#because that is NOT a radfem

[dykeulous]

btw your homophobic republican grandma is not a radfem. no, the conservative woman talking about “womanly brain” & being explicitly anti-abortion isn’t a radfem, either. no… the spiritual woman telling young girls to “return to their divine feminine” & selling out cheap dating instructions & “tips” & promoting the idea of “female-specific” emotions, thoughts, and feelings, most likely isn’t a radfem. your radical christian mom that disowned you for being trans isn’t a radfem. please. PLEASE LEARN what radical feminism is. i am BEGGING you.

[uramitashi]

women really do need better class consciousness.

before you are religious, before you are a citizen of your nation, before you are anything else; you are a woman. your identity is complex but womahood is one of its first pillars. and womanhood is so important because so strictly tied, during her whole existence, to her implications: the ability to reproduce and the relative independence (ie: not having to desperately find another mate to pass on your genes + developing a physiological selectiveness) coming from it. female objectification, sex work, misogyny, female modesty, FGM, everything that hurts women stems from it. males want to control women sexuality because of it. it is therefore natural that womanhood is ontologically more important than any other label - because if you neglect it, others will surely not.

[hadesoftheladies]

when it hits you that the only way we can be so many people on this earth between now and the 18th century is because of men successively mass raping women in every decade and culture—and that the only way oligarchs and emperors can keep this upward trend is by not punishing rape severely or at all, defending the commercialization of women’s bodies and mass rape as free speech, banning abortion and jailing women and girls for reporting rapists (which is basically punishing women’s self defense)—you grow up a lot

[womenstruation]

It always angers me when people say that men would not put in so much effort to enact their violence on women and children because they do exactly that.

I was only seven when I learnt about just how hard men try to deceive the world so they can have free reign over young girls. I went on a Brownie trip to an orphanage back when I lived in Nigeria. The orphanage was just for girls which isn't uncommon, and it was massive, with its own school, shops, clinic etc. The girls had no reason to leave. It was set up by a pastor- a Nigerian who'd moved back from abroad.

I remember while we were there, one of the girls had just had a baby. She had seemed so old to me but looking back, she must have been around sixteen or seventeen. I remember my mum seemed suspicious when we were told the girl had run away and returned pregnant. She seemed even more so when we met the owner.

A year or two later, there was news on the radio. The man who had set up the orphanage had raped and impregnated several girls, selling their babies to prospective parents. I didn't even understand what rape meant back then but I remember my mum being devastated. Looking back, I think she might have felt guilty, perhaps she'd seen the signs: the girls not being allowed to leave the compound; teenage girls ending up pregnant. It seemed so obvious.

But no one questioned a man who used all of his money to build and set up a home for vulnerable girls, he was a pastor, educated, well-travelled. He could never have done something so cruel. But he did.

When I was writing this post, I tried to find any articles but I couldn't. They were just so many identical cases, man sets up orphanage, rapes and abuses children in the orphanage. Different cases, different years, one as recent as 2023. What I learnt back then and know for sure is that men would do anything, no matter how difficult or expensive, anything to have access to people they can abuse.

[sweetstarcollector]

So phrases like "people with uteruses" or "people who have periods" never really bothered me as much as more overtly dehumanizing phrases like "bleeders" or "birthing bodies", but I saw a post today talking about the abnormal symptoms women experienced after getting tear gassed protesting, that ended with something like "we don't know the full effects of tear gas on people with uteruses". And what struck me about that is that's not really correct, because female people without uteruses (either bc they were born without one or bc they had a hysterectomy) will still experience different symptoms after being tear gassed than male people. Women metabolize substances differently than men, our immune systems are different, our hormonal cycles are different, our skin has different thicknesses, etc. All of those things have potential effects on tear gas reactions, and are not dependent on whether or not we have a uterus. They're dependent on whether or not we're female. So saying "people with uteruses" when what is meant is "female people" is not really accurate. And I realized that a lot of times when people use those kinds of phrases, they aren't being accurate.

