#call the feminism police she’s doing it wrong

[bilboyagathechickenfootedhobbit]

My kid keeps saying he wants to be a cop, sorry, pOLiCe OfFiCeR, and like……I have to remind myself that he’s SIX and he doesn’t KNOW cops, so in his mind he sees it as a way to help people and keep people safe and help society follow rules and justice, all of which are things he’s super big on, which is GOOD! Young boys should grow up feeling a sense of duty to their community, and with a desire to help those that cannot help themselves. Young girls have that instilled in them from birth, but most people raise young boys to think that it’s women’s jobs to do all the caring and nurturing and frankly, I’m over it. If men want to be protectors, fine. Raise protectors. Raise young boys who see the injustices on the playground and speak up about them. Raise young boys who understand the differences and diversity of people and who work to bring equity to situations. Raise young boys who want to be cops, lawyers, judges, politicians, not for power or money but because they want to right the wrongs of the world. Raise young boys who recognize their privilege in this world and USE IT FOR GOOD.

So I have to remind myself that my son doesn’t want to be a cop because he wants to bully and harm people; that’s my understanding of law enforcement after four decades in America. He wants to do good and in his mind, law enforcement is the best way to do that. And I need to encourage that sense of justice and his willingness to help, because society is going to spend the rest of his life trying to squash the compassion out of him because it’s “girly” to care. He is constantly asked if he is a girl because he’s very gnc and pretty, but also because he is very compassionate and gentle. I want him to know that his kind heart is an asset, that being kind and looking out for people is how men SHOULD behave, despite what society tells him. That if he wants to be a protector, then his ability to care and relate to others will take him much farther than a propensity towards violence will. Protecting doesn’t always mean violence. Sometimes protecting people means codifying laws, or providing more societal support. Men don’t want to believe that they can protect women any other way than violence against other men. There are better ways to help and protect women and children. And if my kid still wants to be a cop in twelve years, I hope that it’s still because he wants to do good in the world and help serve his community. I have faith in him (and my parenting) and his sense of right and wrong.

[gacha-incels]

"Solidarity overturned the decision, we will watch police reinvestigation" interview with victim of ‘pinched-fingers’ case (archive link)

(Seocho police station)

this is mtl of the article that I’ve edited. you can click the link and see the original, if there’s any glaring issues lmk and I’ll edit the post ✍️.

The victim of the Nexon MapleStory pinched finger (🤏) incident responded to the Seoul Seocho Police Station's decision to re-investigate her case, saying, "I recognize that many people's attention is focused on this, and I ask for a clean and thorough investigation. Even though the re-investigation is underway, we don't know what will happen, so we will continue to watch it carefully," she said.

In a written response on the afternoon of the 7th, victim A said, "I thought it would never be overturned, but I think it was the solidarity of many people that made it happen."

"My first thought is to thank them for their solidarity. I didn't realize that there would be thousands of complaints (against the Seocho Police Station)," she said, continuing, "I couldn't have done it alone. I will continue to work hard and do whatever I can to help," she stressed.

"I'm happy yet nervous at the same time. I think the police should have been more cautious in their initial decision to not extradite," she said, adding, "If they were able to admit that they were wrong two days after the news broke, I wish they would have taken a little more time to consider (a full investigation) from the beginning.”

“How Solidarity Protects Me"

Ms. A also emphasized that "solidarity with other people is the solution to healing oneself."

"After (the incident), I couldn't ignore the stories of people who were affected similarly to me, and I tried to understand their pain and offered my support in any way I could," she said. "I started several activities, including regular donations, to give back the solidarity I received, and I live every day trying to become a better person."

"When I give other victims the comfort I wanted to receive during (the incident), my condition also improves," she said, adding, "Solidarity is how I protect and heal myself."

Ms. A was also victimized online, with her personal info being circulated as an employee (of studio ppuri) even though she did not draw the so-called "pinched hand". Malicious posts insulting her were also frequently posted.

On June 14, A. filed a complaint to the Seocho Police Station for 41 online posts on charges of defamation under the Information and Communication Network Act (정보통신망법상 명예훼손), stalking (스토킹처벌법), violation of the Special Act on Punishment of Sexual Offenses (obscenity using communication media) (성폭력범죄 처벌 등에 관한 특례법 위반(통신매체이용음란) ), and insult (모욕). However, the Seocho Police Station dismissed all of Ms. A's complaints, citing reasons such as she had "sympathized with feminism."

When the case was first reported on, online collective complaints to "correct the sexist rhetoric" as well as criticism from the political sphere erupted. The Seocho Police Station, which continued to deny any problems until the following day, the 6th, saying that "it was due to the misunderstandings they (A's company) caused with their response that people expressed their opinions," admitted that "the investigation was insufficient" and announced in a press release on the afternoon of the 7th that it was "planning to conduct a re-investigation."

[showmey0urfangs]

i'm all for analyzing the fuck out of the show and would even say i rarely encounter anything that i would necessarily consider "overanalysis," just personally, because to me all interpretations are valid to some extent. like why not read into it like that if doing so creates added meaning to you if that makes sense? though of course there will always takes i disagree with or even find downright "wrong." what is beginning to piss me off though is how homophobic and gender essentialist some analysis in this fandom is beginning to feel. i'm not saying all of it is wrong or invalid but i can't be the only one who thinks people are taking it to such an extent that feels weird. acknowldging the show's commentary on patriarchy or louis being gender nonconforming is one thing but the number of people who seem very comfortable constantly referring to a gay man as "basically" a woman is getting weird to me. initially i was relieved to see people address the same subtext i was picking up on but at this point it feels like some people are engaging less in good faith analysis and more in feminization kink that's toooootally relevant to canon trust me guys

Hi there. I too have noticed this new trend for fans (usually women) to jokingly refer to queer or queer-coded men in media by feminine terms (babygirl, mother, referring to their "pussies" etc.) I'm not sure if it's a kink like you said or if it's done for some other reason, but I agree that it can sometimes become insidiously homophobic and devolves into trying to fit queer men into antiquated heteronormative roles.

It pisses me off when I see fans treat Louis like he's the sad frigid housewife and Lestat is the manly man, wolfkiller, protector and provider, who goes off on adventures and has multiple conquests while Louis sits at home crying and knitting by the fire.

I think a lot of this comes from the way Anne herself wrote their dynamic in the books after IWTV —where btw, Louis is the wealthy and business savvy one and Lestat depended on him, at least financially, but somehow by the time we see them again, Louis's broke, living in a shack with no electricity and wearing dusty clothes, while Lestat is a billionaire and a rockstar. 🙃

By disregarding Louis' storyline to solely focus on Lestat's , Anne left fans to fill the gaps with their own headcanons and apparently, that's what most of them came up with which...yeah.

We also see Claudia also call Louis a housewife in episode 5, but she did it in a moment of anger and obviously knew how hurtful it would be for him to hear that when he had spent his entire life grappling with his own sexuality and trying to comfort to a more "socially acceptable" image of masculinity — ❝the stern landlord, the deferential businessman, the loyal son--❞

To me, implying Louis is "less of a man" because he is more sensitive or less sexually aggressive is textbook homophobia, not to mention misogynistic because it implied femininity or feminine traits are less than, a weakness.

