#don't know how to explain to you that it's not feminism to hate men

[inkskinned]

the tradwife movement is the same as it has always been - back in the kitchen, back to breeding - it just has better branding.

when i was younger, i hated pink. i was not like other girls. this is now something i'm embarrassed of - this was not me being a "girl's girl."

but it was expressing something many of us felt at the time: i literally wasn't what girlhood was supposed to be. this is a hard thing to explain, but you know when you're not performing girlhood correctly. it isn't as easy as "i liked x when girls liked y" - because there were other girls that liked x, too - but i never figured out exactly the correct way to like x, or to be interested in y.

now there is the divine feminine. this is the same rhetoric it has always been: women are biologically driven to like pink and ribbons and submitting to our husbands.

the problem is that the patriarchy found a better PR team. because yes, actually, i want every woman to have the choice to be a homemaker. i also want her taken seriously for her legitimate home-making labor. i want her to be recognized as also having a job, just unpaid. i want men to have this opportunity, too.

but it is no longer "i made this choice and I love it." instead it is a sixteen-paragraph rant about how selfish it is that my generation isn't having kids. instead it's long videos about how if you feed your children processed foods, you're going to kill them. instead it is "this is what womanhood is supposed to be. i feel bad for any other choices you're making."

the shame spiral is just prettier. it is large houses devoid of personality. it is the implication: if you don't have this, you aren't happy. the solid, everlasting assurance: women are actually supposed to be submitting. this is the default. this is the natural state of things. all other attempts inflict suffering.

but you can no longer say i'm not like other girls. you can no longer reject this image completely. you cannot find it revolting, even if you know that the underbelly is toxic and festering. sure, it is the same repackaged patriarchy. but the internet does not have shades of grey. you should support and reward other women! your disgust is actually internalized misogyny. not because you are seeing a vision of yourself the way they're trying to train you to be. not because you feel her ghost pass within an inch of your earlobe. not because your father will eventually ask you - why can't you be like her?

because they figured out how to make it beautiful: women will sell other women on this idea, and we will find the singular loophole in feminism. sure, she's shaming you in most of her videos. sure, she implies that a different life is obscene. but she just wants you to be happy! you'd be happier if you were listening!

and the whole time you're sitting there thinking: i'd actually just be happier if i had that kind of money.

[rosabell14]

The hunters of Artemis, Reyna, and Asexuality in Riordan's writing

I kinda started thinking about this since Reyna became a hunter. I could never articulate why I hated this Choice. I was asexual after all. Shouldn't I be happy about this rep? We Ace people barely get any after all. Then I realized that it's because I just didn't like the hunters as ace representation. And I didn't need to be grateful for mediocrity.

You want to know why the hunters of Artemis suck in general? And as Ace rep specifically? Because Riordan did not write them with that mindset.

Like people are so busy hailing this man as the king of representation in literature(blegh) that they forgot how heteronormative and white(sometimes racist) the original series was. Y'all really think this man was thinking about writing asexuals in the year 2007? Get real. What Riordan was doing was a white man trying to write feminism and failing (there's a reason most of his female characterization of female characters boils down to tough "not like other girls" characters who are dicks to the boys around them yet also to the girls around them if they're jealous)

Now onto the hunters.

The hunters when first presented in TTC are not a group of asexuals but rather religious celibates. Fantasy Pegan nuns if you may. The first problem arises when their ages are brought up.

"Then the archers came from the woods. They were girls, about a dozen of them. The youngest was maybe ten. The oldest, about fourteen..."

Remember, before ToA gave us Emmie and Jo, the hunters WERE all young girls. Now why in the world are they so young? Especially when in the actual myths, the hunters could come from any age whatsoever? Well the reason is a doozy.

"Are you surprised by my age?" she asked.

"Uh… a little."

"I could appear as a grown woman, or a blazing fire, or anything else I want, but this is what I prefer. This is the average age of my Hunters, and all young maidens for whom I am patron, before they go astray."

"Go astray?" I asked.

"Grow up. Become smitten with boys. Become silly, preoccupied, insecure. Forget themselves."

Hooo boy. What a way to phrase it. Going astray. Losing themselves. This kinda confirms that the reason why Artemis goes after young girls specifically is because she only wants girls who have yet to finish puberty. Girls have yet to discover their own sexuality. Now I'm not a representative of Asexuals everywhere, but I'm pretty sure most of us don't discover our sexuality at the age of ten. Let alone have the maturity to decide to become celibates about it. And let me reiterate: celibacy is not sexuality. Sure asexual people CAN choose to be celibates but it's not the same thing at all. In fact Zoe and Thalia are big cases for this. Both of them had liked men before(herakles and luke) but joined for their own reasons. Thalia to escape the prophecy and Zoe out of heartbreak. Hell, Bianca herself is mostly swayed by the idea of having no responsibility and a new family.

