#acknowledgment of female oppresion

[balkanradfem]

So I like the Barbie movie enough to do an analysis of their feminist statements and try to get to the root of the problem! They did give us a long list of expectations women worldwide are dealing with, now let's see why they're dealing with it.

1. "We have to always be extraordinary, but somehow, we're always doing it wrong. You have to be thin, but not too thin, and you can never say you want to be thin, you have to say you want to be healthy."

This issue happens because women in practice, culture, and their real-life circumstances are still effectively living as the second class citizens, and they're viewed as servants for males, and male toys. It does not benefit us to be expected to be extraordinary, and it does not benefit us to be thin. So who benefits from it?

It's a feature of a male fantasy. Male wants to posses a woman who is trained to please him in every possible way, but she also needs to be unique and different from all other women, so he feels like he has something special. Every woman already is unique and individual, but he doesn't notice such things as personality, he needs her to be special in a way that he and his male buddies will notice! So she has to be extraordinary in something that males appreciate, but also if she is better than them at it, then they no longer feel the ease of being superior, so she's doing it wrong.

Women's ideal being thin is also a male fantasy, they've managed to pavlov themselves into finding thin women the only kind of woman that is attractive, thus the requirement on women is to be thin, even when it damages our health. Men love causing trauma to women, but to see women actually visibly struggling with it, putting it into words, saying it hurts us, that makes them uncomfortable! So they shame the language, until we phrase it as something that doesn't relate to them, or that makes it seem like it's for our own good. 'Being thin for health' makes it seem like the required starvation is for our own good, and healthy, in fact.

This could not possibly happen if we were not existing in service of the other half of population. If we were respected and valuable human beings, what is bad for us would not be represented to us as an ideal.

2. "You have to have money, but can't ask for money, because that's crass. You have to be boss, but can't be mean. You have to lead, but you can't squash other people's ideas."

These are double standards that men put up for us. Even though women are paid less, own less, are globally more impoverished and have a harder time gaining money, that is no longer enough for us to completely depend on men for money; they hate this. So as a revenge for us managing to earn a bit of our own money, we now can't ask them for any, we are supposed to 'have our own', and still depend for them, but in fear, reluctant to ask or to demand. Notice how it isn't crass for a man to ask for money, it's almost expected, but for a woman, it's shameful.

Women in lead will be criticized, called out, scrutinized and humiliated like no male leader ever would be; this is to make it harder for women to feel in control and comfortable in leading positions. Male leader is supposed to step all over ideas he doesn't find useful, hell he can even squash it and take credit for it later, but if a woman doesn't acknowledge a stupid idea, she is immediately told off for 'not being a good enough leader'. Even when she's doing exactly what she's supposed to do. It's a hypocritical little game to ensure only men can comfortably lead.

3. "You're supposed to love being a mother, but don't talk about your kids all the damn time. You have to be a career woman, but also always be looking out for other people."

This is a feature of "women existing for male convenience" problem. We are supposed to be naturally loving of raising kids, because it's convenient for males to just have their children raised for them without having to do much about it, and if this is not provided to them, then women are evil for not 'loving being a mother' when it's convenient for men that women are super into that and willing to do it for free, forever, without complaining or talking about it, because men don't like to know that it's an actual effort, they feel more comfortable feeling it's a silly little chore that deserves no thought whatsoever.

Women having careers is something men have been making difficult in any way possible, because it means women are not reliant on them for resources within capitalism, but they were not able to completely prevent us having jobs, so now they're just trying to get as much use of it as possible. If women earn money, they will leech off of that money. If women have careers, well then those women should prove that they're just as convenient, nurturing, always available, running at every beck and call, and act as if they still only exist to serve and please men. If women fail to do this, they'll again be accused of being selfish, horrible people, bad mothers, bad community members, and so on and so forth. Men of course, can ignore the entire world and do their job badly, and have a violence problem, and be addicted to p*rn, and it's fine. They're not bad people regardless of how little compassion they have for anyone who isn't them.

4. "You have to answer for men's bad behavior, which is insane. But if you point that out, you're accused of complaining. You're supposed to stay pretty for men, but not so pretty that you tempt them too much or that you threaten other women because you're supposed to be a part of the sisterhood."