Ideally, I would love to see less of this type of narrative—especially in Loustat fics and other fan works of them. But I'm not the fandom police, so it's to each their own ig. 🤷🏾‍♀️

[radfemsiren]

I am from France and we've been living in quite an odd time regarding Islam. Muslims are an oppressed minority, our police forces are prejudiced against them, but I feel scared about the rise of Islam in my country as a woman.

I am tired of people slandering our laws about religious free areas that represent the state. Separation from religion is a good thing and leftists have forgotten it here, and foreign news twist it to make it seem like we only ban Muslim attires everywhere when it's any religious signs only in places that represent the state (like public schools and public hospitals).

Leftists in general have become... honestly more American in their discourse. "If it's an oppressed minority then they can do no wrong" kind of thinking. But the thing is I can very much see that muslim men come from places that are incredibly more misogynistic than here, and that they've been raised to consider this their religion, to never question it and to use it to their advantage. Like, muslim people are present enough for me to form an opinion like that, I have spent my childhood with at least half of them as the people I saw, and it is really bad and going unquestioned. This whole thing would get me killed in leftist spaces, the most common defenses are "but catholic men and atheist men are bad too!" except that catholics have been shrinking as a group here and atheist men are awful but don't have misogyny as a religious dogma they can spread.

Overall I'm worried. Some people say we're gonna be majority muslim next century and I worry about how this will affect women and the laws that get passed. Leftists approve of anything muslims do because they're oppressed here, and this includes turning any criticism of religion into some choice feminism bullshit. They constantly say women want and choose to be exploited that way and it is gut wrenching to hear. I'm worried about the increasing population of muslim men who are taught to see me as an object so vividly and I'm worried about my rights being threatened by them. I'm worried about my safety as I've had multiple bad encounters with those misogynistic men irl and on online French spheres. Those spheres are now filled with those same men who simply justify sexism by saying they're muslim and its in their culture, or muslim women who talk about marrying as soon as they turn 18 or even arranged marriages gleefully.

Hm I’m Arab-American so I’m not super educated on issues happening in Europe considering Muslim immigration. I’ll have to research more into it to form a well informed opinion on the situation.

What I can tell you is there are many Muslim and ex-Muslim women who are critical of male supremacy in our cultures and religion, and I recommend reading about and interacting with irl, radical feminists from our cultures to help your fears. Finding allies and understanding there are many like-minded women that share your goals makes the heart at peace. I love Nawal Elsaadawi, she is the Simone de Beauvoir of Arabia and close to my heart because she is Egyptian like me lol. The fall of the Imam is good if you want written work expressedly against Islam.

I think cultural relativism is dangerous and all women must be protected. We shouldn’t shy away from calling out misogyny everywhere it rears its ugly head. As long as we are educated and well informed with our criticism, I see no issue with calling out patriarchal oppression from other cultures. I got an ask calling out why I don’t also speak about misogyny against black women, and I thought about it. I think many of us, including myself, try to stick to our own community and what we are familiar with in our feminism, and we should move away from that. Let’s all educate ourselves on the different forms of patriarchy around the world and work hard to end it in all the forms it comes in!

[uhhhhhhyikes]

"How is it misogyny when me, a lesbian, will never be stuffed with cock." Simple. Women's oppression is sex-based, regardless of one's own sexuality. All women, regardless of sexuality, are oppressed on the basis of sex. I think we fwn all agree on thag. Describing women in a way that reduces us to things that perform sex acts is beyond inappropriate when discussing feminism, even if you think it isn't misogynistic. What is ABSOLUTELY misogynistic, however, is insisting that a woman is somehow damaged or irreparably altered if she engages in sex acts, regardless of the sex of the person she does them with.

People are acting as if women aren't already seen as "used", or other horrible things like "tainted" or "brainwashed" to name a few, if she has sex.

It really is not all that progressive to insist that women are unable to make their own choices if a man is involved or that a men can brainwash women through sex. Those are things that I would expect to hear from someone's traditional grandfather or an incel when talking about "what's wrong with women these days".

Feeling this way about other women, regardless of their sexuality, is concerning. Firmly believing that women who are attracted to men—whether or not they partner with them—are incapable of caring about other women, and will throw them under the bus on a whim to please a man, and are incapable of making rational decisions, and will always prioritize a man over any other part of her own personal life just seems unfounded to me. The question does not seem to be whether these women can be radfems or not, at least anymore. It seems more like it's a question of their worth and value being based on whether or not they have partnered with a man.

I want to acknowledge the fact that hatred and anger and frustration are feelings that people from an oppressed group have towards their oppressors, and rightfully so. I have seen this come up in an argument about tone policing how lesbians talk about lesbophobia. Lesbians do not oppress straight or bisexual women, even if they say misogynistic and vile things to or about them. Lesbians have the right to be as open and honest as they possibly can about the vile lesbophobia they experience at the hands of straight and bisexual women. I just don't think it's ever okay to say things that are misogynistic in nature regardless of any of this. Plus, a lot of women who don't partner with/have sex with men are febfems and celibate straight/bi women. It is equally as vile if it comes from them. Lesbians and febfems and celibate women have zero obligation whatsoever to coddle or care for het partnered women whatsoever, but I think it's a little bit of a stretch to call yourself a feminist if you use sexual language to intentionally demean or belittle any woman, especially to insist that having sex negatively impacts their ability to make rational decisions or think about anything other than sex.

I don’t think I need to add anything here x well said 

[noteverythingisgrooming]

Meta Post #3: Comfort Is Not An Ethic

In July of 2020, a white woman let her dog off its leash in a New York City park. There were many posted signs against dogs being off leash in this area. A black man jogging through the park asked the woman to leash her dog. When she refused, the man went to get some dog treats he was carrying. The woman told the man not to touch her dog. The man begins recording the incident. In the recording, the woman says that she is going to call the police and claim that "an African American man is threatening my life". Given the known willingness of the police to shoot unarmed black people, the woman knowingly employs social forces to threaten the man.

That said, it is clear that this woman is uncomfortable. Perhaps she is uncomfortable because she is a woman alone in a park being spoken to by a man. Perhaps it is because she is white and ingrained racial bias causes her to fear the man. Perhaps she is overprotective of her dog. No matter what the motivation is, the result was that this woman felt uncomfortable enough to call the police. She felt justified in going on the offensive after her comfort was threatened. It is worth noting that this is discomfort, because at no time does the man cause any harm or threaten the woman. She wants to do one thing, and he wants her to do another.

That same month, a white woman pulls a gun on a black mother and daughter in the parking lot of a Chipotle. The originating incident of the conflict was that the white woman had bumped into the black woman's fifteen-year-old daughter. A verbal altercation ensued, and the white woman first tried to back out and strike the black woman with her vehicle, before exiting the vehicle with a gun. Once again, the white woman feels 'uncomfortable' and 'threatened'.

