#and i was actually always pretty radical in my feminism i was never what one would call a libfem i just wasn't A RadFem because i was into

[radelenagreco]

i'm #newtoradblr i've spent so much time these past two weeks scrolling through radfem blogs i knew i had to make an actual radfem side of tumblr blog for my own sanity. the way i "peaked" is kinda funny 3-4 months ago i liked a radfem post without realizing and all of a sudden i had other radfem posts recommended to me by the algorithm and i was so annoyed because i was very anti-terf etc but for a couple days i read through a bunch of radfem blogs and it was actually such a relief to encounter FEMINISM not some watered down version of it but i felt guilty due to 5+ years of conditioning (and also because i had a nonbinary friend sitting right next to me in class as i was doing this) and i also didn't like the prominent use of the word moid? but anyway, 3 months later, i'm not sure why but the mra nature of the trans movement has grown so much more apparent to me i have like three mutuals who are trans men on my other blog and i would find myself rereading the few feminist posts i would reblog/write because these people are literally reblogging shit like "don't think like a terf. men aren't your oppressors, they're your friends/neighbors/brothers/fathers. if you think that any man could harm you you have been fooled by terf rhetoric" like actual morons/meninists. anyway two weeks ago i saw a post made by someone i knew was a radfem on my twitter tl and i don't know why i knew i was ready i went through her blog and through many others and now here i am.

[wild-wombytch]

So. I'm still new to radical feminism and still in the middle of my peak trans, so I'm trying to be careful with my critical thinking and tonight I genuinely wondered about that injunction that feminism must by default ve trans inclusive. Because does it, really? What do trans people actually bring on the table for feminism? Or are they only beneficiary/exploitative of feminism without bringing on anything in return but misogynistic anon hate? I wondered "hey, if "trans women are women" is a true statement, then what is statistically the involvement of trans women in women's rights? In abortion's rights? In thing that allegedly concern womanhood even if it doesn't concern them personally?"

Because I'm a lesbian and chances are I'll never need an abortion in my whole life. Hell, due to personal reasons, I'd have more chances to want to keep my pregnancy going if I had to have one because I might not be able handle abortion psychologically. Yet, I'm fighting for every woman to be able to have an abortion, to have that choice. Even if more likely than not it doesn't effect me as an individual as much as it effects me as a woman. Because women always have to bear the weight of all the women's rights anyway, we get little privileges in terms of individuation in comparison to men. So I wondered -genuinely, in good faith- if trans women were feeling the weight of this as well or if it was going to be full male "not my problem, don't care" entitlement. And ladies. Let me offer some more exhibit (I swear these are all the first results I had for TWO different wordings on Google):

So let's do the midnight/mushbrain quick unpacking of this :

- No stats

- No arguments, we're supposed to accept trans women benefit feminism because They Said So™

- Lots of vitriolic takes on anyone questioning it ("cruel" "appropriative of the rhetoric of women's rights" that "inflict life-threatening harm on trans people"-lol-, "narrowly interpreting a statement", "bigoted", "anti feminist", weakening feminism)

- Many of those are made by trans women and also denying biological reality [not surprising, BUT an argument of TRAs is that most trans people believe in bio sex...despite hating radfems, somehow]

- It's so focused on pushing the trans activism, trying to prove that trans women don't have male privileges (an idea in these examples often defended by...other males) and that uwu but transwomen experience misogyny too uwu + trying so hard to prove us that there's no threat to women's rights here whatsoever. Nope. None. Please, look elsewhere. That it doesn't answer my question directly.

And by that lack of answer I ironically found it. It's male centered. It's gaslighting us in believing women's rights are ok and NEED trans activism (cause women need saviors and haven't been handling feminism themselves on their own and under hatred all of these centuries, y'know /s?). Nobody cares about women's rights here. It's not based on facts, it's all based on the fact we should blindly believe what TiM say. That including them will benefit us somehow and that it's not male violence because they identify as women so they allegedly can't reproduce male violence. All that while packaging disagreement from female feminists in diverse degrees of insults and misogyny and misinformation...say again how there's no trans agenda here and how it's not like, oh, I don't know, literal male entitlement and narcissism?

Anyway, I'm too sleepy to dig further but by all means, please do if you want to add something.

Just, I'm new to this and this is already pretty exhausting. To think a lot of you have been radfems for years...istg y'all are braver than honeybadgers (complimentary). Literally all the online communities now cater to them and throw us under the bus when we raise questions. It's male privileges benefiting males over females.

Exhibit 4852 about why radfems/gender criticals are right.

[feminismisstillahatemovement]

so I was expecting to see it pinned but I can't: could you summarize why you hate feminism? I feel like it's doing a lot of good but I'm wanting to see other perspectives better of that makes sense?

I really ought to have something pinned so I don't have to keep writing new responses, but I always find there are new angles that need expressing and I never feel I've written one specific post that addresses everything.

I was a feminist myself from the age of 13, when I read Marilyn French's novel The Woman's Room, and within another 5 or 6 years I'd gotten pretty radicalized and gone out and bought my own copy of Valerie Solanas' SCUM Manifesto, along with a bunch of Riot Grrrl records. I stayed in that echo chamber for quite a few years, but increasingly started noticing things that didn't - and couldn't - make sense and asking questions of the movement that no-one within it could answer, and as soon as I did, I was out of the cult. If you try doing that yourself, you'll find the same will happen to you.

I'm at a loss to know how to summarize in a brief and easy-to-digest way the way my life and thinking has developed since then, and what the most pertinent points to relay should be.

Basically, what I'd most noticed was the disconnect between what the feminist movement claims to be and what it actually is. The more involved in feminism any person becomes, the more callous, hateful and contemptuous towards men they will become. If Feminism WAS just a movement that seeks to treat men and women equally, as it publicly claims, then it wouldn't make any sense that that should be the entirely predictable outcome every time: you'd expect the most radical feminist to be the most loving and fairminded towards every man she encounters, instead of gleefully calling for his genocide.

On top of that, the bedrock claims of feminism the past 50 years or more - Patriarchy, rape culture, pay gap, glass ceiling, etc. - are all revealed to be self-evidently false if you scrutinize them with any rigor at all. To be a feminist today you have to believe all human civilization is a conspiracy invented by men to benefit all men through the oppression and exploitation of all women, the world over. But no man knows anything about this conspiracy, which occurred in every disconnected and uncontacted corner of the globe, without a single exception, and there is no evidence or even attempt to theorize how and where this conspiracy is supposed to have taken place (the only attempt I've even heard any feminist trying is Riane Eisler's fanciful and thoroughly discredited theory of "matrifocal" cultures existing at some point in Ancient Greece, that run contrary to everything we know of the past from all historical records and archeology, as well as the rest of the world at that time).

What feminists call "The Patriarchy" is, in reality, the gendered division of labor that we (and other mammals) evolved over millions of years to best survive in a hostile natural world. To frame nature itself as an evil and oppressive human conspiracy is utterly insane and enormously destructive to millions of people's mental health and ability to connect to others.

