#female infanticide

[tommyfebuary6]

It’s A Girl: Three Deadliest Words (2012)

[ichverdurstehier]

I don't understand how you can kill a baby girl. She's just a baby. She didn't do anything.

Baby

[tenaciousbananabird]

[shoujoboy-restart]

I wish could just accuse basic proven popular belief and occurrences as fake just because a ideology I disagree with has a certain interpretation of it.

"racists have this popular argument that black people are inherently disease ridden and genetically inferior, so clearly pointing out black people are more likely to have sickle cell anemia is racist and bigoted statement in itself"

Just the most intellectual laziness and addiction to a comfort zone possible.

[haggishlyhagging]

Now that birth control is more or less routine, infanticide seems an unrelated and horrifying event; but to colonial women, who had no alternative and whose offspring were very likely to die in infancy anyway, infanticide might be a desperate kind of birth control after the fact. Various means of contraception were known at the time, and coitus interruptus was widely practiced. Sarah Smith, who had two husbands and several lovers, may have known about such things, but no means of birth control was foolproof. Young unmarried motherless women like Mary Martin, on the other hand, probably knew nothing of birth control. And in some cases birth-control information wouldn't have helped. Alice Clifton, the sixteen-year-old slave, was "debauched" in an alley by a white man known as "fat Shaffer." Women in desperate circumstances then turned to infanticide. But in killing their infants they not only committed murder; they also asserted, symbolically at least, that a woman should not be punished for her sexuality, that she is entitled to some measure of control of her own body. Such statements challenge civil and divine authority most of all. In a patriarchal society, they are revolutionary.

In Chester, Massachusetts, a week after Abiel Converse was arrested for murdering her bastard child, a Mrs. Tyler, several years a widow and several months pregnant, ate rat poison for breakfast. She spent the day "in great agony" and, about sunset, she died. The editor of the county newspaper took a dim view of this "inconsiderate conduct," and the Reverend Mr. Bascom denounced her at the Converse execution as "an unclean and whorish woman [who] was led on by this abominable wickedness, to murder herself: deliberately, designedly, without hope of any mercy; and without desiring the good wishes or prayers of any friend whatever." Not even the Reverend Mr. Bascom.

It is hard to read the old sermons today without suspecting that men like the Reverend Mr. Bascom were more concerned with their own authority than with God's. Always they warned women to be docile and obedient. At the executions of women convicted of infanticide, the ministers harangued women about "uncleanness"; but they also warned them against the sins of lying, secrecy, anger, disobedience, hypocrisy, sullen discontent, idleness, and "gadding about" with other women. In a political context, these "sins" amount to resistance, rebellion, subversion, sabotage, coalition, and conspiracy. No wonder the preachers thundered: "The Apostle wou'd have the young women taught to be sober, discreet, Chast, Keepers at home, that the word of God be not blasphemed. . . ."

But women apparently were not keepers at home, for during the eighteenth century bastardy became such a common offense that penalties against it had to be reduced. In 1747 Benjamin Franklin's marvelous fictitious creation, Miss Polly Baker, prosecuted for bearing a fifth bastard, argued that she had done her civic duty in adding "to the king's subjects" and should have a statue erected in her honor. Franklin's satiric essay is a serious argument for distinguishing "sin" from "crime." By 1780 the Marquis de Chastellux could relate straightforwardly the story of a "deceived" Miss Dorrance in Voluntown, Connecticut, being well cared for by her family. And George Grieve, Chastellux's translator, who also had met the family, advised English readers that in America such a young woman was "pitied rather than blamed" and could "still retain all her rights in society and become a legitimate spouse and mother, though her adventure be neither unknown nor even dissimulated."