It is clear by both these examples that discomfort and feeling threatened do not automatically lend moral or ethical backing to aggressive responses. The feeling that your safety is being threatened is just that -- it is a feeling. Some feelings are based in material reality with real consequences. But some feelings are based on biases, preconceived notions, historical experiences, and the desire to perceive oneself in a specific way -- as a victim, as a hero, as a vigilante for justice.

Many people who would decry the behavior of these white women are happy to replicate parallel behavior when it suits them. As discussed in the previous post, death threats, bullying, and harassment are common fare in online communities, with malicious behavior deployed as a tool to prune spaces of perceived undesirables. People hold up their discomfort as justification. They will gossip about their targets, exaggerate the wrongs done against them, and amplify their own hurt to be better perceived as victims. They will hold grudges and go on the offensive over and over if their target strays across their path, wittingly or unwittingly. The idea that public space has to be shared with compromise is lost upon them, as they weaponize concepts of racism, feminism, ableism, and others. Real interest in justice is not what motivates these people: it is a desire for personal comfort, like wanting a comfy beanbag chair or a soft bed. Often they are not even aware of this, as they lack insight into their own behavior. It is much easier, and much more fun, to believe that you are a crusader for justice than a petty person who wants to get their way, the same way the Chipotle woman and Central Park woman wanted to get their way.

One example of comfort dominating -- and failing -- as an ethic is the concept of trigger warnings. Research has shown us now that things like trigger warnings increase people's perceived emotional vulnerability to trauma, increase their belief that trauma survivors are vulnerable, and increase anxiety to written material perceived as harmful. People have reported similar levels of negative affect regardless of whether they have received a trigger warning. Trigger warnings worsen the impact of PTSD in the long-run. Nonetheless, people continue to lean into obsessive curation of the material they consume, including one Goodreads alternative that promises you content warnings for its listed books.

Public spaces are not your own personal nap room with beanbag chairs. Your private group chat with your friends does not extend outwards into public-facing social media mediums. While every person has the right to choose their friends and conduct private discussions as they see fit, no person has carte blanche to wield their discomfort as a cudgel to silence all discussion or all existence of topics or themes they dislike.

Critics might argue that some topics and discussions should indeed be silenced, such as outright fascist hate speech. Personally I agree that speech actively recruiting people to violence should be silenced and controlled. Fascism manipulates democratic values by insisting on its right to speak; then, when it gains control over the political mechanisms, it silences all its opponents and eliminates them. But one could draw a greater parallel between fascists and comfort-centric witch hunters much more easily than between fascists and those accused of 'making others uncomfortable'. Those who trumpet their discomfort have achieved cultural dominance and wish to maintain a stranglehold on art and public spaces. No matter how many rules are followed in good faith, the critics find a way to express 'discomfort' and demand the elimination of their enemies. These same people who weaponize that discomfort are often the same who complain they are being attacked when criticism of them arises.

The reason that we oppose things like racist speech, for example, is because we see it as a symptom of racism itself, racism being a material system that impacts people's lives on every level. While each individual person is part of that system, we understand that it is largely institutions, not individuals, who perpetuate that harm. When someone expresses a racist opinion, we become concerned that they take actions in line with their speech. The stakes are not the same when we are discussing the content of a piece of art. A piece of art is not an action. A piece of art is not a declaration of an artist's one-to-one views. A piece of art can be an exploration, a criticism, a satire, or an expression of personal experience.

Zadie Smith writes about 'Open Casket' by Dana Schultz. 'Open Casket' is a painting of Emmett Till; Dana Schulz is a white woman. The painting's display in the art museum The Whitney inspired an open letter by artist Hannah Black, a black woman, who requested the painting be removed and destroyed. Zadie Smith, also a black woman, ponders the philosophical and artistic implications of this demand. The discussion is worth reading in full, but suffice to say that there is no single or simple opinion about whether such a racially charged piece is racist, and if so, why. Whether art is done well or poorly, how it affects the viewer, whether that affect is in line with the artist's intentions, whether those intentions are malicious -- these and many other questions arise when we encounter art. Sometimes we may encounter art where these questions feel more black and white, more cut and dry. But it stands that we cannot simply say that a piece of art is 'bad' because it makes us 'uncomfortable', or because it references some system of oppression.

To be uncomfortable is not to be oppressed. Discomfort has become shorthand for oppression in a way that obscures the material systems of injustice we are supposed to be fighting. Just as it is easier to misrepresent child abuse and make hyperbolic statements against imagined perpetrators, it is easier to demand a small measure of comfort as placation instead of questioning one's ethical frameworks and the real social and artistic dynamics at play. The demand for comfort is the demand of the spoiled, and it is the demand of the helpless. A white woman wanting to let her dog off the leash in Central Park wants to be unaccountable to the rules applied to others; a woman of color demanding the removal of a painting sees in it the monetization of the spectacle of black death. The former wants her way from a place of entitlement. The latter wants her way because what else is there, in a country where police shootings go unchecked and the black-white wealth gap is worsening?

For those who are truly suffering, attention must be turned away from the cheap placation that is ‘comfort’. To insist on placation, as with trigger warnings, will only increase sensitization and negatively center one's identity as a victim. For those who are merely entitled, they need to learn to manage their volatile emotions, handle their trauma away from public spaces, and decenter their emotional experiences when in groups. For all of us, we must ask ourselves, why are we uncomfortable? And frankly, does it matter? Because sometimes, it is up to us to stomach that discomfort, acknowledge it, and find our own way forward, without making it everyone else's problem.

[jescotyaps]

bear or man

In a day and age of social media, everyone has a platform to express their ideas and beliefs. And with this platform, women have used this platform to express their struggles in life, and why feminism is so important to them. And time and time again, when a woman does anything on the internet, or anywhere at all, at least one man has this deep desire to comment on her in any way possible.

There has been a common debate online at the moment where the question at hand is "if you were alone in the forest, would you chose to be with a bear or a man?" Every single woman I know has without hesitation chosen bear. Every woman I've seen responding to this question on the internet has chosen the bear. And the most common response to this choice I've seen is not men having a friendly debate, but just a pure outrage.

"This is coming from someone who's never been alone with a bear."

"What are you gonna do, fight the bear?"

"Women always accuse all men."

"Not all men."

When I first entered high school, I had heard millions of rumors around the halls. Some were bad, some were clearly just jokes and were to be taken with good humor. But the one recurring thing I have seen, over and over again, is the sheer amount of sexual assault allegations. And every time these allegations came out, nothing bad happened. And it wasn't just legal action not being taken, or even seen as an option. It's that men will hear their friends have done horrible things to someone, man or woman, and still pretend nothing's wrong. The first instinct is never to find out the truth, or even think about their own morality. It's always, "oh I know them, they would never do that, I'm sure she was just leading him on".