Now Rick does another thing that goes against the myths. The exclusion of make hunters. Artemis frequently hung around or taught male hunters who respected her. Daphnis, Scamandrius, freaking Hippolytus whom Artemis greatly cared about. Oh but we need to come up with bullshit reasons why Nico can't just join the hunt with his sisters so the hunters of Artemis are all: Ewww men. Also note how at no point does Riordan mention people who fall in love with women.

Now the next point is the oath itself. Artemis says this:

"What oath?" I said.

"To forswear romantic love forever," Artemis said. "To never grow up, never get married. To be a maiden eternally."

When I tell you that Emmy and Joe were retcons . Rick was freaking INSISTENT on the hunters being kids. Also note the three points: to never fall in love, to never get married, to stay a maiden.

I mean I think I don't need to explain why obsessing over the virginity of young girls is creepy. Does Riordan think girls older than fourteen can't keep it in their pants? And let me be adamant here Riordan only cares about the virginity Clause here. He mentions falling in love and marriage because he sees them inherently intertwined with sex.

Now onto the wording of the oath itself:

'I pledge myself to the goddess Artemis. I turn my back on the company of men, accept eternal maidenhood, and join the Hunt.'

I mean you might be able to interpret men here as mankind and therefore excluding women as well. But I have many reasons to believe that Riordan didn't even CONSIDER women as a possibility(someone inform this man that lesbians existed smh 😞). Also note that falling in love is not mentioned in the actual oath but maidenhood is.

Now onto the next big issue. Percy Jackson's Greek gods and its chapter on Artemis. It basically confirms all of my problems.

"IT’S NOT THAT ARTEMIS HATED ALL MEN, just most of them. From the moment she was born, she knew one critical fact: Guys are kinda gross."

No mention of girls. In this chapter Percy(Rick) brings up Artemis' disdain for dudes over and over again.

“Let me be a maiden forever, Father,” Artemis said, twirling her finger in Zeus’s beard. “I never want to get married.---- But you can grant me a bunch of followers: ocean nymphs, river nymphs, wood nymphs—what the heck, how about mortal girls, too? Any girls who want to join me can become my followers, as long as they remain maidens like me. They should probably make the decision when they’re about nine years old, before they get interested in boys, because after that, they’ll be all distracted and of no use to me.”

Yikes yikes yikes. Ladies and gentlemen the age has been lowered to 9. Freaking 9. Also I guess girls older than that don't need Artemis' protection then? (the real problem is that older/married girls should be out of Artemis's jurisdiction and under the protection of other gods like Hera, Hestia, and Ares. But Hestia is barely there. Hera is terrible and the Amazons also suck)

Now when I tell you that Artemis' big point was about virginity, I mean it. This actually has mythological evidence.

The myths actually DO mention what happens when female hunters fall in love. Rhodopis and Euthynicus were two hunters who offended Aphrodite by choosing a chaste life so she had Eros make them fall in love. However note that they weren't booted out of the hunters for falling in love, but rather after having sex in a cave. THAT was what Artemis took offense to.

Another myth is the story of Aura. A huntress who offended Artemis by comparing their breasts(Greek mythology am I right?). Saying that her breast were better than Artemis' because they were smaller and hey maybe that means that Artemis isn't actually a maiden. Artemis punishes her by making her lose her VIRGINITY. She goes to nemesis for revenge. Nemesis goes to Eros who makes Dionysus fall in love with Aura and when Aura refuses his advances he ties her up and... Yeah you can guess where I'm going with this.

But hey! Those myths aren't in the Greek gods book. You know which myth is? The myth of C(K)allisto. And this one angers me so much I want to chew on the drywall.

The way Riordan writes it. Zeus turns himself into Artemis, brings Kallisto's guards down with the disguise, gets close to her and then when Kallisto REJECTS Artemis' supposed advances, forces himself on her. I need to say this again. Kallisto does not fall in love, she isn't seduced, she does not break her oath. But we still need a reason for her to be yeeted out of the hunters so her lack of maidenhood it is

“You were my favorite,” Artemis said. “If you had come to me immediately, I could have helped you. I would have found you a rich, handsome husband and let you settle into a new life in the city of your choice. I would have allowed you to retire from the Hunt with honor. You could have gone in peace. Zeus’s assault was not your fault.”

Kallisto sobbed. “But I didn’t want to lose you! I wanted to stay!”

Artemis felt like her heart was breaking, but she couldn’t show it. She had rules about her followers. She couldn’t allow those rules to be broken, not even by her best friend. “Kallisto, your crime was keeping the secret from me. You dishonored me, and your sisters of the Hunt, by not being honest. You defiled our company of maidens when you were not a maiden yourself. That I cannot forgive.”

I want to slap this man so hard he flies to the opposite side of the universe. We are not here to blame victims of assault guys! Except we are! But with extra steps. If you get attacked, it's not your fault, but If you are too scared to admit the truth then you deserve to lose your only safe space and turn into a bear. Oh nooooo Kallisto DEFILED Artemis' company by being an icky non virgin. The moment you lose your virginity even if it's not your fault you get punished. But not because I'm gross but because YOU lied. How terrible! And he expects us to feel for ARTEMIS???