Feminism has done, and continues to do, massive harm to relations between the sexes, because by framing every second human being on planet earth as The Oppressor, and the other half of the human race as innately abused and perpetually bedraggled Victims, it makes love between the sexes impossible, if taken at all seriously.

It's important to make the differentiation between Feminism (a far-left political ideology) and Women (half of the human race): feminism does not speak on behalf of the majority of women, and never has (the last I heard, only around 10-15% of women identify as such, depending on where you ask). You can support equal rights and opportunities for all without lending your support to the idiotic ideas of class/gender war mostly borrowed from Marxist theories, which is what most of feminism from the second wave onwards has been based on. Although I tend to avoid labels myself, many people today feel much more comfortable identifying as egalitarians rather than feminists, because it removes the century of hateful sexist baggage that word brings with it.

This is already getting quite long, so I guess I'll leave it there, but I'm happy to expand on any specific aspect of feminist belief you may want more detail on. It's easier to get into the nuts and bolts when the topic is not so broad.

[yourtoradorasextendedwarranty]

I can't in any capacity say that I'm an ally to anyone. That's not me being an asshole. That's not me being a bigot. I'm an ally to no group. I'm a friend to people. And I care about people. Someone asked me about one of my asks where I got called a transphobe and a homophobe and it reminded me about the topic in general.

Fact is I don't care what color you are. What religion you belong to. What sexuality you are. What Identity you assume. If you are not a dick to me or to people that I care about, I won't take issue with you. What's weird though is to be called homophobic when a lot of my friends are lgbt. And this is not one of those, "Well I have a black friend" moments. I legit have friends from varying walks of life. One of my best friends from college was a gay black furry. And one of my favorite past times was picking on him in playful ways. Why? Because if was always fun to see him flustered and he actually thought it was funny. Am I gay? No. I'm comfortable in the fact I'm straight. And my friend knew that.

There are going to be a lot of things that people say that I don't agree with. Does that make me hateful? No. It just means that I have my own views on things. I however understand that if I WAS hateful towards certain groups, I'd have to be bigoted against a huge number of my friends. Like my college buddy from Sri Lanka, his friend and our roommate who's have Korean half Black. Several of my ex GF's who've been bisexual. Even friends of mine who are lesbians whom I've defended in public after they have been accused of being transphobes for, and I'm not kidding, "No being willing to suck the dicks of trans women". That's not a fucking joke. And it's sick.

I've made posts about how I'm not an extremist because I'm not. Fact is, and I mean this, I should not be considered an bigot because I don't worship a movement. No one else should either. And on my blog I will cover a lot of topics. Like:

-Groomers -Gun Laws -Radical Feminism -Black Representation in TV and Movies -Race Swapping -Capitalism -Communism -Socialism -Anarchy -State and Federal Powers -Etc.

And there will always be more. I'm not transphobic. I just want kids left alone. I'm also not homophobic, but again leave kids alone. If you are an adult you can love another consenting adult. I take ZERO issue with it. And I never will take issues with it. My only focus on any of that stuff is quite literally "Let kids be kids. Let them figure out who they are without pushing them. Don't sexualize them ever." Simple rules to live by. Anything else? I'm willing to have a discussion about. Hell I've been on record losing my shit at least in one of my reblogs borderline making promises to deal with anyone who would threaten any of my friends/family irl because they are LGBT.

What many don't understand about me is that I'm an angry ginger who is actually pretty moderate on most issues. And it's only in cases where people belong to cult like mentalities that anyone can even REMOTELY consider me hateful or radical. More so when we consider that the only people I actively hate are those that actively seek to harm others. And not just in a weird way that won't do anything. I'm talking people that WILL or would enact actual violence onto people I care about. Like the FBI. Or Antifa. Or real extremist white supremacist's. Or segregationists leftists who have called some of my non white friends "house N-". I typically don't give that word any power myself and most of my friends don't, but believe me when I tell you, I'll make you look like a punk and I won't even have to touch you.

So even the notion, that I'm X type of bigot is hilarious to me. And no amount of this, "Bow to me and my ideology or you are a bigot" will make me change who I am to my friends, my family, and the people I care about. I worship no one. And I will never bow to your cult like ideals. And maybe one day, someone like the person who sent that ask will find it justifiable to kill me. Who knows. I certainly don't. All I do know is that I'm a very caring person. And a lot of the time the stuff I mean get's lost in translation. What I say might be interpreted one way by one person and another by someone else.

That's just reality. But if you can't even come to me and ask for clarification, or you just expect me to placate someone because of the group they belong to, then you are barking up the wrong tree. You are not my friend. You are not my family. And a number of you are people that would actively endorse having me end my own life, or wishing someone would end my life for you.

Why? Because you are tyrants. You believe yourselves gods and that your "moral rights" are and should be everyone's "Moral rights". You will not rule me. You will not control me. You will not make me worship you as if you were gods. I am me, and only me. And I will live me best life not just for myself, but for the people I hold dear.

[judeesill]

tbf i still find non radfem books like who cooked the last supper, invisible women, the feminine mystique, the second sex etc good recs for girls/women interested in radical feminism. sort of like an intro class to feminism in general before you focus on actual radfem literature. you can't go from 0 feminist readings to gyn/ecology overnight... it's not a given that gyns who find themselves on radblr will have read basic feminist texts

yeah that’s a really good point! I think a lot of the problems on radblr come from the fact that most women come to it without any knowledge about feminism, much less any organizing experience. that’s fine, and to some extent should be expected given the current states of the broader left (weak, disorganized, overrun with liberalism/ anarchism) and the feminist movement (functionally non-existent). That’s just the way it is across the left — I can’t tell you how many so-called socialists I know who couldn’t even tell you what class struggle means. In our case, though, I think it’s especially problematic, because a lot of women are “radicalized” by disillusionment with trans politics (or discomfort with trans people 🙃) — and without a proper grounding in feminist basics, it’s really, really easy to at best lose focus on women’s liberation, and at worst just become a reactionary. lol.

So, I totally agree that some feminism 101 is in order, so we’re all at least speaking the same language when it comes to the messier ideological debates about and within radical feminism.

I think a big part of the problem, though, is that … it’s not a given that women who find themselves on radblr will EVER read basic feminist texts, or even radical feminist ones. it’s pretty obvious from the way people talk about lesbian separatism and political lesbianism that, like, no one knows what they’re fucking talking about. and how could they, if they’re just reblogging quote posts and the same handful of master lists with a whole bunch of random pdfs with no context or commentary? hate to break it to ya, ladies, but all your faves were political lesbians. like, literally all of them. And this is actually pretty clear from the things they write!

I’ll save my takes on radblr’s fundamentally incoherent lesbian politics and the fact that separatism has NEVER been a settled question in radical feminism and the fact that political movements need GOALS and STRATEGIES and DUES BASED MEMBERSHIP ORGANIZATIONS for later. Suffice it to say, we need to stop being so content to let tumblr thought leaders pulling evocative quotes from PDFs decide what we think, and start getting serious about political education.