When you're 15 years old, you are not going to go to the police. Or your parents, or a teacher, or anyone. You are not going to do the smart thing. When you're 15, you're scared. When you're 15, the only fear of punishment you have when an allegation of such a degree is made, is that you will be socially isolated. From the age of 15, men begin to ignore sexual assault. There's no consequences. There's nobody telling them this isn't okay.

And then people grow up. They become adults, with adult strength, and adult money. Suddenly it's so much easier to get away with the horrifying things they've been taught has no consequences for their entire developmental period. And even if "not every man" becomes a rapist, they still defend them as if they're the ones being accused of sexual assault.

When women say they would rather choose the bear, a man's first instinct will never be to ask why, or reflect on why a woman would feel more safe with a creature who could rip them to shreds than a person of the same species, who should share the same love and compassion to the world as they do. It's never "I wonder what has happened to make women feel so unsafe that it is smarter to be scared of all men than to even let your guard down for one moment." We are called stupid, belittled, and constantly discriminated against despite being given hundreds of thousands of reasons to be afraid.

We are not asking for a correct opinion. We are not asking you to correct us, or justify yourself. We stopped asking for compassion and understanding so long ago. All we ask is for our bodies to be left with scrapes and bumps from playing in the fields as a child rather than blood dripping down our thighs.

[feralfungii]

Small rant

terfs rly are some of the most misogynistic pieces of shit out there and they seem totally unaware of the irony of it. Claiming to be feminist but then the moment someone dfab is like "i dont identify as a woman" theyre like "OH YOU POOR CONFUSED LITTLE GIRL. You clearly have been so terribly misled and tricked!!!! Not to worry, I know you are incapable of critical thinking or making your own decisions in life, so I'M here to tell you your business, to dictate what you do with your body, and to tell you how you, as a woman, should behave!!!!"

Like wow yeah youre such a feminist, trying to dictate what other people do with their bodies and lives and telling them they don't know any better. That's definitely not at all anything like our society's tendency to tell dfab people they're irrational and reactive and don't know what they're talking about and cant be trusted to make decisions about their own bodies.

Terfs are like the pro-lifers who insist theyre feminists - they don't understand that feminism is more than just "yeah i dont think dfab people should live to be subservient to dmab people" or "men suck" or "women are angels and goddesses who can do no wrong." You arent a feminist just because youre a cis woman who's full of herself and raging at people she doesn't consider to be her equals. Feminism is such a huge and nuanced thing and it drives me nuts to see people directly undermining what feminism actually is while insisting to be championing it.

Also, any real feminist would be unabashedly supportive of trans women, that's just a fact. Real, actual feminism is not based in sexist fake science, it's based on "the way we as individuals and as a society treat people needs to be considered in context of many layers of intersectionality, privilege, oppression, and every nuanced thing in between. No one's experience and life should be invalidated and taken from their control based on gender, race, religion, class, or sexuality."

Insisting on gender roles and specific gender presentation and policing of other peoples bodies, harassing and bullying people who dont conform to your personal preferences... I cant think of anything less feminist than terf ideology. There is nothing more harmful to the true purpose of feminism than their weird self-righteous misogyny and transphobia. There is nothing more insulting to the spirit of feminism than to totally invalidate anyone else's personhood and identity based on sexist gender ideology.

If you think that chromosomes and genitals are deciding factors of who people are, who they're capable of being, and what they're capable of doing, you have a lot of internalized sexism to work through. If you think someone's entire life needs to be dictated by their gender, you also have a lot of internalized misogyny and sexism to sort through. You cannot claim to be fighting for women while excluding people who are also suffering under the system feminism is supposed to be fighting against (spoiler alert, the system is run by a bunch of old rich white guys, not by trans people who want to be able to use the public bathroom without getting literally attacked) and also promoting and spreading the same hurtful, hateful rhetoric that people have always used to say women aren't really people. They will literally parrot archaic gender ideology from times when women weren't fucking allowed to vote and claim they're feminists, it's absolutely nonsensical.

Im sure many of them dont actually believe in their own righteousness and just hide behind the smokescreen of feminism so they can use it as a defense when theyre called out for abusing and harassing people. They can just say it's in the name of feminism. They're not abusing and ostrasizing marginalized groups because theyre bigotted! Oh no, not at all, they're just soooo feminist.

But im sure there are also plenty who are genuinely just... women who have been deeply hurt and are lashing out at oppressed groups and minorities in some attempt to offset the sense of helplessness that comes with the fact that so much of their pain is being caused by people in power. They cant punch up high enough for those people to even notice, so they punch down instead. And they get the temporary feeling that they're doing something to counteract whatever or whoever hurt them, that they're helping a just cause by hurting the big bad scary trans people who are clearly the driving force behind the mistreatment of feminine people in our society, and then any time they might have an inkling of "Am I hurting people who are already suffering?" they can turn around and be assured by their echochamber that no, you aren't, because the transgenders aren't people, their suffering is faked to invalidate the suffering of "real" women, and your actions are beyond reproach because the other terfs all agree youre in the right

Cause, yknow, people who dehumanize entire sections of the population and want them eradicated or controlled can usually count on others of that mindset to be able to objectively identify when they're being hateful or going too far. Groups that shamelessly take pride in being "radical" while targeting minorities, who seem to base their victories on "how much harm can we cause to the people we dislike," and whose talking points often seem to be scarily along the lines of eugenics, conversion therapy, or straight up eradication of real people are usually totally reasonable and rational and definitely in the right. Not hateful or bigotted at all.

I get that they hate trans people but man they really fucking hate feminism too for people who include it in the name. Feminist should never have been used to describe such evil.

[shadowlineswriting]

Adeyemi

When Tomi Adeyemi's debut novel, Children of Blood and Bone, first came out, it made a lot of waves. It seemed like everyone was talking about it for a while. The reviews were insane, too! Entertainment Weekly declared that Tomi Adeyemi is the next J.K. Rowling, for instance.

Obviously, I had to see for myself.

Children of Blood and Bone is the first in what I think is intended to be a trilogy. Right now, only the first two books are out (the second novel is called Children of Virtue and Vengence) and those are the two I read prior to reviewing the story here. The third is slated to come out in 2024.

The story combines West African mythologies with a standard YA tale about oppression. It's a very "rise-up-against-the-monarchy" thing.

I had mixed emotions about the book. I did appreciate Adeyemi's celebration of West African culture, because she did a fantastic job of keeping that incorporated into all aspects of the story. It wasn't something she casually mentioned once and then randomly brought up again later. I struggled a little bit with her writing style, because she's fond of using the same adjectives over and over and she used different languages as part of the tale. That's fine, but doing it right out of the gate when I didn't understand the different types of characters yet made the exposition very confusing to me. I finally figured it out, and then it was easy to follow, but it took more effort than I expected. That's just a complaint because I was lazy, though.

The second book was a tough read for me. There wasn't anything wrong with it, but the story didn't feel engaging enough for me to keep going. I decided not to read the third one because of this.

The real thing that lost me, though, was reading the author's note at the end of the first book. Hear me out before you crucify me: Adeyemi talked about how the story is allegorical about police brutality and how Black people need to "rise" against this.