Court dockets were crowded with bastardy cases. At the Court of General Sessions of the Peace held at Springfield, Massachusetts, in May 1785, Mary Howard, a "singlewoman," appeared and "voluntarily confesse[d] herself to have been guilty of the Crime of Fornication, and that she . . . had a Female Bastard Child born of her Body on the twentieth day of January last past. . . ." Mary Howard was followed by six other women. Each made a similar confession. Each was fined six shillings and charged three shillings for costs—a little more than a week's wages for a skilled spinster. A woman who accepted her child and her shame could be rehabilitated, but a woman who took matters into her own hands could not. In the same month, the Superior Court meeting nearby at Northampton sentenced Hannah Piggin to die for concealing the death of her bastard child. It was almost as though women who committed infanticide were punished not so much for killing but for trying to put one over on the authorities.

-Ann Jones, Women Who Kill

[mattdillon]

"cherry valance did nothing wrong! you all can't handle her!" where are these people who hate cherry. it seems like everyone likes her or defends her to the death. i wanna meet these people who allegedly dislike her, preferably so we can talk and be friends.

[rottenrager]

Sunflower Shoes

Whispers she softly as

She fondles her womb

The moment is close by

She can adore her sacred bloom

A gift from her other half

Dazzling sunflower shoes

The size of her palm, she chuckles

Lost she gets in her motherly muse

Time ticks by, alive is the room

She wails, her nails dig into her skin

With a final push, she drowns in rheum

In her arms is sweet pardon of her every sin

A daughter, her heart is sewn with joy

She calls out for him to see

"Rotten is the fruit of your womb!", he thunders

He snatches her world, her pride, her glee

Is being a girl, so sinful, so evil?

Never opened her eyes, she's put to sleep

A man turned monster in a heartbeat

That he numbers, all god can do is weep

Lie those sunflower shoes in a corner

And the remains of a mother she lived to be

Six feet under, her child, her soul,

And hopes in heaven she's safe and free

[yurious]

I hate feminist posts on tumblr, me and my friends talk about how men should be selectively aborted

[magaramach]

yes the ending was overly saccharine but 5 months after i first watched it i'm still thinking about jayeshbhai jordaar's rooftop scene.

[diamondnokouzai]

oogh....help me.....the pop history book......its criticizing an aspect of chinese culture incorrectly.....

[unabashedtragedyruins]

[anniflamma]

So I’ve received a couple of anonymous messages telling me that they were really disappointed in me for liking Elian's Antinous fanart. Instead of answering them individually, I’m just going to make an angry rant post instead. Most of if probably won't make sense anyway.

This post have talk about SA, and homophobia. Be aware. I don’t ship genuinely Telemachus and Antinous, if that’s what you’re wondering. I didn’t even consider the possibility that ship could even exist. At the end of the day, I don't care about that ship.

And do you want me to explain that I know SA is bad? Or that I’m aware Telemachus/Antinous is a toxic ship? Do you think I’m dumb and don’t know that? You don't have to explain to me either, I know that SA is bad, I have experienced it, you don't have to explain to me, trust me I know.

I like Elian's art because it’s really beautiful. Her work is a huge inspiration and encouragement for me when making animatics. But do I REALLY have to spell out, word for word, that I know Antinous is an antagonist and tries to do bad things? Does it mean every time someone draws Antinous and I like it, I have to explain that I like the drawing because it’s well done, not because I support Antinous’ intent toward Penelope and wants to kill Telemachus?

I mean, I’ve seen tons of thirsty comments like, "I hate how Zeus treats women, but your design is really hot" or "Even if Poseidon SA Demeter, this Poseidon I'd go down on all fours for!"

I have seen some stuff….

I guess I could just imitate something like that????

But I know it’s a joke and I know its a fantasy that someone is expressing. Its not real, its fictional. I know all those thirsty ppl who simp over Poseidon, Zeus, or even Antinous aren’t supporting hatred and violence toward women. And yes, I am expecting that you should already know this too. Because if we gonna assume the worst of ppl… Then everyone who likes Greek myth/Epic the musical are pro SA. "Do you like Crice from Epic the musical? That means that you support her actions, you support SA!" "Oh you like Odysseus?! He killed a baby and all of his female slaves cuz they got SA by the suitors! You support infanticide, slavery and SA!" Do you hear how dumb that sounds? To be honest, I wouldn’t be that surprised if there are some who think like this. I mean, this discussion wouldn’t even be a thing, right.

