©

i'm trying to be a better person.

  • hellopleasestay:

allhopeisgon-e:

TRIGGER WARNING - Danger Zone.

I’m here if anyone needs someone to talk to <3
    gracklesong:

catandkitty:

cutting all that to remind y’all this was a woman’s art project based around the theory that the venus of willendorf (commonly ascribed to a man, or at least, not necessarily discussed in the context of being made by a woman) may have been a self portrait based on what the artist could see of herself before mirrors which is like, the exact opposite of women suffering from the low self-esteem a commenter assigned them.


#yikes some of the other comments on this#’guys don’t understand what a horrible view girls have of themselves’#i didn’t realize this was such a horrible view!#since it’s… what i see when i look down

this is also pretty similar to what I see when I look down? in fact, I’m pretty sure that unless you have a perfectly flat stomach, your view will be some variation on this (and even if you did it wouldn’t be that wildly different)? It’s just how bodies are configured.

What the comments mostly illustrate is that neutral, realistic images of women’s bodies are automatically construed as negative. Any image that does not portray an (unrealistic) ideal will be construed as negative unless they’re surrounded by glitter, cutesy, cartoony exaggeration, and poses and accessories that assure the viewer that the woman is still perfectly fuckable despite possessing body fat. A post depicting a cartoon woman who is fat but smiling demurely, wearing fancy lingerie, posed with her ass up in the air or legs spread is “body positive”, but a woman drawing an accurate, nonsexualized image of herself is a sign of her own crushing self-hatred.