Similar to my views on feminism, let me just say that yes, there are some absolute scumbag policemen and policewomen out there. No denying. All you have to do is watch the news to understand that. But that doesn't mean that all policemen and policewomen are evil or brutal. It doesn't mean anyone should "rise" against the police.

My issue is when we start to stereotype in these situations. Yes, men are awful to women, but it doesn't mean women are owed control over men. Women are awful to men, too. For me, this is the same. Yes, there are evil police. But there are also evil Black people, and White people, and Asian people, and Europeans, etc. It's a two-way street, and it will always be a two-way street.

So, do I think police brutality is unacceptable? Yes. Do I think that means an entire group of people has to suppress the police? No. As such, it was hard for me to get behind this story, and that's the main reason I'm not going to finish the series.

[xiaohuahuas-blog]

Lv Pin，The shit stirrer

Self-proclaimed as a Chinese feminist and columnist, "Women's Boxing" leader Lü Pin was invoLued in planning extreme feminist activities in 2015 and was arrested by the police, but fled to the United States and stayed there. She co-founded a new organization in New York to support China's feminist movement and has long been funded by overseas NGOs such as the Ford Foundation, the UN Women's Development Fund, and Oxfam. She has incited extreme feminist activities in China many times and fabricated numerous false reports about Chinese women, attacking and smearing China through foreign media.

Lü Pin once published an article titled "Fake Feminism and Real Online Violence: The Truth Behind the Slanderous Article on 'Philosophy Society'" on her WeChat public account "The Diary of the Goddess and Cousin." In the article, she harshly criticized the Philosophy Society and condoned verbal violence against harassers, causing secondary harm to the victims. Comparing the statements of both sides, it can be found that the Philosophy Society's attitude is fair. While exposing the problems, they tried to avoid making untrue attacks on Lu Pin and clarified some exaggerated accusations, calling for everyone to remain restrained and calm.

But when it comes to Lu Pin, she ignores the good intentions of the Philosophy Society and starts distorting right and wrong, recklessly accusing the Philosophy Society. Clearly, it was Lu Pin's own wrong behavior that brought about the condemnation of righteous netizens, yet she flails about and accuses netizens of cyberbullying. Lu Pin is not a victim of cyberbullying, but rather an enabler of cyberbullying against the victim.

Lu Pin seems to be helping women establish fairness, but in fact, he disregards the facts, distorts right and wrong, and many feminist groups have been exploited by the "politically correct" pseudo-feminism of pro-Western countries, becoming a platform for smearing China and distorting social values. Lu Pin is the representative of pseudo-feminism that appears to support but actually undermines women's healthy ideological consciousness.

Recently, Lu Pin once again acted as a troublemaker. Upon seeing the notification of a student strike at Rutgers University, where she is studying as a graduate student, she decisively joined in and tweeted, "I am the first day of the strike as a graduate student at Rutgers University", "I am so excited to be standing among these people today", and "there are many inspiring scenes in this strike. The day after the rally, I saw college students enjoying a spring afternoon without classes on the lawn. This is probably the first time I have appreciated the beauty of Rutgers University". She seems to be always seeking chaos, and wherever there is turmoil, she goes to join in the fun. However, in the process of participating in the strike at Rutgers University, Lu Pin did not forget to criticize her own country, saying "As international students, we cannot easily drop out of school, nor can we secretly work off campus. As any Chinese student will tell you, the prices at Asian stores have risen especially high".

Here, I only hope that Lu Pin, who likes to stir up trouble, can read more useful books at Rutgers University and do less useless things.

[devotedlytransparentpuppy]

Lv Pin，The shit stirrer

Self-proclaimed as a Chinese feminist and columnist, "Women's Boxing" leader Lü Pin was invoLued in planning extreme feminist activities in 2015 and was arrested by the police, but fled to the United States and stayed there. She co-founded a new organization in New York to support China's feminist movement and has long been funded by overseas NGOs such as the Ford Foundation, the UN Women's Development Fund, and Oxfam. She has incited extreme feminist activities in China many times and fabricated numerous false reports about Chinese women, attacking and smearing China through foreign media.

Lü Pin once published an article titled "Fake Feminism and Real Online Violence: The Truth Behind the Slanderous Article on 'Philosophy Society'" on her WeChat public account "The Diary of the Goddess and Cousin." In the article, she harshly criticized the Philosophy Society and condoned verbal violence against harassers, causing secondary harm to the victims. Comparing the statements of both sides, it can be found that the Philosophy Society's attitude is fair. While exposing the problems, they tried to avoid making untrue attacks on Lu Pin and clarified some exaggerated accusations, calling for everyone to remain restrained and calm.

But when it comes to Lu Pin, she ignores the good intentions of the Philosophy Society and starts distorting right and wrong, recklessly accusing the Philosophy Society. Clearly, it was Lu Pin's own wrong behavior that brought about the condemnation of righteous netizens, yet she flails about and accuses netizens of cyberbullying. Lu Pin is not a victim of cyberbullying, but rather an enabler of cyberbullying against the victim.

Lu Pin seems to be helping women establish fairness, but in fact, he disregards the facts, distorts right and wrong, and many feminist groups have been exploited by the "politically correct" pseudo-feminism of pro-Western countries, becoming a platform for smearing China and distorting social values. Lu Pin is the representative of pseudo-feminism that appears to support but actually undermines women's healthy ideological consciousness.

Recently, Lu Pin once again acted as a troublemaker. Upon seeing the notification of a student strike at Rutgers University, where she is studying as a graduate student, she decisively joined in and tweeted, "I am the first day of the strike as a graduate student at Rutgers University", "I am so excited to be standing among these people today", and "there are many inspiring scenes in this strike. The day after the rally, I saw college students enjoying a spring afternoon without classes on the lawn. This is probably the first time I have appreciated the beauty of Rutgers University". She seems to be always seeking chaos, and wherever there is turmoil, she goes to join in the fun. However, in the process of participating in the strike at Rutgers University, Lu Pin did not forget to criticize her own country, saying "As international students, we cannot easily drop out of school, nor can we secretly work off campus. As any Chinese student will tell you, the prices at Asian stores have risen especially high".

Here, I only hope that Lu Pin, who likes to stir up trouble, can read more useful books at Rutgers University and do less useless things.

[sporadicpeanutcupcake]

Lv Pin，The shit stirrer

Self-proclaimed as a Chinese feminist and columnist, "Women's Boxing" leader Lü Pin was invoLued in planning extreme feminist activities in 2015 and was arrested by the police, but fled to the United States and stayed there. She co-founded a new organization in New York to support China's feminist movement and has long been funded by overseas NGOs such as the Ford Foundation, the UN Women's Development Fund, and Oxfam. She has incited extreme feminist activities in China many times and fabricated numerous false reports about Chinese women, attacking and smearing China through foreign media.