I don’t think every woman on radblr needs to do a PhD to be able to weigh in on things, but I do think those of us with the time/desire to make intellectual interventions, create syllabi, and/or start cohering some democratic organizational infrastructure (or at least some more discussion groups) can and should step up. Obv people are and have been doing this, but if we want to ever do anything more than snipe at each other online, we gotta get movin.

Thanks for letting me grandstand on ur ask, i just have a decade’s worth of frustration built up about this 🙃 always more to say. (like, I also don’t think we should be so into gyn/ecology at all, actually … but more on that later (-:< )

TL;DR: READ MORE! GET WISE, WOMEN! LET A THOUSAND READING GROUPS BLOOM!

[vintage-bentley]

It’s so frustrating, you kindly gave them the benefit of the doubt and pretty gently (I think) pointed out a really cruel stereotype and yet we are always wrong. They just drop the terf bomb and that’s it

Gay people get no voice. Women get no voice just drop the terf word and shut them up. I don’t even consider myself a terf just a frustrated and silenced lesbian

I really did try to be gentle and nice! My goal wasn’t to be a big mean evil terf, my goal was to kindly explain why the post had homophobic undertones. I didn’t have much hope of that goal being achieved because I know how homophobic gendies are…but you never know. I’ve had great interactions in the past with people I don’t agree with and who don’t agree with me, so it’s always worth a shot.

The fact is that most times, if you say anything about women or gay people that goes against what a gender ideologist is saying, you’ll be discredited as a “terf” even if you aren’t one (and nobody actually is. There’s no such thing as a trans exclusionary radical feminist because radfems don’t exclude trans people. Just males). It’s their go-to shield against critical thinking.

You’re so right that gay people and women get no voice…and it really is frustrating. I’m technically not a terf because I’m not a radfem (I consider myself radfem adjacent, I don’t feel comfortable subscribing to a particular ideology)…but even before I started looking into gender criticism and radical feminism, I felt like I was being silenced as both a woman and homosexual. It felt like nothing I said mattered unless I used the approved language and read the approved scripts. I couldn’t even be openly homosexual—that’s “terfy”.

Like I said, the reason I’m talking about this so much isn’t because of a singular fandom post. That singular fandom post just happens to be a really good example of an attitude towards women and homosexuals that I’ve been observing for a while now. And it’s really frustrating to see it over and over again, women and homosexuals essentially being told “shut up, your thoughts mean nothing if you don’t agree with me”. Because it’s “listen to and learn from minorities/marginalised groups”…until it’s gays and women.

[venusiansage]

new to radblr <3

so! i have always aligned with radical feminism when it came to issues like sex “work” and women’s oppression in general. however, i never sought out community because i avoided anything that could be seen as “TERF-y” with a ten foot pole.

it turns out that blindly listening to the internet morality police about a group of people without ever actually considering their arguments is pretty stupid and useless. i started reading what “terfs” had to say and…it was the most reasonable shit ever. the most logical shit ever. the most factual shit ever. like these are the alleged evil, hateful people? that’s when i was like Ruh Roh Raggy.

i never in a million years thought i would agree with gender critical people or become one myself…i was always a good little internet warrior who did whatever the status quo considered to be Good and Right. i always thought that radical feminists were right about everything except for trans people…turns out y’all were right about everything, period.

i am not transphobic, if you use any definition of transphobia that actually makes sense. what i am is against anything that comes in the way of women’s liberation. and unfortunately many parts of the trans movement, especially denying sex and reducing womanhood to gender stereotypes, does exactly that.

so yeah. hi i guess😭 welcome to my new radfem sideblog. needed a place to store all these amazing resources from intelligent women on the internet. y’all rock.

[auroraapple22]

Also, if you're trying to get MORE women on board with radical feminism or just feminism in general (which as a radfem is what you should be doing in interest of dismantling the patriarchy,) telling them that every single man they have met or will ever meet, every man that's ever lived, is garbage and to save yourself and be a true feminist, you should change your sexual orientation and only have relationships with women and if you don't, you're not a real feminist.

Like?? Number one, sexual orientation isn't a choice, duh. Number two, you are alienating so many women when you say shit like that. Lmfao, I love a lot of radfem ideology, but I saw a post the other day saying feminists only love the right kind of woman. The "radfems" who hold these beliefs aren't actually feminists at all because they want women to deny their own sexual orientation and also tell them that every man, even their own fathers, are evil and hate all women. That's a pretty hard sell if you've had an actually good father.

My mom was extremely emotionally abusive towards me my whole life and fucked me up severely. My dad was really young when I was born and he disappeared, abandoned his own family and entire life for five years. Yeah, that is terrible, but he was only 18 and to be real, he was right when he told my mom she shouldn't have a child. She never should have had children because she's selfish and vindictive and abusive.

So I didn't meet my father until I was 5 years old, but he very much so stepped up to the plate after that. He tried to get full custody of me but unfortunately he was a man who had given away all parental rights when he was a scared 18 yr old kid. I don't speak to my mother anymore but my dad and I talk all the time.

My father and all other men have been socialized in a society that brainwashes everyone from the time they're born with perfectly curated propaganda that tells them society is a certain way and to live in it, you behave like this. Any man who starts to wake up and tries to change the way he thinks about and treats women deserves a little bit of credit. They must've met someone who opened their mind a little bit, or read something or whatever. It snapped them out of it long enough to get them to start waking up.

But there's plenty of people who live in places where it is unlikely they will have anyone close to them that could open their eyes to the way men are socialized to oppress women and subconsciously behave as though they are better. And are those people really at fault for falling victim to the propaganda machine that is so strong and so advanced and so prevalent?

It's not all socialization, plenty of men get the same socialization and take it much further and are virulent in their hatred of the female sex. But don't tell me that every single man truly hates the female sex at their core. Their minds have just been developed in such a way that they may act like they do hate women just by acting like a normal, regular run of the mill man.

Just because someone does something wrong and makes a mistake, like my dad disappearing off the face of the Earth until I was 5 years old, doesn't make them irredeemable forever. My dad abandoned my mom when she was pregnant with me and he was a bad father for that until he made up for it and still is trying to make up for it to this day.

I thank God to have a Dad like mine because if he never came back into my life and I was raised solely by my psychotic mother, I don't even want to think about what kind of person I would be today. He couldn't take me out of her household completely for legal reasons, but with all the time he was able to spend with me, he did his absolute best to make me feel like a loved, valuable, worthwhile person.

He was always trying to give me advice for how to cope with abuse and remind me that it wasn't my fault. I still suffered a lot in my childhood, and his advice didn't help me feel that much better at the time. But as an adult, when all his wise words sank in, it saved my life. I never would have learned how to love myself if no one in my childhood told me I was lovable. Without my dad coming back, that's exactly what would have happened.

He made some bad choices but lucky for me, I have a good father now. He will force me to let him help me even if I try to refuse it. I told him I was hurting for money a bit, which he is too, he's not a rich guy, and he sent me $300 to my PayPal which I told him he didn't have to do.

My mom is an abusive piece of shit but I'm a radfem because I really love women. I often do not feel accepted by the radfem community because I'm a heterosexual woman who really believes the only hope we have to actually accomplish the goals of feminism is through love, hope, understanding and compassion. If we really believe all men are evil and will stay that way forever, why bother being a feminist? Feminism is about changing the world for the better and building a brighter future for women and girls, so if you believe no man is capable of change, then the goal of feminism is moot. A world without any men at all would lead to a world without women and girls, too.