For example, I'm sure we've all seen people say things about how the repeal of Roe v Wade will harm people with uteruses/people who can get pregnant/etc. And while yes, it definitely harms those people, the full truth is that abortion bans harm *female* people, *regardless of if they can get pregnant or have a uterus.* Because female people who don't have uteruses can still get pregnant, and in those rare cases will 100% of the time need an abortion. Female people who deal with infertility and can't carry a fetus to term can still be jailed for miscarrying. Female people who are completely sterile (for whatever reason) can still be denied medications/medical treatment on the grounds that the treatment could theoretically harm a fetus. Female people who may currently have no uterus/no longer be able to get pregnant but who have had an abortion in the past will face increased stigma.

Here's another example:

It seems pretty straightforward- menstruation stigma is experienced by people who menstruate. But again, that's only half true. Period stigma is experienced by all female people, regardless of if they menstruate. Think about the fact that we are told female people should not hold political leadership because "what if a female president has PMS and starts a war", despite the fact that almost all female presidential candidates are old enough that they would have experienced menopause. Female people have their feelings dismissed because "it must be that time of the month", regardless of if they're too young to menstruate or too old or if they have a condition causing amenorrhea. Female children grow up seeing periods- a natural function of their bodies- portrayed as disgusting, dirty and gross, as making them unclean, as something to dread and fear. This affects them before they experience menarche, this affects them even if they never experience menarche. It affects all female people.

I could come up with more examples, but you get the idea. Reducing female people to singular body parts and organs inherently denies the reality of femaleness. All parts of us (both biological and social) interact with all other parts of us to form an experience that can't be understood by chopping us up and putting our individual functions under the microscope. In order to get an accurate picture you need to look at the whole (female) human.

[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.

[frogfacey]

every day you get reminded of how much of this website's politics seems to be "(progressively) being transgender is a white people thing."

[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.

[smhalltheurlsaretaken]

y'all need to get a grip. you blab all day about how much you hate bigots and hateful people and how evil it is to dehumanize anyone and then you turn around and say "kys" and "i think [x] should all just kill themselves" and other disgusting, violent and childish trash

so many people on here are just full of hatred and vitriol and turn into frenzied sharks anytime the target 'deserves it' and they think they can get away with it and not be called bad people. then they whine about how sad it is that we can't all just get along and if only all the evil people in the world would stop doing evil things wouldn't that be nicer

you're just as vicious, hypocritical and fanatically puritanical as the caricature you have made in your minds of the people you think you have nothing in common with. if you've ever told someone, ANYONE to kill themselves you're not advocates of justice, you're not artisans of peace, and you certainly don't have any moral high ground that would allow you to pass judgment on others

[gendiebrainrotreceipts]

Presented without comment 🫥

They do realise that the intention of pride was to normalise homosexuality? Not to show off your extreme and weird fetishes? It’s almost like homosexuality is too vanilla for them now, they just wanna be as edgy and outrageous as possible. Who cares about how this will hurt gay people in the long run ig

[direquail]

One of the many things I find funny and irritating is the slant of a lot of interpretations of Alecto's name (that it's about feminine rage)--on this here wlw internet in the year of our lord 2024, it's easily made to figure as rage against God, or rage against patriarchy, or religious oppression, and therefore an allusion to the idea that she's going to get her vengeance on John for betraying and oppressing her somehow, but like

John is the one who named her Alecto. He's the one who named her that. So, naming her "Alecto" is alluding to the embodiment of John's rage--their rage, since they are joined inseparably (John even explicitly says that when he first perceives her: "You wouldn't stop screaming. You were so scared. You were so goddamn mad").

He says of Alecto to Harrow, "In a very real way, you are [Alecto's] children". At a very surface level, Alecto is (depending on the text or tradition), one of the Furies--famously, in several surviving Greek tragedies, who punish Orestes for the crime of killing his mother. In fact, in Aeschylus' Oresteia, they declare that they are specifically bound to avenge matricide.