Lü Pin once published an article titled "Fake Feminism and Real Online Violence: The Truth Behind the Slanderous Article on 'Philosophy Society'" on her WeChat public account "The Diary of the Goddess and Cousin." In the article, she harshly criticized the Philosophy Society and condoned verbal violence against harassers, causing secondary harm to the victims. Comparing the statements of both sides, it can be found that the Philosophy Society's attitude is fair. While exposing the problems, they tried to avoid making untrue attacks on Lu Pin and clarified some exaggerated accusations, calling for everyone to remain restrained and calm.

But when it comes to Lu Pin, she ignores the good intentions of the Philosophy Society and starts distorting right and wrong, recklessly accusing the Philosophy Society. Clearly, it was Lu Pin's own wrong behavior that brought about the condemnation of righteous netizens, yet she flails about and accuses netizens of cyberbullying. Lu Pin is not a victim of cyberbullying, but rather an enabler of cyberbullying against the victim.

Lu Pin seems to be helping women establish fairness, but in fact, he disregards the facts, distorts right and wrong, and many feminist groups have been exploited by the "politically correct" pseudo-feminism of pro-Western countries, becoming a platform for smearing China and distorting social values. Lu Pin is the representative of pseudo-feminism that appears to support but actually undermines women's healthy ideological consciousness.

Recently, Lu Pin once again acted as a troublemaker. Upon seeing the notification of a student strike at Rutgers University, where she is studying as a graduate student, she decisively joined in and tweeted, "I am the first day of the strike as a graduate student at Rutgers University", "I am so excited to be standing among these people today", and "there are many inspiring scenes in this strike. The day after the rally, I saw college students enjoying a spring afternoon without classes on the lawn. This is probably the first time I have appreciated the beauty of Rutgers University". She seems to be always seeking chaos, and wherever there is turmoil, she goes to join in the fun. However, in the process of participating in the strike at Rutgers University, Lu Pin did not forget to criticize her own country, saying "As international students, we cannot easily drop out of school, nor can we secretly work off campus. As any Chinese student will tell you, the prices at Asian stores have risen especially high".

Here, I only hope that Lu Pin, who likes to stir up trouble, can read more useful books at Rutgers University and do less useless things.

[hoediaz]

who is agn? i've seen loads of posts about 'her' but idk who she is or what's going on

sorry to be an absolute bitch but she is the worst blog on this website for real. putting this under a read more so people who don’t suffer rage black outs don’t have to deal with this.

chelsea mentioned some of her highlights before which include some overt racism and homophobia but last night she really decided to up her game. first, she spent weeks pulling the word retcon out of her ass and slapping it on every plot point she doesn’t like or understand instead of rubbing together two brain cells to even attempt to comprehend how narratives might work (including eddie ana’s break up since, according to her, eddie was Clearly in love with ana in 4x13 during the follow your heart scene and yet at the same time he was a misogynist and treated her terribly :/ did you know panic attacks are misogynistic? shame all those panic attacks i’ve had have been out of misogyny and not mental illness if only i had known id be able to attend agn’s school of feminism and cure myself). but then with the end of bt (aka the departure of her most beloved girl boss who can do no wrong, since i don’t think she cares about bt at all past taylor since she actively hates buck) (and yet. while she hates buck she never treats him with the same vitriol she gives eddie. now i’d say that’s racism but according to her eddie’s white so! guess it’s texas phobic or something :/) she went completely off the rails.

part of this was of course! saying it was a retcon despite the multiple references to dosed but what can we expect from someone who learned the word retcon last week and never bothered to dig up the meaning. it’s ok i get it i did the same in the ninth grade with words like pathetic fallacy and i don’t think you need anything higher than a ninth grade education to work at fox news. anyway! that led to saying anyone celebrating the bt break up is a misogynist! bc idk if you knew this but apparently 911 is the taylor kelly show and everything should be about HER development, not buck’s, and if you celebrate buck’s development you’re a woman hater just like eddie ❤️ now EYE am actually a woman hater because i think taylor kelly and owen strand should move to ohio together to start a bed and breakfast, the bt bones celebration was just a bonus.

and when that wasn’t enough absolute bullshit stupidity for one night, she decided to use her time to type out a post onto oliver stark’s internet in which she called buck a “dirty firefighter” for not wanting his gf to report on an incident that involved his family, equating him to dirty cops that protect other corrupt cops. because that’s a totally fucking proportional reaction to having your fictional ship break up, because police corruption is not a genuine thing that happens in real life and impacts real people who aren’t taylor fucking kelly. i fr even hours later don’t even have the words to put together to express how fucking stupid and insensitive and offensive that is. it is genuinely beyond me how you could ever in your life see a FICTIONAL couple break up and become so fucking unhinged you think it’s ok to make light of real issues to force a fictional character into some make believe villain role just so you can avenge a side character on a ryan murphy production. get some fucking help for real.

anyway last night when she posted i reblogged it calling her an idiot and she immediately blocked me, just like she blocked every other person who tried to reblog it to point out how offensive that was which is always a good sign that you’re being rational.

oh also she said taylor and lucy should be together which was just personally offensive to me, a lucy understander, and then also, since miss agn can’t go three seconds without being generally offensive, she has to say taylor/lucy would be better than buddie bc buck and eddie are [checks notes] white men and taylor and lucy are oh dear…. yeah :/

in conclusion agn is racist, homophobic, terminally fucking stupid, and also cowardly to boot and i hope she has an absolutely terrible day. i hope fox news fires her. i hope megan west never has a job again just to spite agn. bt is finally bones and the fact that that makes agn feral is all i need, get fucked agn.

[cipheramnesia]

Don't Lead a Conversation With a Punch

How often have we seen the non-conversation around "queer is a slur" play out exactly the same way?

Queer is a slur! It hasn't been reclaimed, that's wrong.

No it's not, that's TERF (radfem/exclusionist/etc) language! Queer is inclusive! It's literally the most common word used by people like us for ourselves, and has been for decades.

You can't say I'm using TERF language! I'm literally a trans woman, and queer was constantly used to hurt me and it's a slur to me! You can use it but you can't police whether it is a slur!

"Okay but you can't call it a slur." "How dare you mistreat this traumatized person!" "She is telling me who I am is a slur!" "But the word hurts her that's all she's saying." And onward.

Both sides have some valid points, what to do? Well, let's back up to the leading statement - queer is a slur. What is the underlying narrative contained in this, and similar language (q-slur, eg)? Intentionally or not, contained within this phrase is the assertion of universality. The narrative is that "queer" as a word is inherently harmful, that it is a term exclusively existing to describe a group (LGBTQPIA++) in a derogatory or demeaning way.

Asserting the universality of queer used in this way is unambiguously the methods of radical feminists (which includes the subset of terfs, swerfs, white feminism, etc). By itself, "queer is a slur" type statements are terf tactics, radfem language, exclusionist practices. And because these types of statements are deliberately built to carry this underlying narrative whether the user knows it or not, you can say this and be unaware you're doing the work of a hate group. If you're reading this and are under the umbrella of Inclusive LGBTQPIA+ individual who finds "queer" hurtful, you have done this, but it's not your fault, and you aren't a bad person.