So my message to my fellow radfems is love your fellow woman regardless of their sexual orientation because you're going to need them and you should want them on your side to accomplish the goal of feminism, dismantling the patriarchy.

some women do not have any patience for abused women and women in abusive situations, and I see it on radblr all the time. it’s unfortunate. what gets me is that they’re very willing to dissect every decision the abused woman made, but seem unwilling to believe in the intentions of his actions. women should know the red flags, but men aren’t responsible for the red flags, those just happen spontaneously. she shouldn’t have trusted him, but anything that happened that gained her trust was a spontaneous phenomenon not something he did intentionally. it’s as if up until the moment of abuse, he’s an amorphous blob who just accidentally explodes into abuse. he’s featureless, but his arms swing randomly. her money ends up in his account due to his oafishness, not insidiousness. when they started dating, he must have been a passive actor - not perusing her with the specific hopes of dominating her once all opportunities align.

Men are responsible for their actions, and not only their abusive actions. They’re responsible for the roses they send, too.

[meeda]

long ramble about idk.. politics?

re: that last post, it got me thinking about the evolution of my own beliefs overtime, starting from maybe 2012 ish when I was a teenager and a pretty stereotypical left liberal sjw type. I mean most of it is still the same shit I believe today, if not a little more naive and annoying about it. I was also a raging “feminazi”, as it was called back in the day, and as many a teenage boy on the internet would label me as because I had the radical notion that women are people

I think the turning point in 2014 (if you know you know) happened as a result of overcorrecting my sjw-ness. Thinking that I was somehow “cringe” for believing in the things I did, in the manner of which I did. Thinking hey, maybe social justice and feminism has gone too far actually. Thinking hmm, maybe men have it rough too actually, and it’s all feminism’s fault. then discovering other people that thought the way I did.

Despite being knee deep in anti sjw, anti feminism, mra nonsense, I still retained most of my core beliefs. I never actually called myself anti feminist because I knew that in my heart I still supported “real feminism” (which ironically enough included men’s issues). I didn’t fall for the alt right pipeline because i have always supported lgbtq rights and racial equality. I’ve always been religiously agnostic, and I never cared for religious extremism.

Turning point #2 happened shortly after the blm movement started gaining traction. It kinda snapped me out of everything and brought me back to reality, and it also showed me the true colors of many of the anti sjw bloggers i followed. because now the mask was off, and they started becoming full on racist. It was embarrassing and I started to become ashamed that I ever associated myself with people like that.

enter the trump era. by this point i was already out of the anti sjw echo chamber and boy oh boy was i glad because this mask off moment just became a whole face transplant. no emotion could compare to what i felt seeing the beliefs I once entertained suddenly morph into the alt right movement and qanon. It felt like i dodged a bullet.

my relationship with feminism was and is complicated. I was born, raised, and socialized as female. i think it’s only natural that i feel very strongly about female centered issues. Like I mentioned before i was a naive but staunch feminist as a teenager. I remember the teacher asking a show of hands who here identifies as a feminist. I was only one of three people, in a class of majority females, that raised their hand. I remember telling my friend at the time (who, in retrospect, was probably a closeted transwoman) that they’re a fool for wishing they were born female because why on earth would you ever want to be a woman in a violently patriarchal society.

to me, the allure of anti feminism was the chance to redeem myself for harboring misandrist beliefs and not seeing things from a male perspective. but it was also the opportunity to question my own beliefs instead of blindly believing what i, as an afab, am “supposed” to believe. This overcorrection, years later, swung to the other end of the horseshoe when i rediscovered radical feminism in 2021. Prior to that moment I’ve always looked at rad feminism with disdain, even when i was still a so called “feminazi”. They were too extreme for me. It didn’t help when things like gender critical and trans exclusionary feminism were on the rise as well, which contradict not only my core beliefs but my existence. but there was something about it, something that reminded me of the same feeling i had when i discovered anti feminism. Like i was discovering forbidden knowledge. It was time to dip my toes in.

I orbited radfem circles for awhile to try to enlighten myself but it didn’t take long for me to realize that something felt wrong. It felt less like I was trying to “see other perspectives” and more like I was doomscrolling. Bad news after bad news after bad news. It almost felt like they were having a competition for who could share the worst injustices towards women. I did learn some actually useful things, like the detriments of the adult entertainment and sex industry. How “choice feminism” only benefits the patriarchy. The evolution of contraceptives. But the bitterness, the lack of empathy, the tone deafness. The last straw for me was when i saw a terf gleefully express their joy about the murder of brianna ghey, and said they wished it happened more often. It was time to get out of there.

This decade has been a roller coaster for my personal beliefs, but I think for the most part, my core beliefs have stayed the same. I still care about humanity deeply. As juvenile as it feels to say, I do just want things to be better for everyone. None of us asked to be born. Not one of us. Literally we’re all here against our will and we had 0 say on the circumstances of our birth. But we’re here, and we’re here together. The least we can do is help one another.

[rainglade]

The insult "social justice warrior" is one I've always found interesting.

If you heard the term out of context and didn't know its meaning, it sounds pretty neat! Like a warrior? For justice? Sounds pretty fierce.

It kind of reminds me of the term "Radical Feminist," where the term sounds pretty cool (in a good way) but in reality it just refers to TERFs (transphobic bigots).

"Social justice warrior" was initially used as an insult for - in my opinion - valid reasons. It was used against people who did or said performative things in the name of allyship, but ended up being tone-deaf, ineffective, and even harmful. One of those forms is what some refer to as the "white savior complex," for example. These things just ended up being, for lack of a better word, cringe.

Overall, these people harmed and hindered progress indirectly by creating an aversion to speaking up against hate and making advocacy seem "uncool."

Nowadays, though, I feel like the meaning has changed. Although the original definition still holds true, it has morphed into a term that bigots generally use to refer to people who disagree with them. It became the thing that it seemed to be originally, a reference to anti-racists, queer empowerment, feminism, disability advocacy, etc.

Unfortunately, the use of it as an insult never actually changed, so now the effect of it is inherently harmful by making actual activism and calls for progress seem "cringey" and uncool.

I kinda wish that it wasn't the case, or that while the meaning changed, the symbolism of the word changed too. Maybe it will always stay as an insult, or just a dismissive method of putting down progress and positivity. Although there isn't a solution to the term itself, what is important is reducing the impact of it. I know personally I, like most others, were exposed to the term through the internet.

Perhaps young minds shouldn't be exposed to an environment that references progress and anti-hate as uncool in the first place?