This is an example of psychological abuse; victims are most often told they're responsible for their abuser's actions, as if they would in any situation be able to control or influence them, which they can't. But, putting that responsibility on women will make women hyperfocus on their own behaviour, on prevention of abuse, prevention of violence, which means they will go a long way trying to please men, tiptoe around them, give them insane amount of attention and care, in hope or preventing the escalation of their behaviour - and this is exactly what men want, this is what the abuse was for. To gain that devotion and attention, with the threat of violence. If women understood perfectly that men are responsible for their own behaviour, their way forward would be to hold men accountable, to lock them up and never look back. It's only in the world where women are victims of severe psychological abuse that we try to please men into not committing acts of violence. And it never works, because men love violence, and will turn to violence at every corner, even more easily and smugly knowing they can simply blame a woman for not working hard enough to prevent it.

Men expecting women to be pretty but then punishing them for being pretty is also an act of abuse; women's exterior is being judged as if our appearance is both a statement and a crime. Men can look whatever they naturally look like, and it's not a provocation, temptation, lack of solidarity or anything worth criticizing; but any way that a woman looks can be scrutinized and a ground for moral callout. The reality is that women also just look like the way they look like, and there's nothing wrong with it. There is zero moral problems with women looking pretty or not pretty. There isn't even a problem with tempting males because males are responsible for their own actions and not toddlers who have no power to resist impulses. This is a tactics for making women responsible for male behaviour - the way she looks is responsible for what I want to do to her. Complete nonsense, they just found a way to blame her for his own behaviour.

Calling women out for not being 'a part of the sisterhood' based on their appearance is very poorly concealed tactic to turn women against each other, to distract them from seeing that men are the root of the problem. Men don't turn on each other based on appearance, and it doesn't make sense for women to be assumed to do it either; in women-only communities, it doesn't matter what women look like. Whatever women look like is never a threat or an attack on other women, men are trying to play on female insecurity and frame other women as a threat to that insecurity - when the only threat all along was men, creating ideals and standards of beauty that don't correspond to reality or nature.

5. "Always be grateful, but never forget that the system is rigged, so find a way to acknowledge that, but also, always be grateful. You have to never get old."

The waves of feminism have forced the public consciousness to acknowledge that the system is rigged, but the pressure to do something about it falls completely on women, even though men created the system, rigged it, are keeping it rigged, are using violence to enforce it, and are benefiting from it. And it's convenient to them if women do nothing else but acknowledge it's rigged and stay grateful they're still allowed to live within, we're supposed to be threatened by the fact that we can easily be killed if we step out of line.

Men are threatened by older women because mature women have experience, they are no longer easily manipulated or cheated out of their gain, they will not bow down and please men like young, inexperienced women can be tricked into doing. So they convince those young women, that being old is shameful and ugly for women. They want women to stay young and susceptible, like children that they can control and not allow any agency or free will. This ensures we stay focused on being scared of time, aging and our own bodies and nature, but not of the predators who are taking our lives as a service for themselves.

6. "Never be rude, never show off, never be selfish, never fall down, never fail, never show fear. Never get out of line, it's too hard, it's too contradictory and nobody gives you a medal or says "thank you". And it turns out, in fact, that not only are you doing everything wrong, but also everything is your fault."

These are lists of standards that are only applied to women, men are allowed to do all of these things and to be catered to while they're doing it. This behaviour is presented as bad only when women are doing it; if men do it, it's considered neutral, normal, intrinsic to human nature. Women being selfish inconveniences men, who are looking to exploit female selflessness. Women showing off and being proud would cut into their time showing off, they want that attention for themselves. Women getting out of line is inconvenient, since men have drawn those lines for women (those lines don't exist for men). Women showing fear makes it difficult for male predators to corner them down and have them act complacent; men don't want to see proof of victimizing women, except in private, except when they can get off on it. Never in public, never when women could potentially escape or reach for help, then it's sexist of women to be afraid.

Women getting medals, acknowledgment or gratitude again, cuts into male parade of getting all the acknowledgment, gratitude and medals, for them it doesn't make sense that they should share attention or credit with what they consider to be the 'servant class'. Men have deluded themselves into thinking they deserve more credit than women do, they don't consider us smart or capable, because they can easily oppress us, so how smart can we be? But also, they expect and demand us to be as smart and capable as necessary to resolve all of their issues, to make their life easy and pleasant and undemanding. We are forced to deal with issues they won't even look at, we often solve problems or create solution they wouldn't be able to produce, and this is when they simply take credit and convince themselves that they knew better all along. It's a 'male-delusion rules reality' kind of world for women.

After doing the biggest bulk of work on earth, creating and raising the entire human race, doing daily unpaid labour, putting up with violence, threats and constant degradation from men, after not having our interests represented by the law, education, government, economy or any other institution with any power, after spending a piece of our life being groomed and then having to spend another undoing the grooming, we are still told that everything is our fault, and that we're doing everything wrong.