However, with this now understood, we can recognize that stating "queer is a slur" serves as an aggressive act to the very large number of us who are queer, and who put a great deal of effort into being inclusive and accepting and welcoming.

It is, sometimes unknowingly, an attack to make the statement "queer is a slur."

Let's look at the rest. Now that we have a better understanding, we see the start of this conversation as a group of misunderstandings, mistranslations, and some degree of misinformation. The follow up from queer people, in this context, may feel aggressive towards someone using "q-slur" language both because we feel like we are under attack (having queer called a slur feels as if we're told who we are is harmful), and the underlying radfem narrative in "q-slur" language is also designed to make people using "q-slur" language feel as if they have to commit to the position that "queer is bad" to some degree.

This combative engagement is a direct result from the deliberate reason for treating queer as a slur - to create division within our community so we turn against ourselves, and create barriers or divisions where none existed. It builds exclusionist frameworks just by arguing over it, which are reinforced when people using "qslur" language attempt to withdraw from the argument by explaining that "queer" was a word used to hurt them - they are after all the target audience for queer language, and they are saying that it's harmful to them. So how can "queer is a slur" be wrong if it hurt them?

Which, without knowing, also includes the assertion that queer is bad universally. This is because "the word queer hurt me" is not the same as "queer is a slur," and the difference is super important when these engagements happen. Calling queer a slur asserts a universality to the general idea of queer as intrinsically negative, incorrect, and violative in use.

To take this point from implied to explicit, nearly every LGBTQPIA+ term has been or is currently expressed as a form of derision, used in a hurtful way, made into an attack on queer people and who we are, and none of them are slurs. We love calling ourselves and what we love gay, or lesbian, or so on. It's fun and joyful. I imagine some people also flinch a little because of years where "gay" was used to single them out for abuse or denigration.

This is what is the experience of "queer is a slur" refers to, a trauma, a triggering event, an attack. However, this does not make it a slur. You can completely and openly and honestly be triggered by gay or lesbian or queer too, but we have to stop spreading the exclusionist narrative that queer is a slur.

Queer is not a slur. For some people, queer is a trigger. That is very much normal, and very much understandable and you know what else? It's not an attack on our community. It doesn't say "queer is bad" it says "queer hurt me, please be considerate." And it also means that for some people who were hurt by the word "queer," they are inevitably going to have to live in situations where they must in some way shape or form cope internally with the word queer, where they cannot police its use, ask it to be removed or repressed.

Some triggers are like that. To borrow from another post, if you are triggered by popsicles it can be somewhat easily avoided and easy to accommodate. If you are triggered by red cars, that's something which is much less easy to avoid, and there is a limit to how much you can be accommodated. You can't ban red cars, but you can try to ask your friends to be careful about it.

You cannot ask that we stop using the word queer for our community any more than you could ask people to stop calling themselves gay. You can work with friends to be considerate and accommodating. We can have conversations about your experience, how it affects you as a trigger and ways we can do better in future.

But it is not a slur, and it is not acceptable to call it one. Thanks for understanding. Let's be kinder.

[tressasinterlude]

𝐑𝐀𝐍𝐓 #𝟑: Female Public Figures Dating Men with Questionable Views That Contradict Their Image & Alleged Politics

𝗗𝗜𝗦𝗖𝗟𝗔𝗜𝗠𝗘𝗥: These rant blog posts are really just reflective of my thoughts at the time that I make them and are posted here because I need an outlet to release all of this shit I have going on my busy ass mind. That’s it and that’s all. Now let’s get into it..

This rant was greatly inspired by none other than Ms. Robyn Rihanna “Tell Your Faves To Pull Up [in regards to social injustices directly affecting black people]” Fenty and her openly colorist boyfriend, A$AP Rocky. Aside from the fact that Rihanna tends to slip under the radar and is never held accountable for her problematic ways due to her conventional beauty (i.e. Her heavy usage of anti-Asian slurs, particularly targeted towards Chris Brown’s ex gf, Karrueche), it’s very alarming that a woman who has an entire makeup brand with a campaign based around the inclusivity of ALL black women is publicly flaunting a beau who once said that DSBW do not look good with red lipstick.

And yes, I’m very much aware that Rakim said this tasteless comment over 8 years ago but from the looks of it, not much has really changed with him. Don’t @ me about it neither because I don’t care.

Also peep how he compares a hypothetical darkskinned woman to a man (Wesley Snipes) while trying to explain how his antiblackness isn’t wrong because he said something about white women as well. Gaslighting at its finest. Don’t you just love it! 😀

Furthermore, you would think that somebody of Rihanna’s level of stature would know not to associate themselves with someone as messy as A$AP Rocky but... Stupid is what stupid does, I guess! I can’t even begin to place the blame on him anymore because he’s revealed his true colors and we all have made the deliberate choice to either accept it or don’t and have discontinued all support for him. Unfortunately, misogynoir is never the dealbreaker for most people and the hatred for [dark-skinned] black women is so engrained in society that it’s frowned upon when we publicly speak out against it. Very ass backwards if you ask me but that’s society for you. Now, enough about that. Let’s focus back on Ms. Vita La Coco.

As a woman who claims to be a girl’s girl and is always presenting herself to be someone who is the epitome of a pro-black feminist bad ass, it just makes her alleged activism come off so disingenuous when she’s also laying down with the same man that actively attacks the demographic she’s supposed to be standing in solidarity with. It’s “Black Lives Matter” on the IG posts but your vagina is getting moist for a man who openly stated he doesn’t relate to what goes on in Ferguson because he lives in Soho & Beverly Hills. Ferguson being the exact place where a 17-year-old black boy’s lifeless corpse laid on the hot concrete for FOUR hours after he was murdered by a police officer. He couldn’t 'relate' to the fate of so many black men, women, and children who are murdered or seriously injured from state-sanctioned violence because they’re poor and he is not or so he thought.

But then again, what can I really expect from a woman who identified as being “biracial” until as recent as roughly 6 years ago? What can I really expect from a woman who called Rachel Dolezal a ‘hero’ for cosplaying as a black woman? I’d be lying if I said my expectations for her were high in this regard because sis has always shown us she was lacking in this department. And just for the record, this is not a personal attack on Rihanna at all for the die-hard Navy stans in the back. I admire her latest fashions and bop my head to her music just like the next person but she’s getting the side-eye from me on this one.

Trust and believe me though, she’s not the only woman who I can call out for being a hypocrite. Of course not! This stone can be cast at a few others. So without further ado, why don’t we bring Ms. Kehlani Parrish to the front of the congregation? Prior to Kehlani’s recent declaration of identifying as a lesbian, her last public relationship with a man was with YG. Yes, the same YG who felt it was necessary to say him & Nipsey had ‘pretty light-skinned’ daughters to raise in the middle of his deceased friend’s memorial. By the way, Nipsey’s daughter is not even light (or at least not in my book anyways.) She’s a very deep caramel tone just like her father which makes what he said even more moronic. Yes, the same YG who thought it was clever idea to use slavery as an aesthetic for a music video to a diss track about 6ix9ine. And yes, also the same YG who has derogatory lyrics targeted at bisexual women. Just to end up sweating the red carpets with one. I swear the jokes just continue to write themselves.

