#and just like the misogyny of all that

[tea-cat-arts]

"Wwx wouldn't wear high heels or mini skirts-" some of you are wildly underestimating what wwx would do for the bit

[inkskinned]

okay is she being actually immature or is it just a woman over 30 expressing a human experience you find to be immature.

like yeah. at certain ages... let shit go. im not defending the real immature shit. im not defending the karen you're picturing. i worked in retail i hate those people too. (once somebody got mad at me because she didn't like how our winter window decor was a snowman smoking a pipe. i wish i was joking).

but men at 57 will write books about how 17 year old girls are soooo sexy. they will invent worlds where women have to be naked for "armor reasons." they will write songs that treat women as objects. people rush to defend them. meanwhile a woman at 35 will be like "heartbreak is hard, actually" or "i feel betrayed by a friend" or "i am struggling with something emotionally." immediately people will say stuff like this woman is 35 by the way. by the way this woman is SO OLD to be experiencing this. BY THE WAY.

im 31, almost 32. the other day a poet was blasted online because at her "big age", she had written a poem about feeling unloved. top comment was "this woman is 29 by the way." this woman is too old to still be useful, by the way. she has to behave better . maybe if she was a good wife and mother she could stop existing loudly, and the story could continue on without her. this woman has served her purpose, by the way. she's so cringe, by the way. at 29 - so old! - she still hasn't figured out that her existence should be one of shame.

[taffywabbit]

I finally watched breaking bad (all within the past week or so while I worked, finished it and watched el camino last night) and I'm confident this isn't a new thought I'm expressing or anything but genuinely how DID an entire generation of dudes convince themselves Walter White was cool and admirable and intended to be sympathetic. I know ppl just lack media literacy sometimes but I'm still so confused

I don't think I've EVER watched a piece of media that so blatantly depicts a guy making the worst possible decisions at every turn and having his life ruined for it and not being redeemed or made sympathetic in any significant or lasting way. the kinds of justifications villains USUALLY give that make people consider them "morally grey" or "tragic" or whatever (everything I did was for my loved ones, I did what I had to to survive, once I was in this I couldn't get out, I just needed you to trust me so I could keep you safe, etc etc) is ALWAYS framed as complete self-serving bullshit when Walt says it, and one of the only shreds of personal growth he ever exhibits in the whole series is when he finally fucking admits that. every time he does something even remotely cool or drops a quotable one-liner, something terrible immediately happens that makes everything worse and makes him look like an unreasonable idiot asshole again. by the end of the series the ONLY characters they can still contrast as being morally "worse" than him are literally a bunch of bloodthirsty neonazis who kept a guy in a cage for several months. this show is practically SCREAMING at you the entire time not to admire Walt. why did every dude I knew in highschool have his face on tshirts and Facebook pfps.

I just don't get it. at least with The Dark Knight's Joker it was like, a feature-length movie and that's it. you spend a lot less time with the Joker and it has a lot less time to delve into his motivations, so there's way more room for flanderization and misinterpretation as people extrapolate the few cool/interesting/sad things they saw into a whole nuanced misunderstood guy in their heads and online. Walter White has 5 seasons' worth of 45min episodes to convince you beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is a miserable fucking loser who ruins everything he touches because of greed and selfishness. if you weren't watching it for that, what WERE you getting out of this. what DID you think this show was about. am I just missing some key piece of context from 2012 or whatever that would help me understand this

[pinbones]

I've seen a few posts about women and pants now and many of them are very good, and not to nitpick those posts or downplay religious sexism or anything, but I have to emphasise:

Somebody who DOESN'T live in a controlling religious country/cult/family is also affected by sexism. We all know that, right? Secular parts of the first world also have opinions about how women dress, including when it comes to trousers, especially in childhood and in institutions like schools and the workplace

Me and many people my age (20s) remember being forced into skirts, punished and shamed by parents & teachers & peers & possibly then bosses about what we wear not being feminine enough, and it wasn't by deeply religious sects. Many updates to dress codes are very new and sexist views are still in place in many institutions. Normalised societal misogyny wants women (and people they want to treat as women) to dress femininely, down to what KIND of pants they're allowed to wear (compare a pink top and jeggings to mens jeans and tell me these two women are treated the same. Hating women in pantsuits is still a sexist office joke today, and even those outfits are feminine compared to male suits, which raise eyebrows when worn by women). The women I know who wear trousers regularly are literally otherwise feminine, and all wear dresses to events.

I know trousers have become much more normalised over the past few decades in secular society (yay!! the result of many many years of effort and lawbreaking) but let's not be absolute when we talk about the pants concept lol. Especially within a larger conversation about female/transmasc/intersex/transfem masculinity and social perceptions, especially in an age of rising fascism

[hemipenal-system]

this is a forcefem (trans affirming genderplay) space, not a forcefem (whatever weird misogyny shit y'all got goin on) space. get on hrt or get the fuck out

[casscainmainly]

The Batkids' deaths vary in severity/importance, but they all serve to shake some core part of their superhero identity. Sometimes it affirms their existing identity (Cass' first death), or it spurs them to discover more about what their current identity means (Damian, Tim); sometimes, however, it severs them from who they were. Dick's transition into Agent 37 and Cass' turn to evil both stem from very temporary deaths, where the death is not as important as what happens after. It's not the pill or Cass' dip into the Pit that actually changes them, but the boundary these events create between their old and new selves.

Which is why Jason's death is different from all of the above. Beyond being (at one point) permanent, his loss of self is irreversible. Dick and Cass claw their way back to their identities pre-death, Nightwing and Batgirl respectively; Jason does not. He cannot, because he doesn't fit Robin anymore, and Robin doesn't fit him. It's not only that his sense of self is shaped by his death, but that it was, in many ways, destroyed by it.