So the name "Alecto" alludes to the nature of John's mission and how he sees it.

It also implies that his divine rage, the rage that gives him power, the power that makes him divine, that he either represents or wants to represent, is feminine rage. He was chosen by Earth (which, Furies are sometimes the daughters of Gaia); he is her champion, however he's managed to fuck that up. Once the truth of that comes out, it becomes clear that all of his power comes from her.

And that's why you get statements from Tamsyn Muir like:

“[T]he God of the Locked Tomb IS a man; he IS the Father and the Teacher; it’s an inherently masc role played by someone who has an uneasy relationship himself to playing a Biblical patriarch. John falls back on hierarchies and roles because they’re familiar even when he’s struggling not to. Even he identifies himself as the God who became man and the man who became God. But the divine in the Locked Tomb is essentially feminine on multiple axes – I think Nona will illuminate that a little bit more."

So yes, he plays the role of Emperor and God and Teacher, with all of the things that implies. And I don't think it should be discounted. But he also is (and partly sees himself as) the chosen champion of a goddess, or what is for all intents & purposes for a human like him a goddess. He is her avenger, and while she sleeps, her avatar.

And I don't think we're meant to read him purely as a parasite who's taking advantage of her to gain power for himself, either. Or an oppressive, Kronos-like figure. Especially if you consider Palamedes' theory of the Grand Lysis, even if he was purely motivated by desire for power before (which I really doubt), there are parts of each in the other, now. What was clear and separate before is uncertain and interpenetrated. Is his rage his own, or hers? Is his mission of revenge his, or hers? If he wants power, is that his own selfishness, or her desire to survive?

And does it matter?

[nightmarish-fallen-angel]

I'll occasionally see posts that are like "well obviously transandrophobia is because the trans community is against afabs"

I hate it I hate it I hate it

Stop referring to me by my sex and ? just generally being wrong.

The majority of transandrophobia I've experienced has come from cis people, and specifically cis women that are close to me and get so so upset that I "chose" to be a man. And the ant-trans rhetoric that others will peddle about trans men and why they can't possibly be in their right minds to choose to be a "disgusting" man.

[tofanahisjava]

The shit I see on TikTok is insane and this is even all that bad compared to what's out there. Like he really thinks hes making a point. He really thinks this proves that he experiences womanhood as much as any of us. I love how everyone of his examples can be categorized into either fetishizing femininity both the performative physical aspects or the servitude subjugation aspect, Or just straight up fetishizing and romanticizing male violence against women and the more directly violent aspect a female oppression. And he doesn't seem to be able to grasp that he is taking his stance of womanhood from a male perspective, Or that he only is experiencing misdirected misogyny and misdirected homophobia because of the way he chooses to live his life a privilege that actual women don't have. Anyways, I'd love to hear your guyn's take on this video. I'm gonna post more this guy's stuff on here because it seems like hes all over tik tok and is gaining a lot of popularity.

[s1ll13rg00s3]

The Grace Hopper conference was opened to men and instead of being respectful and listening to the speakers they just fucked up the job fair taking interview spots and jobs from women and harassed female attendees

[aaafeminist]

[weallpartyatybcpatricksfuneral]

"girls support girls-" okay but are you normal about queer women? are you normal about BIWOC? are you normal about disabled women? are you normal about autistic women? are you normal about fat women? alternative women? unattractive women? are you normal about women who choose not to shave their legs and armpits and faces? are you normal about butches and tomboys and masculine women? are you normal about trans women? are you normal about trans men? are you normal about nonbinary folk and people who lie outside the gender binary or renounce gender all together? are you normal about women who absolutely despise and detest the latest trends? are you normal about weird women who unsettle you with their interests? are you normal about women who don't wear makeup, who will never wear makeup, who openly dislike makeup and the makeup industry?