And if you don’t know, I literally make thirst art of Poseidon (and that includes Zeus and Hermes), and you don’t see it as a bad thing??? It’s Poseidon… Do you know what he has done to women in the myths?!

Im going to ramble here and I will bring up stories from greek myth that have SA in it. So be aware.

One example is the story of Caeneus. When Caeneus was a woman, his parents left him to take care of the house while they were out running errands. Poseidon took that as an opportunity to break into the house and sexually assault him. This is probably the only myth where Poseidon actually feels bad after what he did, so he grants Caeneus a wish. Aww, how sweet~~~ /sarcasm.

Do I need to give an example of Zeus? We all know what Zeus does. But hey, I’ve made Poseidon/Hermes ship art. And guess what? There’s a story where Hermes breaks a woman’s leg so she can’t run away from him, and then he sexually assaults her. Isn’t that cute~~! /sarcasm

Heck, I can even go on with my biblical ships. David/Jonathan—David, a serial assaulter and murderer, and Jonathan, a mass murderer. But do I support their actions? No, I do not support mass murder, and its really dumb that I have to spell it out for you.

Daniel/Darius is even questionable too! It's literally a king and his servant, and that power imbalance is so big I don’t know what to tell you! Do I have to spell it out that I know that, in real life, king/servant relationships aren’t cute at all?!

All of these characters that I’ve listed have done or represent horrible things. And I have to tell you that I don't support their actions?! Really? You really can't think outside the box?

But do you see what I’m trying to tell you? We can simp over other ancient mythological figures but Antinous is the red line that we can never cross??? It’s hypocritical and immature, that’s what it is.

Right now, ppl loves the Ody seduces Zeus art I made. And that "ship" is well really questionable too! But nobody have called me a witch and tries to burn me at the stake yet. 😐

And the thing is, I can separate these fictional characters from the real world. I can also separate the fictional material from other fictional interpretations. Exemple, I like The Song of Achilles, in it, they are the same age, but I am also aware that in the Iliad, Achilles is 16 and Patroclus is 26. But do I automatically assume that Madeline Miller likes teens? No! Do I assume that everyone who likes The Song Of Achilles like that shit? No!

But we still can have a disscussion about it without making it into a witch trial.

As long as we can separate different fictional materials, then everything is fine. It only becomes a problem if a person can’t separate them. Then we have a problem. I can acknowledge that my depiction of King David from the bible is not the same as from the original story and that he is horrible person towards women. If I couldn't acknowledge that, then its bad! The same goes for Antinous if someone makes an AU or headcanon about him. If someone want so make AUs about Antinous, my first thoughts isnt "Oh they like to SA ppl!". At the end of the day, this is just a group from tiktok who didn’t like a toxic ship and decided to bully an artist while acting like they have superior morals.

And I get this type of shit from christians when I make my queer bible interpitations, both from those that don't like the queer stuff but also those that points out that David and Jonathan were horrible ppl.

So I rarely answer comments like this because they usually end up spewing beliefs filled with homophobia and Islamophobia. Heck rasism sometimes, apparently, Christians don’t know that the Bible takes place in the Middle East, and they are angry at me for drawing them looking like Arabs! I just delete their comments before they gets there. Making queer biblical animatics on TikTok that go viral on the Christian side is not fun at all guys....

And hate to say it but tiktok Epic fans sound really similar. You are acting like you’re on a pedestal, holier than thou. Its just a different font.

+ I haven’t forgotten all those homophobic comments I got on my David/Jonathan animatic that I posted right after my Ruthlessness animatic. Epic fans were saying they didn’t want “that gay shit” and wanted to see more Epic stuff. Hate to break it to you all, but the Epic fandom isn’t that innocent.

