initial work to get a job done.
– Neither the first step nor the last are of greater significance,
– As they were both needed to accomplish the task.
– Past-Present-Future they are all connected…


– You can not think of two things at the same time.
– When our focus is on Spiritual Values, it is impossible for us to have lower thoughts such as greed or anger.


– If you believe something to be true,then sometime in your life you will be called upon to demonstrate that particular truth.
– Here is where we put what we CLAIM that we have learned, into actual


– Looking backward to examine what was, prevents us from being totally in the HERE AND NOW.
– Old thoughts, old patterns of behavior, old dreams…
– Prevent us from having new ones.


– History repeats itself until we learn the lessons that we need to change our path.


– All Rewards require initial toil.
– Rewards of lasting value require patient and persistent toil.
– True joy follows doing what we’re suppose to be doing, and waiting for the reward to come in on its own time.


– You get back from something whatever YOU have put into it.
– The true value of something is a direct result of the energy and intent that is put into it.
– Every personal contribution is also a contribution to the Whole.
– Lack luster contributions have no impact on the Whole, nor do they work to diminish it.
– Loving contributions bring life to, and inspire, the Whole.


Source : 12 Little Known Laws Of Karma That Will Change Your Life