[feminismisstillahatemovement]

Also you seem to say that women are /more/ privileged that men (in westernized societies), not equally so, and the only way I can interpret it is through logic of 'Dangerous jobs are worked almost entirely by men AND in military conflicts it is men who are sent to fight so they have higher risk of death, also men are pressured to always be pragmatic and provide everything whereas the only real demand for women is to cook children and birth food and have sex'. Like, is this something along these lines? Because I often hear men say they'd much rather life a "comfy" less effort life like women and be forgiven for emotional weaknesses or lacking a good job - which confuses me a lot because it feels very depressing and insulting for me as a human being to be seen as 'you don't have to be smart or put effort, just look pretty and do bare minimum'... But I also often hear "you don't count because you are autistic and live in 2nd world country". But if majority of women are CONTENT and it is /minority/ who'd like to work traditionally male jobs or have 'pride' in regards of emotional maturity and intellect - what REALLY happened in western societies where women have ok amount of rights for the past few decades? Did feminists just sorta... spoke for majority and it snowballed? Because to think of it, it doesn't make logical sense for feminists to demand that women LOSE "comfort" and face HIGHER standards for accomplishments, maturity, physical proves, risks for life, etc. Maybe I'm misanthropic but typically humans don't abandon BENEFITS based on honour alone - only singular anomaly humans do. Or gamers, when they want to play harder mode for pride. Was it all REALLY just to, in fact, cover their comfort by claiming this comfort is oppression? (one more time, I speak about 1st world countries specifically (ironically where feminism is the strongest), my neighbour countries are special hell for women)

"you seem to say that women are more privileged that men (in westernized societies), not equally so"

Women in western democracies have every legal right that men in western democracies have and many additional allowances and special protections on top: for instance, women are exempt from military conscription, have far more funding devoted to their healthcare, are routinely given 60% less prison time for the same offences as men, etcetera etcetera. It's a long list. This is not something I'm angry about, or even seek to radically change: it's just a fact of reality that flies in the face of the fundamental premise of the feminist narrative but which needs to be openly acknowledged to understand the world in which we live and make any progress as a species.

“But if majority of women are CONTENT and it is /minority/ who'd like to work traditionally male jobs or have 'pride' in regards of emotional maturity and intellect - what REALLY happened in western societies where women have ok amount of rights for the past few decades? ”

A far larger number of women self-report being NOT content today than when asked 60, 70 - 100 years ago.

“Did feminists just sorta... spoke for majority and it snowballed? “

Feminism has never spoken for the majority of women. It has done a fantastic job of infiltrating and taking over education and media, where it gets to tell women they should be angry and unhappy all the time, but there’s still a great difference between feminists (adherents of a conspiracy theory-based political movement) and women (every second human being on planet earth), and if I remember rightly it’s only about 14% of women who identify as being feminist. The power they wield is far out of proportion to the number of people they actually represent.

"typically humans don't abandon BENEFITS based on honour alone"

There is no honour in feminist thought...

I think it might help you if I lay out how I see our recent history in this regard, as it may differ from the mainstream narrative you will have been indoctrinated with:

Feminism as an actual movement emerged out of the rapidly expanding caste of middle class women living unprecedentedly safe, comfortable and educated existences in the late 19th century, who had cooks to cook their food, nannies to look after their children, housemaids to clean up their houses, and well-to-do fathers or husbands to buy them everything they needed. Unlike the far larger mass of poor working class women, they no longer had work to occupy their time and so they, understandably, grew bored and began to want to have more influence in their community for themselves and other (middle class) women. They, somewhat peculiarly, started to see the burdens and responsibilities their brothers/husbands/fathers were expected to take on as a kind of treat - a privilege being kept from them - seeing jobs as a fun adventure of some kind, rather than the monotonous wage-slavery they have always been for the vast majority of the human race. The tasks these women selected to take on were not the back-breaking labor of coal mines, tree-felling, fishing vessels or construction sites, but light, comfortable and often part-time office duties, organising meetings to police and lecture others, all while demanding special treatment for being women. Which set up the blueprint for all feminist demands to come: all the rights, none of the responsibilities.

Things grumbled along in this way for decades, until the feminist movement (as well as the university system as a whole) was infiltrated and largely taken over by the Marxists in the late 1960s/early 1970s. The main goal of all Marxist-infiltrated movements in the west is to sow discord and create divisions in the populace. This led to the “intersectionalist” model of society, in which EVERYONE but straight white men are told from birth that they are an oppressed underclass who must march in the streets, scream abuse at strangers and feel glee at the suffering of all others outside of their in-group. And that largely explains the madness of today.

“it doesn't make logical sense for feminists to demand that women LOSE "comfort" and face HIGHER standards for accomplishments, maturity, physical proves, risks for life, etc”

For the reasons stated above, the modern (1970s-onwards) feminist movement itself doesn’t primarily care about “women”, only destroying whole families and healthy relationships between the sexes in the west - along with any woman who speaks out against whatever is its present agenda; There’s no sense in the way modern feminism eagerly championed allowing biological males into female spaces and sports and everything else, or how quickly it destroyed and silenced all the old school feminist women who spoke out against it.

I guess the fundamental point I’m making here is modern feminism is a political force entirely separate from women as a class, who, like all the other identity politics movements, it uses only as a human shield to deflect criticism of the agenda it is actually pursuing.

[fierceawakening]

Here’s the thing about the fascism though: Lots of well known terfs are allying pretty openly with fascists, though. That’s part of why I asked in my OP what the actual endgame is. Nazis are showing up at your rallies, and your leaders, at least, seem not to be very keen on driving them off. That’s deeply concerning to me.

What the Nazis seem to believe is “women are weak and fragile and need to be protected so they can live as their proper complements to strong men.”

Some people on my side of the debate have started to think terfs believe the same thing.

That the idea that trans women peeing near us is threatening (I’ve peed next to one. She used a stall same as me. We washed our hands at nearby sinks and then left.) is the idea that women are fragile, fainting flowers who need male protection.

I’m not sure I agree terfs think this. Radical feminism has always been, it seemed to me from studying it, about the idea of building a self sufficient society without men. I don’t think this makes much sense, but I don’t think it’s fundamentally a fascist yearning for rigid gender roles. Or a belief that women are fundamentally less capable.

What does surprise me though is the way these alliances seem to keep happening, and the way some people seem to ignore them.

I don’t think people should punch terfs. I’ve never liked that meme. But my suspicion is that the thought process is “boy, lots of fascists hang around these people. That means they’re likely also fascists, as only a fash hangs out with a fash. Fascists should be punched. (Not sure how long you’ve been on tumblr, but it was a fad around the time of Trump’s inauguration to spread memes shaming anyone not willing to punch fascists for any reason as milquetoast liberals.) Therefore, I am cool and punch terfs!”

I do not actually find this very cool. Punching people you disagree with typically only solidifies their belief that you are persecuting them, and people who feel persecuted are notorious for thinking they’re justified in doing things they’d otherwise recognize as cruel and an overreaction.

(More later.)

Weird question of the day: so what is terfs’ actual endgame?

Like I know the middle game is “everyone identifies with their assigned sex and no one modifies their body in ways that alter secondary sex characteristics.” But then what?

They say they’re feminists, so that would imply the actual endgame isn’t just “the destruction of the transcult” but the end of patriarchy.

But how is everyone identifying with their asab and not modifying their body supposed to do that?

It’s very Underpants Gnomes.

Recruit trans people who doubt.