But it's ultimately Stephanie's death that links death so closely to the loss of a superhero identity. Her death, unlike the others, is instigated by loss - Batman fires her from Robin, which leads to the events of War Games. On her deathbed, Steph asks "was I ever really Robin?", and Bruce replies "of course you were." It's a sweet moment, but it's retroactive. He can only affirm her legacy as Robin in the past tense (it's over; it can't impact anyone anymore). Her non-existent memorial can be read not only as a lack of care for Stephanie Brown the person, but for Stephanie Brown the Robin - Jason's Robin is immortalised, Stephanie's Robin is erased. She dies because she was made Robin, and she was made Robin to die.

I guess my point is that everyone's deaths are linked to how much they are valued within their mantle, not just in a metatextual sense (as in, how much DC editorial liked them) but also in the text itself - deaths either instigate further ownership of their name, or dismantle their sense of self. This is why it's important to recognise Steph's tenure as Robin (both in comics and fandom). Recognising Steph-as-Robin is a direct refutation of her death, a long-delayed memorial.

[lilidawnonthemoon]

[offkilterkeys]

The world isn’t ready for my alpha kid readings.

[womendeservehumanity]

When will women wake up? When will they stop with the incessant coping? That it’s just a few bad apples that hate women. The vast majority of men vehemently hate women. They show it both on and offline. More overtly online though. And the amount of likes for all of these posts (all of which are from gimmick accounts with 10-100k+ followers dedicated to hating women) shows that. Men do not see us as human beings. Straight men’s interest and attraction to women starts and end with sexual gratification. And there’s no reason to even explain this to other women as if it’s some hidden truth. They will literally tell you. They will get online and tell you they aren’t emotionally and romantically interested in women. That the concept of actually caring for and loving a woman is foreign to them. That you’re a sex doll and a set of holes to them.

Like who needs feminist theory to dissect all the ways in which misogyny manifests when it seems men are doing everything in their power to show women how much they fucking collectively hate us. Even blatantly regarding us as holes and sex dolls.

Also find it so interesting that these are tweets with millions of views but so called progressive twitter NEVER sees them or condemns them and instead opt to give attention to some random radfem with 300 followers saying men bad. THATS what’s a pressing issue to them. THATS proof that misandry is as prevalent and troublesome as misogyny meanwhile this is what women are subjected to.

[aishabellasbigblogofeverything]

I love it when women hate men. I love it when women are allowed to vent to each other about how horrible and creepy men are. I love it when women form friendships with and prioritize each other over relationships with men(whether they're attracted to them or not). I love it when women put men dni in their bios and on their nude photos and on posts on their blogs. I love it when women refuse to mollycoddle and accommodate entitled male feelings with "but this doesn't mean I hate all men, I know a few men who are great, I love my father/sons/brothers/uncles/male cousins/guy friends" I love it when women complain about men WITHOUT "not all men" being a disclaimer. I love it when women avoid socializing with/refuse to be around/befriend/get close to men because they know men can't be trusted. I love it when women make "kill all men" jokes. I love it when women offer absolutely no concern or care for men's feelings and if their misandry offends men whatsoever because why should we, men are the oppressor class who have raped and killed and abused us and kept us as subjugated as second-class citizens for millennia, they regularly mistreat us and the women in their own marginalized communities still every single day and make this world so much harder and more awful for us to be in, and if we choose to hate them and not spare them any sympathy then so be it, and I don't just mean "men as a class" either, you can be a woman who doesn't want to have anything to do with any man on an individual basis and completely cuts off men from her personal life too and ykw I will love and fucking support you in that because men deserve absolutely NOTHING from us. If they're so tough and strong then they can handle it just like they can handle being lonely. If you are a woman who hates men, ESPECIALLY IF YOU ARE A LESBIAN AND/OR A TRANS WOMAN, then just know that I love you. I love you, I support you, and you are safe here.

[annieisyourfavourite]

so sorry but that post about "the reason boys and men are being radicalized is bc girls are mean to them" is driving me up the fucking wall. maybe i really am just on a different internet than the rest of you but. this sentiment of "women are being bitches who don't care about men and that's why there's Problems now" is like. such an alpha male podcast classic take. like it's literally "not all men". it doesn't magically become better bc u say stuff with liberal terminology. jesus christ

[the-judicial-assistants-notebook]

not enough discussion about the gavins' complicated relationship with feminine-coded/beauty products, i don't think.

[prolibytherium]

Just in general I think trying to look to pre-late modern period history for validation of LGBT+ identities is an absolutely useless venture. Every single underlying human experience defined through the lens and framework of LGBT identity has always existed, but it's impossible to pin down Exactly who and what a figure might have been if they existed in this contemporary context and decided to self identify via these labels.

It's also a wildly reductive lens that flattens the complexity and variety of how sex and gender has been constructed across time in different cultures, how sexual norms have varied, etc. This is not a constructive approach to learn about history and you're never going to be able to fit historical figures neatly into little identity categories.

[idekwtf-is-happening]

So long as the other option is a woman, America has no problem voting a felon into office

[anachronistic-falsehood]

leans into the mic. "saying all men are trash in response to the various ccs getting outed as abusers is the wrong move and will harm male victims of abuse and sa" and "the reason these male ccs were able to abuse people and cover it up for so long is because of rampant misogyny in the content creating space and it's important to listen to the women coming out with their stories right now" are statements that coexist. btw

[lgbtlunaverse]

Horrible thing to say but I think there's a real chance Jiang Yanli was both of her parents' least favorite child and knew it and just kinda. Had to go on with her life knowing that.