This is abuse, and somebody is doing it. We are not put thru all of this for vague reasons, or for arbitrary reasons, someone is benefiting from all of it. While we're raising children, who lazes around and attaches their last names to our kids? When we're doing daily unpaid labour, who doesn't do their part? Who is staring at us while we're walking down the street, who fails to represent or even acknowledge our interests, and even our human rights? Who does the grooming, and who enables them to do it? Where do they get resources from it, who allows it to go on unchecked? How come young girls and women are regarded as such low value that we allow them to live unprotected around predators who will absolutely attempt to violate them in as many ways they can? Who fails to prevent, or arrest, or punish them?

It's not just a system of patriarchy, it'a a system of men, doing this every single day of their life. We can point the finger at the root of the problem. We have a common enemy, and they're working damn hard to keep us from realizing it.

[fretami]

“dont talk about how men are dangerous or oppresive!! it might hurt some mens feelings who wish they werent men! :(���

esp since im a terf who doesnt hate men as a class, and i get flack from other feminists due to that— i can still ACKNOWLEDGE sexism in society, male preferences, male violence, male sexism etc

(the same way i critique female preferences and sexism)

some of you are dangerously susceptible to men hating terf ideology

[amandagraysonsarek]

Mirror Play

@spacemomx

There were very few places Amanda loathed more than Starfleet HQ. 

For one thing, it was cold. Frigid. Compared to the Vulcan environments she spent most of her time in now that she was married, Starfleet HQ was one giant walk-in freezer. 

For another, it was designed in a completely ridiculous manner. There were Empire crests all over the place, on every door, along corridor walls, and even as little accents on lightswitches. Skewered Terra, as Sarek liked to call it, was  all around them.

But the worst thing about Starfleet HQ by far was the men. Terren men made her blood boil and everything about this place was designed with them in mind, the Boy’s Club come to life. 

Amanda was only there to pick up Admiral Archer’s copy of an Andorian songbook. Similar to the “Great Songbooks” of Ancient Terra, Andorian songs were often party songs meant for clan gatherings, and undoubtably contained new words for the Universal Translator database. 

Songbook in hand, Vulcan guards at her back, Amanda made good time through the giant, icebox of a building, aimed straight for the exit. 

Later, when Sarek asked, she remembered that it was the tone of his voice that stopped her. The Terran jeered, his voice dripping with lust and a casual, oppresive air. It made her stomach tighten, still a Terran woman even years after near complete immersion in Vulcan culture. 

“I know it hasn’t been long, and I truly empathize, but think of your career. If you want to continue to rise, you’ll need the support of a fellow rising officer. And trust me when I say I have no trouble rising for you.”

She snapped. Stopping on a dime, Amanda turned her head and looked behind her for the source of that trash---and found a blond woman in one of those ridiculous mini dresses long shirts that were the Starfleet female uniforms. She was in a doorway and a male officer leaned on the wall directly in her path, blocking her way and then chatting her up.

She closed her eyes and concentrated on her bond with her husband. 

I’m about to do something scandalous. If you hear about it later, don’t act surprised.

She felt a nudge of acknowledgement from him and opened them again, still seeing red. Taking a moment to relax, Amanda let go of that anger and focused on how much cock-blocking this Starfleet Terran gutter troll was going to please her.

“Hafa’uh,” she said, tilting her heads back behind her. She had no doubt that the guards would stop at her command.

“Winona, is that you? You didn’t tell me you were getting in today!” 

Amanda’s voice was excited and light as she walked right up to the Starfleet Officer’s back. He saw the Vulcan guards, his eyes widening as he looked back at her and then stumbled out of her way. 

Sarek was an enemy no one wanted to have.

Pushing through the opening he’d created, Amanda walked right up to the woman and put small, pale hands on her more muscular arms. She thought of Sarek, tricking her mind into making her eyes dilate and her face soften. 

“I’m sure you are terrifically busy and I have to get back to the Embassy, but walk with me. We should schedule a time to... catch up...”

Now, Terrans in general and Starfleet officers more specifically were known for their exaggerated expressions of lust and mysoginistic power---as evidenced by the scene that had drawn her over---but Amanda always believed that the key to selling a lie was in the minor details. The way her thumbs drew across the other woman’s arms was more than enough to make her point.

[geosmin-smell]

"Societal and cultural norms are ascribed at birth based on sex, but they are not inherent characteristics of ourselves, like anatomy"

This is a fact, feminism/sociology 101 but also literally what gets women and feminist women branded "terfs". Men are rarely called out for "transphobia". Funny that.

