I can't find an origin point after a bit of searching, and the actual comments aren't doing much explaining either, it's a mix of legitimate anti-rape comments and people saying men can wear whatever they want but women can't, to all men are less than dogs and a stain on society. So yeah, what's all this about?
It is a response to the perpetrator, Elliot Rodger, of the recent Santa Barbara shooting, and his apparent "manifesto", I believe. Prior to his attacks, he essentially created a video/posted things about how he felt that every woman around him was "scum" for going along with what he perceived to be unsavoury people ("beefcakes") when they would be better with him; how this was an injustice to him, and essentially making him look very much like someone who was entitled to have sex with a woman by virtue of little basis, insulting women as a whole and the like -- "all women are X". The tag in question has taken up a tone of empowerment to describe and discuss similar issues of society's internalized misogyny that women experience and/or perceive daily, in response to the lad's comments.
Thank goodness for Ashwin 'cause I actually misunderstood it. I thought it was short for "Yes, all women need feminism," and I was like chrissakes can we not make this political.
Aw, it's such a shame to see such a theoretically noble thing being so heavily corrupted to spew hate at people :/
Yeah, I can see how some of these tweets are taking it too far away from the core of the topic. It always traces back to many factors leading up to this incident, not just the obvious misogyny. Also, curious if this was one of the articles that helped spurned it? Here While the tone is certainly something, the article does make a good point. I haven't personally faced anything directly that threatens my safety (at least in a way that has changed me life completely) as described in these tweets, but perhaps it has become too subtle for me and others to notice. But I think at least, I can empathize with some of these tweets who do make good points.
Power to the hashtag and all, but the one issue I have is that many people on their seem to think misogyny was the main cause of this violent outburst. Of course it added to it and allowed Rodgers to channel his anger into something, but it was his degraded mental health that led him to this point. There are plenty of misogynists out there who aren't violent, as much of a cop out as that sounds, but it's true, they don't all go out and kill people to make their point. Most have the mental capability to resist this behaviour, unlike Rodgers. More spree killers have mental degradation than misogyny under their behavioural personality. His hate against women was his outlet, but it could have easily been against non-white people, foreigners, the government, or his school/work colleagues. Still, the hash tag has had many good messages about the problems women face and i'm glad it's spurred many good messages and statistics that has made many people think.
I think the most disturbing thing about it was people calling it a "misogynist shooting" rather than a "tragic shooting" or something. I dunno, it just kinda feels like it devalues the actual victims. They're victims of misogyny, not, oh, I dunno... murder?
Really? I thought it was meant to be a response to the "not all men" argument against all the misandrists who call themselves feminists as if to say, "Maybe not all men [are rapists/objectify women/etc.] but #YesAllWomen feel like they could be raped or otherwise victimized by men."
It was a response to that in light of people saying 'not all men' in the wake of Rodger's spree. It's basically the antithesis of it, by including all women into he sphere as people who all suffer under misogyny. I'm sure a number of woemn would dispute suffering misogyny, but the message is a good one.