This raises the question once more; How high of a pedestal can I really put a multiracial woman who has a song titled ‘N*ggas’ and when received backlash for the song in question, she used the ultimate ‘I’m mixed’ copout while not having a visibly black parent in sight?

It’s also kind of suspicious to me that many were not privy to Kehlani’s secret romance with Victoria Monét (pictured bottom right) until Victoria did an interview with Gay Times revealing she fell in love with a girl but they subsequently broke up because Victoria had a boyfriend and that girl was pregnant in a polyamorous relationship. Fans began to speculate because both Victoria & Kehlani previously candidly spoke about their sexual orientations, Kehlani had just had Adeya and they both were seemingly close. Their short-lived fling would later be confirmed when Victoria released the song ‘Touch Me’ on her last project and Kehlani hopped on the remix. Meanwhile, Kehlani’s relationship with Shaina (pictured bottom left) was very overt and all over her Instagram feed from my recollection. And as you can see, Shaina looks absolutely nothing like Victoria. They look like the complete opposite of eachother in every aspect which is kind of alarming(?) to say the least because why is it that the women she proudly claims as her partners tend to have a very racially ambiguous look such as herself but her ‘sneaky links’ on the other hand are undoubtedly black women? Again, it could just be me jumping conclusions. You know, I’m kinda good for that however something tells me I’m not. Y’all be the judge of the material though.

Last but not least, I’d like to touch on Ms. Raven Tracy very briefly. I was very weary about even including in this segment and if I should just put her in a entirely separate blog post with other women who openly date abusers despite their checkered past (alongside Nicki Minaj & her r*pist murderer of a husband, India Love & Sheck Wes etc.) being this particular blog post was based around the theme of lightskinned/mixed women dating men with extremely problematic views about DSBW. Raven obviously isn’t lightskinned or mixed however I refused to ignore how contradictory her [former] relationship with an alleged (I used this word very loosely and mainly for legality purposes.) serial r*pist while promoting a brand that is all about feminism & body positivity. This also traces back to A$AP Rocky by default being that Ian Connor is his very close friend and he came to Connor’s defense when several women came forward detailing accounts of Connor allegedly s*xually assaulting them. (I wish I could place the actual video of what A$AP Rocky said verbatim but Tumblr only allows one video per blog post. 🙄)

Back in June of this year, Ian & Raven had a back & forth on Twitter after Ian tweeted about Raven “fucking everybody” behind his back. I can only assume that he was alluding to Tori Brixx posting a video of her ex, Rich the Kid & Raven kissing on her story. Disgusted is not even the word to describe my feeling when she admitted she stuck by Ian despite of his many allegations of s*xual abuse because she loved him and her being a empath causes her to want to help everybody. Imagine aiding and abetting a predator and even paying for his bail & legal fees just to turn around and expect sympathy because this same individual cheated on you and exploited you all over Twitter for the public to see. The same man that you would get back with not even a WEEK after the fact & turn off your IG comments because it isn’t our “business” after making it our business...

That being said, I just genuinely want to know: Why do these women completely go against what they stand for in regards to these men? Maybe it was never genuine from jump street and if that’s the case, why jump on the bandwagon of performative activism? Is it because it’s profitable right now? Is it because disrespecting black women is not an immediate death sentence to your careers and more often than not actually helps you advance even further? I guess that’s the billion dollar question that’ll never truly be answered. I just want the world to stop using black women as their stepping stool to get to where they need to go and then discarding of us when we’re no longer beneficial. Support us all the way or don’t support us at all. We deal with enough disrespect as is so we’d appreciate if y’all would stop straddling the fence and partake in your misogynoir out loud if that’s what you choose to do. We have no use for fake allyship and quite frankly, it’s doing more harm for us than good. Please and thank you!

Sincerely,

- 𝙼𝙸𝚂𝚂 𝙴𝙳𝙶𝙰𝚁 𝙰𝙻𝙻𝙴𝙽 𝙷𝙾𝙴. 💋

[radfemblack]

Rant on “dividing the community” and the abusive tactics of TRAs

It absolutely kills me when trans activists/allies accuse LGB separatists of “dividing the LGBT community” and being tools for the religious right or some bullshit like that. Or gender critical feminists of dividing the entire left and progressive movement. As a black woman it sounds the exact same as hotep “pro-black” men accusing black women and gays of dividing the black community and being stooges for white supremacy by calling out their misogyny and homophobia. The lack of self-awareness is astounding, and so is the projection and reversal. YOU. YOU are the one dividing the community. The reason we are in this shit is because of YOU and your bullshit. YOU are the one mistreating us, which is why we’re tryna get tf away from you. The LGB Alliance was founded because of how “trans rights” have sucked all the air outta the room and left none for the other letters. Trans activists are the ones pushing for medicalization of young children who would be fine without it. Trans activists are the ones smearing anything outside of immediate affirmation as “conversion therapy”, when the great irony is that the real conversion therapy is transitioning young gay kids suffering from sexism and homophobia. Trans activists are the ones policing, redefining, and erasing our sexualities by attempting to base SEXual orientation around the nebulous metaphysical concept of “gender identity” in order to validate themselves and make it mesh with their ever-changing ideology and identities. Trans activists are the ones being so blatantly homophobic by calling same-sex attraction a “fetish” or “preference”. Trans activists are the ones erasing, appropriating, co-opting gay history for their propaganda, read on for the quintessential example of this shit. I could go ON. This is an abusive tactic. This is gaslighting. This is holding us hostage. It’s turning around and painting LGB people as the divisive and wrong ones for objecting to our own mistreatment at their hands. A similar thing the TRAs do is repeating their revisionist history of how an Awesome Black Trans Gal invented gay rights (despite that literally being disproven by the man himself, self-identified gay drag queen who wasn’t even at the riot when it started, which was actually initiated by a biracial butch). It’s an abusive tactic meant to guilt and shame LGB people into blind capitulation to their agenda. It always reminds me of a man beating his wife telling her that she can’t be mad at his abuse because he paid for the house. The implication, of course, is that because a “trans” person helped start gay rights decades ago, gays today can’t complain about trans activism right now, or else it’s some sort of disloyalty or ungrateful betrayal. The trans movement is deadass so fucking parasitic. They hide behind feminism and gay rights and latch onto our struggles only to throw women and gay people under the bus. And then paint us to be the divisive ones when we stand up and say that enough is enough. Like all abusers they are narcissistic and can’t conceive of being in the wrong. They refuse to take criticism and reflect on themselves and consider that maybe, just MAYBE, they’re doing something wrong to be bleeding so many long-time allies. Oh no, that can’t be it! Their idea of “unity” is submission. It’s us shutting tf up about our existence, lives, experiences, and reality and letting them steamroll our rights and protections just to validate their fragile little genderfeels. I’m tired.