Destroy the transcult!

…..

End patriarchy!

?????

[limeade-l3sbian]

Hello, sorry for using your inbox as some kind of confessional, just wanted to share that when I started reading radfem theory, I lost one friend who was very very dear to me, she was my best friend who knew me for years, she's NB, and was immediately sure and decided to cut any relationship with me after I said boys can wear dresses without being told they're girls. At that moment I felt really sad and lonely and questioned myself if reading and sharing my thoughts on feminism was worth the possibility of being rejected by other friends...

Now, months later, I kept sharing my thoughts and other women's thoughts and experiences, and realized many of the girls and women I already know actually share those views... Even when they had never said anything about it. Suddenly I realized I wasn't alone, and I saw more and more women getting into a more radical way of thinking after being literally exposed to one (1) piece of literature or story, we just know, we all know but sometimes we're too afraid to speak up.

Similar situation with my friend in high school. It always sucks just from a human standpoint to lose a friend and I'm sorry that's for things ended, but I am glad you found the strength to express your opinions and take initiative with your narrative 💜

I told another gyn around here recently that she needed to keep writing her opinions, stories, whatever she wanted bc she had a real gift for it and I honestly extend that sentiment towards you as well anon. You have a good flow in the way you express your hope at the end of your ask and if you're not already more active with writing, you should be!

(oh and don't worry about using my inbox as a confessional lmao. that's pretty much what it is at this point lol 💜💜)

[olderthannetfic]

I wanted to ask you about radical feminism (TERF-ism & TIRF-ism). Radical feminism never seemed to be *necessarily* some of the really bad things that people on this blog say it is. For instance, everything roach-works says it is in an earlier post. There are at least some people I've read who are part of the movement of radical feminism (whether or not they would self-identify as that) and who really don't espouse any of the views in roach-works comments. (1/2) Thinking of the list of points

--

From nothorses - the people I’ve read (e.g. Iris Marion Young) *do* espouse many of these, but not so in a way that has to lead to these more extreme views that roach-works mentioned. One may not agree with them but they don’t seem so bad to me? Are they? Am I a terrible person? It disturbs me to hear something with the word 'feminism' in it denigrated so harshly, and it always seems to me like the views get mixed up with the worst half of the people who believe in them. (2/2)

(Appendix...) I feel there's a lot of truth in SOME of the views that nothorses correctly ascribes (i. m. o.) to radical feminists, in particular: "Women are all miserable with their bodies, cursed with the pressure to reproduce and have sex with men. ... miserable with their genders, forced as they are to ensure the overwhelming and constant suffering that is patriarchy." Is it just that the "all" makes the views too strong? Or is there, for critics, a more fundamental problem I'm missing?

I've seen some much nicer, saner people self-describe as radical feminists and object strenuously to how I see radfems... However, all of them still kept talking about porn in terms that only make sense if you're talking about the evils of the mainstream industry, and moreso the mainstream industry of the 1970s (which is when a lot of this rhetoric comes from). And yet this attitude gets over-applied to porn in general, regardless of medium, working conditions, or level of economic necessity involved in its creation.

The attitudes I think are pretty much universal in this ideology, and universally shitty, come out when they're confronted with fsub content by and for women.

Yeah, yeah, "mommy porn". I'm not saying Fifty Shades of Grey is well written or not kind of embarrassing, but when people start bleating about how confused womenfolk will get bad ideas from it, you should be suspicious, whether they're radfems or fundies.

"The hot billionaire falls in love with me for no reason and does all the work to make sex hot while I lie there like a dead fish" is a common fantasy. It really doesn't say anything about the woman in question, nor does it make the patriarchy stronger.

The big one to look for from nothorses list is #5:

Sex, in particular, is more often exploitative than not. Only some kinds of sex are not exploitative. Many kinds of sex that we think are consensual, or that people say are consensual, are either rape or proto-rape.

This is saying "BDSM is rape", which is something that most radfems do think once you scratch the surface. Rape roleplay is also rape and furthering the patriarchy.

Even if they make some small allowance for informed adults doing BDSM in some strict environment with specific rules, show them 50SoG and women's right to choose goes out the window. Sure, the relationship in the book looks pretty unhealthy, at least at the beginning, but the thing being criticized is readers' right to choose.

Even the radfems who support butchness and don't think butch women are gender traitors will usually be assholes over trashy wank material like 50SoG.

And once you open the door to "your libido is political", you've started down a very dark road that leads to a bunch of naturally kinky tumblr teens sitting in their bedrooms, staring at their computer screens, and wondering if they're a future rapist because they like a/b/o or sex pollen or something.

--

I get where you're coming from. Maybe you're in a context where most women are pretty miserable. But I'm not. I was raised by a mother who thought diets were stupid and telling your daughter what you think of her body is active child abuse.

Being a victim of abuse, including "you're too fat" type abuse, is neither inherent nor unique to women. Sure, women tend to be under the microscope, but so are lots of people.

As an upper middle class anglo white woman in the US and moreover as a woman who looks fairly conventionally femme even with my very hairy legs (much to my annoyance), I honestly don't experience that much policing. I already, through no fault and certainly no merit of my own, conform reasonably well to the "neutral" standard of white womanhood. My male equivalent would be the most unmarked in the US, but I'm only a little marked.

What this gender-obsessed analysis misses is that it's not about womanhood: it's about failing to be the "neutral" default. Poor people fail. Black people fail. Asian people fail. Disabled people fail. At least in the US. In Japan, third generation Korean-Japanese fail. Burakumin fail despite being ethnically Japanese due to having been a separate caste for centuries.

"Intersectionality" on social media tends to get used as miserypoker: the speaker with the most listed oppressions wins the argument and you should signal boost them or you're a bad person.

In actuality, what intersectionality means is recognizing that gender and sex may sometimes just not be very important in a given person's life if they experience enough privilege or if, conversely, they have such a profound lack of privilege elsewhere that this other identity overshadows gender in terms of their lived experience.

Radfem ideology says I must prioritize Woman out of my many identities. But, in reality, I feel more kinship with bisexual men than with lesbian women. I feel more kinship with kinky straight people than with bisexuals who want AO3 and pride parades to be nothing but g-rated hand holding.

--

I get that it's upsetting for people to be railing against something called "feminism", but that's like saying that disliking the Jews for Jesus makes you antisemitic. The whole point is that a lot of people feel that radical feminism is pretty anti-woman in many of its core values.

I don't think you're a bad person. I do think that some of the underpinnings of radfem ideology lead directly to sensitive people who are concerned about such things wondering if they are.

[aropinions]

So What Is Exclusionism, Anyway?

As I've looked through inclusionist circles, I've come to a startling realization that most of them have an extremely skewed understanding of what exclusionism is (along with its various offshoots, subtypes, and related beliefs). They equate it to hatred of whatever group is being excluded, and they don't think people part of the excluded group could ever support exclusionism.

So, I've decided to write a long post to clear up some of those misconceptions. This post is mainly targeted to inclusionists and people wondering where they stand on the inclus/exclus sides of various types of discourse, but if you're exclusionist already, please feel free to reblog or boost it. <3 Thanks in advance for reading!