The trans dogma preach is that biological sex is not real, that my (and other four billion of females) literal vulva vagina xx chromosomes and penises teste and xy are a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT INVENTED BY WHITE PEOPLE (to say that they often use anomaly/rare intersex conditions/intersex people as paws) and that the human specie is not sexually dimorphic lol

Intersex conditions are inter as in, in between, because there are two sexes. The exception proves theres a rule that predominates by far, 99%. (In humans) Theres no other thing besides x and y chromosomes nor any other type of gametes other than ovaries/eggs and testes/sperms. Intersex conditions are an anomaly of sexual development (like being born without legs or with three). Plus intersex conditions are sex specific, meaning females and males have different types. They are not a third sex and fight for not being seen as one. Hermaphrodites do not exist in the human specie and intersex conditions often come with other types of health complications that can often be severe and life threating.

They also have asked the trans cult to stop using their suffering and material condition as pawns to say whole ass males are women cause they say so based off x feminine steriotype.

The trans ideology believes what defines women and men are gender roles/sex steriotypes of behavior, of minds (neurosexism)

How much doublethinking do you need to write this and acknowledge gender is imposed based on sex and then defend an regressive ideology that says there are traits (clothing/color/toys/habits/hobbies preferences, behaviours, personalities, feelings, thoughts) that are incompatible with women or men thus making them the opposite sex/'gender'. Essentialy supporting gender roles but in a "woke" way.

How somone who says they are not a man anymore and its a woman instead for identifying with x stetiotype about women is not actively endorsing gender norms/steriotypes/assumptions?

You either is a gaslighter or you are not in touch with the trans community/activism at all. They do say all this but also that they trans women are biologically female, use words like female penis and girldicks and also say homosexuality (exclusive attraction to the same sex) is transphobia and immoral and that lesbians and gay men are bigots who deserve death and rape ;)

Women and men; mulheres and homens; femmes and hommes; kvinnor and män etc are words we invened to use for adult human females and males, respectively, to humanize them. We invented words and classifications to describe things because they are necessary or we simply wouldn't communicate.

Women and men mean adult human females and adult human males. It means, describes sex. Women and men does not mean a or b steriotypes.

Plus gender was something created by males/patriarchy to subjugate, violate and oppress girls and women.

so to say women are content with gender and call us "cis" is misogynistic. It implies we identify with oppression (gender) and can opt out sex based oppression (something the woman hater trans movement denies it even exists) by not identifying as women and girls anymore. It also implies we can be privileged for being female and having the feminine gender role imposed on us and we can be the oppressor, on the basis of sex, of males. Males who are the privileged sex class. The oppressor sex class. Who might feel "oppresed" for not being from an oppressed group of people (girls and women). Because they "identify" with the extremely harmful gender or aspects of the gender roles/femininity imposed on the female sex? Go to hell.

Why do trans deny their scientific/ biological sex? I understand not identifying with your assigned sex, but I can't understand denying what you are born. To put it bluntly, how can you deny being male or female if you have a penis or vagina? When I ask this, I'm called a transphobe or am accused of using science to justify transphobia. Neither are true, I'm just trying to learn and to be more understanding.

It sounds like you don’t fully understand the difference between sex and gender. That’s fair because the terms are often ambiguous and their conceptions sometimes change over time. It’s important to know that sex and gender are related but not the same. I lean into the American Psychological Association’s understanding of the terms. No single definition is perfect, but this resource provides several good descriptions that may help you. 

Sex, alone, does not translate into societal norms and expectations for men and women. For example, certain expectations of hair length, dress, occupation, and many aspects of femininity are not inherently tied to whether I was born with XX or XY chromosomes. Societal and cultural norms are ascribed at birth based on sex, but they are not inherent characteristics of ourselves, like our anatomy.

That’s where gender comes in. The reason why pink is associated with female-ness is not because of one’s genes, but because of the standards that society has ascribed to women over time (note: there’s much more to gender than superficial things such as colors but I’m simplifying for explanation’s sake). An individual can be born as a genetic male, but she may identify with and feel more comfortable expressing herself as a woman, by our cultural and societal understanding of woman-ness. 

Most people are fully content living within the scope of their ascribed gender that aligns with their sex. Of course, not everyone does. People whose gender does not align with their sex are transgender or gender non-conforming. In this sense, no one is denying their male- or female-ness. They are embracing their authentic identity rather than the one that was decided for them via societal expectations and upbringing.

If this still doesn’t make sense, I encourage you to look into the intersex experience. These people are born with an ambiguous genetic make up but parents (or doctors) often make choices for the individual when they are a baby, forcing them into a particular gendered and sexual mold. This process requires societal norms and culture to build their mold into what their parents want. If we can’t differentiate sex and gender, how are intersex people accounted for? Food for thought.