[fem-lit]

In the current epidemic of rich Western women who cannot “choose” to eat, we see the continuation of an older, poorer tradition of women’s relation to food. Modern Western female dieting descends from a long history. Women have always had to eat differently from men: less and worse. In Hellenistic Rome, reports classicist Sarah B. Pomeroy, boys were rationed sixteen measures of meal to twelve measures allotted to girls. In medieval France, according to historian John Boswell, women received two thirds of the grain allocated to men. Throughout history, when there is only so much to eat, women get little, or none: A common explanation among anthropologists for female infanticide is that food shortage provokes it. According to UN publications, where hunger goes, women meet it first: In Bangladesh and Botswana, female infants die more frequently than male, and girls are more often malnourished, because they are given smaller portions. In Turkey, India, Pakistan, North Africa, and the Middle East, men get the lion’s share of what food there is, regardless of women’s caloric needs. “It is not the caloric value of work which is represented in the patterns of food consumption” of men in relation to women in North Africa, “nor is it a question of physiological needs…. Rather these patterns tend to guarantee priority rights to the ‘important’ members of society, that is, adult men.” In Morocco, if women are guests, “they will swear they have eaten already” or that they are not hungry. “Small girls soon learn to offer their share to visitors, to refuse meat and deny hunger.” A North African woman described by anthropologist Vanessa Mahler assured her fellow diners that “she preferred bones to meat.” Men, however, Mahler reports, “are supposed to be exempt from facing scarcity which is shared out among women and children.”

“Third World countries provide examples of undernourished female and well-nourished male children, where what food there is goes to the boys of the family,” a UN report testifies. Two thirds of women in Asia, half of all women in Africa, and a sixth of Latin American women are anemic—through lack of food. Fifty percent more Nepali women than men go blind from lack of food. Cross-culturally, men receive hot meals, more protein, and the first helpings of a dish, while women eat the cooling leftovers, often having to use deceit and cunning to get enough to eat. “Moreover, what food they do receive is consistently less nutritious.”

This pattern is not restricted to the Third World: Most Western women alive today can recall versions of it at their mothers’ or grandmothers’ table: British miners’ wives eating the grease-soaked bread left over after their husbands had eaten the meat; Italian and Jewish wives taking the part of the bird no one else would want.

These patterns of behavior are standard in the affluent West today, perpetuated by the culture of female caloric self-deprivation. A generation ago, the justification for this traditional apportioning shifted: Women still went without, ate leftovers, hoarded food, used deceit to get it—but blamed themselves. Our mothers still exiled themselves from the family circle that was eating cake with silver cutlery off Wedgwood china, and we would come upon them in the kitchen, furtively devouring the remains. The traditional pattern was cloaked in modern shame, but otherwise changed little. Weight control became its rationale once natural inferiority went out of fashion.

— Naomi Wolf (1990) The Beauty Myth

[tanuki-kimono]

Hello ! I've been really into Gegege no Kitarou recently, and looking at his mom made me wonder : back when kimonos were worn on a daily basis, how did pregnant people style them ? Did they wear other types of clothes that don't compress the stomach as much instead ? If you happen to have any info on this, it would be very cool :)

Hi! It's hard to imagine as many kitsuke pictures now promote perfect tubular silhouettes with not a fold out of place, but in the past kimono were worn far more loosely than they are today!

Kimono was then worn everyday (=no time for perfect polished photoshoot looks ;), many kistuke accessories we now use didn't even exist (=they were not needed!).

During Edo period to late Meiji, feminine silhouettes were far more flowy/willowy than what we have today:

Kimono tended to be longer (hikizuri for ex.) and adjusted far less tighlty on the upper body (=people were working!). Depending on the period obi were narrower, or worn differently (criss crossed for ex.) or laxer than what we do today.