I'll start by introducing myself. Hi, I'm Ivy, or at least that's what I go by on here. I am a heterosexual, aromantic female. I am neurodivergent (ADHD, so forgive me if I ramble or write in a scatterbrained way) and have several other mental illnesses that I don't wish to talk about online. I do not have gender dysphoria, but I do not "feel feminine," and my personality has been described as rather masculine. In fact, many people in the inclusionist trans community have tried to convince me that I'm nonbinary because I don't feel a strong connection to a female gender, and I'll talk about that more later in this post.

I'm going to put all my relevant discourse opinions on the table right now. (In the next paragraph, I'm going to explain what all these labels actually mean and why they don't automatically make someone a horrible person.) Contrary to popular belief, I am not a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF), an aphobe, a transphobe, or a bigot. I am ace-exclusionist, aro-exclusionist, trans-exclusionist, transmedicalist, pro-LGB, and gender-critical.

Now here's the fun part. Bear with me -- we're about to debunk the myths about these opinions, explain each term's real definition, and talk about some of the reasoning behind the beliefs.

Exclusionism, as a blanket term, is the belief that gatekeeping is necessary to make any group or community meaningful and safe. Various types of exclusionists fight against the lumping together of various marginalized identities or groups, because they believe that letting different types of people into spaces meant for more specific groups will detract from the safety and functionality of those spaces. They do not hate the groups they are excluding, and they typically want to exclude both ways. For example, ace exclusionists don't want allosexual LGBT let into ace spaces any more than they want asexuals let into LGBT spaces. Many exclusionists in LGBT discourse support the exclusion of groups that they themselves are part of, because in addition to the idea that it's harmful to the main LGBT community to lump them into it, they also think their group deserves its own recognition as a separate thing from the LGBT community. Exclusionism is not hatred.

Time to get into more specific terms. Let's start pretty simple, with truscum and transmeds. Someone who is truscum believes that people must have dysphoria to be trans. Someone who is transmedicalist believes that gender dysphoria is a mental disorder, and that transness is a medical condition synonymous with gender dysphoria. All transmeds are truscum, but not all truscum are transmeds. Most truscums and transmeds are against MOGAI, neopronouns, gender microlabels (e.g. genderflux or demiboy), and xenogenders. Most truscums believe in nonbinary people. There are some transmeds who don't believe nonbinary dysphoria is real, but they're not the majority.

The direct opposite of truscum and transmed is "tucute," which denotes a belief that dysphoria is not required to be transgender and gender identity is completely unrelated to biological sex or medical disorders/conditions. Tucutes also generally support MOGAI, xenogenders, neurogenders, microlabels, and neopronouns.

Next, we have bio-essentialism. Bio-essentialism is the belief that oppression is based on biological sex, not gender identity, and that identifying as a different gender than your birth sex doesn't automatically mean you are oppressed. This doesn't necessarily mean bio-essentialists believe that gender doesn't exist or that you can't identify as whatever you want, just that your social oppression is based off your biological sex. Not all bio-essentialists are truscum or transmeds, but most are. Bio-essentialists prominently use the terms "male" and "female" to describe biological sex rather than gender identity, and non-radical ones will use "man" and "woman" as blanket terms that include transmen and transwomen while maintaining "male" and "female" as words for biological sex only.

Then, we have the big bad term, TERF. I've seen a lot of people misuse the TERF label, so I'm going to try to clarify its actual meaning. The acronym stands for "trans-exclusionary radical feminist." It's important to break that down into two main parts -- TE and RF -- because trans-exclusionists are often called TERFs when most of them don't fit the "RF" part of the acronym at all.

Trans-exclusionism (TE) means that you believe transgender issues/discourse/activism should be separated from LGB issues/discourse/activism because they are fundamentally different. L, G and B all have one thing in common: being attracted to people of the same sex as you. T is about someone's gender, not their sexual orientation, so trans-exclusionists believe that the LGB and the T should not be lumped into the same community. It doesn't mean they think trans people deserve less respect or are not real. Most trans-exclusionists are also truscum or transmedicalist, but not all are. Many trans-exclusionists who are also feminists are gender-critical, but not all are. Pro-LGB is a synonym of trans-exclusionist, but in my experience, people who describe themselves as "pro-LGB" are more likely to also be gender-critical than those who identify themselves as "trans-exclusionist."

Radical feminism (RF) is a subset of feminism that -- in addition to general feminist beliefs -- is anti-porn, anti-kink, against the makeup industry, and very often openly misandrist. Radical feminists are not always trans-exclusionist, and trans-exclusionists are not always radical feminists (in fact, most aren't). Most radfems are anti-capitalist, and all are against pink capitalism and rainbow capitalism (the commercialization of feminist ideas, gay rights, etc.) Most radfems are truscum or transmedicalist, but not all are.

All TERFs are also gender-critical. "Gender-critical" people are bio-essentialist, but they go a step further to say that gender identity is a meaningless term, and that biological sex is the sole basis of oppression. However, one can be gender-critical and still support trans people if one is a transmedicalist. GC transmeds believe that trans people are still oppressed in society according to their biological sex, not their gender identity, but that social/physical transitioning is acceptable as a treatment for the mental disorder known as gender dysphoria.

Neither trans-exclusionism nor radical feminism is inherently transphobic or hateful toward transgender people. To differentiate a regular trans-exclusionist from a TERF, ask yourself if the person fits the radfem beliefs outlined above. If not, they aren't a TERF.

Now that all of that is covered, we can talk about the last couple types of exclusionism I want to touch on -- asexual exclusionism and aromantic exclusionism. These almost always come together as a package called aro/ace-exclusionism or aspec-exclusionism, but it is technically possible to be ace-exclusionist and not aro-exclusionist (or vice versa), though I've never personally met someone with such beliefs. Aspec-exclusionists believe that aspec people should not be included in the LGBT community because the lack of sexual or romantic attraction is a completely separate struggle and involves separate experiences than having attractions that exist, but are not heterosexual. Some more extreme aro/ace exclusionists strongly gatekeep aromanticism and asexuality. These ones don't believe in microlabels on the "aro spectrum" or "ace spectrum" such as demisexual or grayromantic. They maintain the belief that if someone has sexual attraction (regardless of whether they actually pursue people sexually) then they are not asexual, and if someone feels romantic attraction at all (even if they don't pursue romantic relationships) they are not aromantic.

Aro/ace-exclusionists, regardless of their beliefs on aromantic and asexual spectrums or microlabels, are not inherently aphobic. They only want aromanticism and asexuality to be separated from the rest of the LGB or LGBT community, and treated as their own distinct identities.

I hope this post was informative, and if anyone has feedback on anything I should edit, they should let me know in replies. Regardless of your beliefs, if you actually read this whole post or even just scrolled to the bottom, I'd like to offer a sincere thanks for bearing with me thus far. If you are an inclusionist or otherwise disagree with the things in the post, but you read it anyway, I have a lot of respect for your willingness to hear opinions other than yours rather than blindly blocking out everything you disagree with.