Pregnant women had no trouble adjusting their clothes to their changing bodies :)

The kimono was worn looser and looser as belly and boobs grew. If possible, kimono could have been unstitched and retailored (if fabric allowed it) to the bigger size needed.

Obi and ties were set above (and/or under the belly depending on time), like so:

And pregnancy belts were widely used.

One belt was a type of sarashi (soft cotton roll, which was also used for chest) named hara-obi 腹帯, which provided support:

Another special belt was the Iwata-obi 岩田帯, used during Obi-iwai 帯祝い, a ceremony taking place on the day of the dog during the fifth month of pregnancy. This was meant to ensure safe birth, as dogs were thought to give birth easily - hence why inu hariko are good luck charm for expecting women:

The obiiwai was also a way to announce a pregnancy to the community (as miscarriages, abortions, and infanticides were sadly quite common then).

Iwata obi are still a thing, here are modern ones:

Finally, as a side note, what pregnant women could do if they felt smothered by their kimono? Well, just open the damn thing to wear it much like a robe!

Japan had not the same shaming view of female breasts than the West then. It was quite common to see some working class people in underwear/loosely dressed, or have both sex share spaces in the nude (baths for ex.).

Tbh, unless she was living a sheltered life (no work, servants, etc.), I don't see why a pregnant woman would have bothered with a properly adjusted kimono, when she could have just be much freer and comfortable xD

Hope this helps!

[dressed2k1ll]

Book review: Goddesses, Whores, Wives & Slaves by Sarah B Pomeroy (1975)

10/10

This was impossible to put down. A fascinating and vibrant history of Ancient Greek and Roman Women: from all walks of life, using just about every resource available within art and archaeology and anthropology.

It’s also also very very well researched and informative with a HUGE bibliography and a great index and lots of notes for the nerdy (aka me) who has already highlighted the next set of books to chew on.

Overall she argues (and does so persuasively with a great deal of thought and objectivity) that Roman women seemed to have enjoyed a higher quality of life than the Ancient Greek women because of generally (especially in upper class households) having a more public-facing life, being slightly more protected by the pater familias model of the Roman household, and having slightly more social mobility.

However a shout out goes to the Amazons and their social model for living 🏹🏹🏹

If you’re curious about the roles of women in varying Hellenistic and classical contexts, this is a must-read.

Her final words are so interesting and prescient too: “Serious intellectual thought about women continued: Stoicism, the most popular of the Hellenistic and Roman philosophies, directed women’s energies to marriage and motherhood. The argumentation is brilliant and difficult to refute. And this rationalized confinement of women to the domestic sphere, as well as the systemization of anti-female thought by poets and philosophers, are two of the most devastating creations in the classical legacy” 😢💔

Also, if you’re upset by reading about things like sexual slavery and infanticide, it might not be the book for you.

Overall, it’s staying in my collection and I’ll definitely be referring to it again.

[icarus-phaethon]

"You achieved equal rights why do you need feminism anymore" idk bro you tell me, who is fighting against rape cultute, porn, sex work, human trafficking, for maternity leave, better healthcare for women, against pedophilia, male honour belief system, male supremacy, female infanticide, women's labour paid n unpaid to be honoured, mothers and wives to be honoured, fighting for animals, fighting for women who are being raped, abused, killed, domestic violence, eve teasing, fighting for female only spaces, against climate change that impacts women much worse, safety of women [trad women] who dedicate their lives to their husbands through alimony, equal pay, shared household responsibility that you don't have to raise a 30yo manchild you married, for widows, single mothers, homeless women, etc

If it wasn't for feminism we weren't even being considered for voting rights, until feminists fought for our inclusion in universities we were killed for studying, until feminists fought to be included in medical trials women were fed doses of meds catered for men and poisoned, until feminism fought for mothers there was no maternity leave[we are still the frontrunners in this fight], until feminists fought for us we couldn't have bank accounts, men have never stood up or fought for our rights, we were ignored. They were righting about capitalism, racism and more, but no issues that impacted women.