No matter who you are, I hope you have a great day. <3

[politicallyinvolvedpandabear]

Intro

Welcome to my blog. This is a place for me to reblog my favorite posts, engage with people, and offer some of my own opinions. In the past I had certain thoughts about certain posts (especially some of the ones I loved, which I have bookmarked) but I didn’t have the time to respond or it wouldn’t look good for me to start reblogging from tHe hOrrIbLe eVIL TERVES. This place is a safe space for me to interact with that content, and I won’t out anyone who interacts with me. I don’t have any stalkers so I don’t think anyone I know will find me, but in the event that you do, please mind your own business or pretend you didn’t see this, lol. (Not that I’m doing anything bad at all by having opinions.) I’m refraining from putting too much identifiable content but anyway. I love women and always will. 

Details on my stances below the cut:

Name: Panda bear (I picked this name ‘cuz I think pandas are cute)

Sex: Female 

Sexuality: Lesbian (female homosexual, aka woman who loves and is attracted to other women EXCLUSIVELY)

Point one: I don’t think you have to be a lesbian to support other women or want them to be happy. I think there are actually very few lesbians in the world, which is fine (I can’t control anyone else’s sexuality and wouldn’t want anyone to control mine). Lesbians are not attracted to men and are the only sexuality that fully excludes them. This gives me an edge whenever I heavily criticize men (I can choose to cut them out of my life pretty easily), but I don’t think lesbians are superior to other women or anything. Lesbians are just female homosexuals; we exist like that. As such, I don’t believe in political lesbians

Point two: When I introduce myself to people, I almost never ever bring up my sexuality, but I do it here because just like being female means you have certain experiences and understand certain things, so does being a lesbian. I like other lesbians and love hearing from them. I’m definitely not the spokesperson for all lesbians at all, but I think I’d like to use my own voice (with my own unique experiences) and speak up about them. Me laying this out means you know where I’m coming from, as someone who has no attraction to men. 

Point three: No bi lesbian nonsense. I support lesbians and I support bi people. I don’t support two identities being haphazardly smashed together to validate an attraction to men (or ”non-men”). Women are already expected to be attracted to men and I fought that heteronormativity and I won. Don’t undo other people’s work by undermining what it means to be a lesbian (by attaching qualifiers to it) and going Frankenstein’s monster on it. You either are the label or not: you don’t just identify as something to actually become it. 

Point four: My sexuality is slightly more complicated than the typical lesbian (not in terms of emotional depth/connection but in terms of my actual attraction and when it manifests itself). Since this isn’t a dating site, I won’t go into this unless asked. Know that I sympathize with the A in LGTQIA though, even though my primary alignment is with LGB. (Please don’t call me queer.) 

Age: in my early 20s 

Political stances:

Pro-female. I am for radical feminism, women’s rights, female separatism, and so on. Women and girls are my top priority not only because I love them and am one, but because I genuinely want them to have a happy life, especially because most of them didn’t do anything wrong. “Leave no woman behind” is a good motto to me though. If it hurts women, it has to go

You’re probably wondering if I’m a “terf”. No, I am not. I am cis: I’ve never experienced dysphoria (embarrassment/discomfort/slight shame about my body, yes, but every woman experiences that), but I don’t think being trans is exactly bad. I’ve always thought that if you’re not hurting anyone, then who you are/how you choose to present is no one else’s business. This, however, disqualifies all the creeps who are BULLDOZING women’s rights (their language, ability to have female only spaces, and ability to speak about their own experiences among others who understand without outsiders or judgment/cries about exclusivity). Don’t even talk to me about the cotton ceiling and all the weird conversion therapy/shaming rhetoric. I’ll say this now so I don’t get asked: I do not like dick and I never will. Please do not try to force or guilt/shame me into doing anything I don’t like: that’s rape culture and that’s incredibly creepy, horrible, and evil. Do I believe trans women are women? Not really, that’s why they’re “trans”. That’s the point I think: that’s why you transitioned. I don’t have to be attracted to you or like you to want you to be respected/have a good life, so if you treat me with respect, I’ll do the same to you. Not being able to define “woman” is bad though, and I’m definitely not really interested in people who identify out of womanhood. Lack of interest doesn’t mean hate. I think gender non-conforming women are awesome and they can be however or whatever they want without needing to deny their own sex. Since I don’t understand dysphoria or trans people, though, I won’t throw anyone well-meaning under the bus. So that’s my stance on that. From what I’ve been seeing, I don’t know if there are any well-meaning trans people left who aren’t just caricaturing womanhood (or manhood?), but if you can prove me wrong, I won’t be upset about it. 

My thoughts on men are I hate them. As a class, yes, but also all of them as people because you won’t see any humanity there. Maybe there are “good men” and “not all men” are raging misogynists, but that’s the bare minimum, and the patriarchy allows any average man to hurt any woman, quite often without consequences. Men have oppressed women for thousands of years and I won’t forgive them. Yes, the average guy isn’t responsible for what happened to women then and even now, but the oppressed are allowed to hate our oppressors, and women are already taught to be careful around any man because if he turns out to be bad, it was “her fault.” If you’re a man, therefore, that’s a red flag for me. The onus is on you to prove you’re not an asshole and I’ll interact with you civilly. But my biggest priority is women. You’ll have to accept a lot of things if you want to be welcomed here and radical feminism is about women, so don’t step out of your place. I’m completely serious: men have been doing this to women for a long time, so I’m not going to cheer for you or waste my energy on you at all. If I do, it’s for another human being who seems to be decent. I used to want everyone to be happy until I realized how truly evil the other sex is. 

My bullet points turned into paragraphs, but that’s all, I think! If anything else comes up, feel free to ask me. I’m always open to learning more (that’s why I made this blog: to interact with people instead of keeping everything to myself) and I believe in fairness/justice a lot, so if anything I say or do doesn’t seem just or fair, let me know. If you think me being anti-male/a misandrist is bad, though, then just look at the other side and you’ll see why, lmao. As someone who loves women, how can I not hate those who hurt them, especially the way men do? 

TLDR;

for: abortion, female rights, female autonomy, kindness, fairness, anti-discrimination, gay rights (obviously), higher wages for people, the rich to stop screwing poor people over by giving up their riches, social justice 

against: racism, misogyny, the patriarchy, anything male (male language like “guys”, the male body, hearing their male opinions on female issues), rape or rape culture, conversion therapy, cringe culture, cancel culture, anything that hurts women 

The way this works is I’ll probably be writing a lot in the tags (sometimes in posts), and if I receive any asks (not death threats hopefully), I’ll answer them. I’m quite new to this and I’m still young, so I’m mostly here to learn, but if there’s anything I can do for you, let me know and I’ll happily do it (if I can). Perhaps I’ll write about my personal experiences and thoughts (especially on being a lesbian because that’s the most important thing to me). I like hearing other people’s stories and thoughts too. 

Since this is a sideblog, I can’t really follow you back (easily), but I think you’ll be able to tell it’s me (maybe), and I do take notice if you follow me if I agree with you/think you’re cool. 

Not sure if anyone actually read all of this, but thanks for stopping by! Hope you have a lovely day. ^^