But rosabell! This is how things go in the myths. What was uncle Rick (bleghhhh) supposed to do? I don't know... Choose a different version of the story? There are versions were Zeus/Hera are the ones who transform Kallisto into a bear. There are versions where Kallisto actively CHOOSES to sleep with Artemis. Granted it's still assault because she's being lied to but at least then, she'd have a degree of autonomy in the events. At least Artemis could rightfully accuse her of breaking her oath. But noooo, Riordan doesn't know lesbians exist. He actively makes Zeus into a canonical Ra*ist. Why is he on the throne again?

(the fact that this book came out AFTER HoH y'all 😭)

Once again, Riordan sees maidenhood(virginity)/love/marriage as intertwined. This is NOT what being on the aroace spectrum means. You can fall in love but not have sex. You can have sex but not fall in love. You can have sex AND still be an asexual. You can be married and still be a "maiden". Riordan doesn't get to claim to be such a progressive ally for retconning the hunters in 2017, TEN years after he first introduced the hunters because he suddenly remembered that lesbians exist.

Or more like because he doesn't know what to do with his female characters. The hunters more than anything are Riordan's heroine dumping ground. If you don't want it put them in relationships, either kill them(Bianca whose main purpose is to die) or make them eternal virgins(the hunters, Rachel). The fact that some people genuinely think that Calypso should have joined the hunters astound me. Girl suffered for years because of the gods and you all think that the best thing outside of Leo for her(not that I like Caleo) is to become a servant to the gods? Because you can't perceive a female character doing anything else if she's not in a relationship. Like with Thalia, this at least made sense on a strategic level because she didn't want to reach sixteen. Oh but we also don't know what else to do with her so she needs to want to be a hunter after the war is over so we give her a half-assed argument with Luke and now she can be all: wah wah Zoe you were totally right about boys. And the cherry on the cake is that she doesn't even get to be in the final confrontation with Luke or say goodbye to him because of a freaking STATUE. And after pjo her personality becomes Zoe 2.0 and her and Jason get ONE measly meeting.

When I first spoke of not liking Renya joining the hunters this is what I mean. Riordan had so many options with Reyna. Why did she have to leave her esteemed position which she worked so hard for? Two boys rejected her? Why couldn't she go reconnect with her sister more then? She could have joined the Amazons. But nooo Riordan was so allergic to the fans asking him wether she could be Bi or a lesbian. For the stupidest reasons too? Oh Reyna being a lesbian would come off as stereotypical because she got rejected by two guys beforehand! My dude, do you think people don't say the same thing about us who are on the aroace spectrum? That we say we are aro/ace because we got rejected before? Come up with a better excuse next time.

My brother in Christ couldn't even allow Reyna to talk about her sexuality and whatnot. It couldn't even be fully about her. No. He had to turn Reyna into his own mouthpiece admonishing the EVILLLL fans who may have shipped Thalia and Renya. He literally had her say the word "shipping". How cringe can you get? And then he had the audacity to admonish the fans by saying: Why does a strong friendship always have to progress to romance?

It's a sentiment I agree with but coming from this man, it's extremely hypocritical? I don't know Richard maybe because YOU are obsessed with shipping? No character can escape your shipping hands unless they're eternal virgins or dead. You literally turned the Argo2 into Noah's ark2. So much attention focused on shipping that the seven barely felt like friends.

Why does Reyna need to join the hunters? She can choose to not relationship without having to become a servant to female Peter pan.

This is actually a really adequate metaphor when you consider that Emmie and Jo say that they have not met Artemis in YEARS and Apollo mentions that the two of them were lucky she let them LIVE. god can you imagine joining Artemis when you are 9? At an age when you have still not finished maturimg cognitively and therefore shouldn't be trusted on taking a freaking celibacy vow(were you even given the talk yet that age) and after 70 years you decide you want to leave? If you're lucky Artemis will part with you on good terms but SIKES every person you probably knew before joining is now dead. Where is THAT angsty Bianca fic?

Speaking of Bianca. How she was handled also angers me. In another post, I've already talked about how the hunters barely gave her adequate information before letting her join.

How Zoe was the main reason for her death. Zoe KNEW that at least 2 people might die in the quest she was given and yet she decided to bring the least experienced girl to the quest and couldn't even watch her properly.

But you know what else pisses me off? The fact that THEY should have been the one to tell Nico about his sister's death. I've always hated how Chiron made Percy the CHILD tell Nico the other CHILD about his sister dying. But more than anyone, it should have been the hunters' responsibility. Bianca was THEIR responsibility. She died in a quest to save Artemis. The least they could do was tell her remaining family of her fate. The Doylist reason of course is that we need to kickstart Nico and Percy's complicated relationship and have Percy discover that Nico is a son of Hades. But in universe, the fact that they immediately fuck off from the camp upon regrouping makes them come off as extremely selfish. We don't even know if Bianca was given a funeral by them or not. We see Artemis being upset about Zoe but we never see her react to the news of losing Bianca.

[intersexcat-tboy]

hello! this question may come off as ignorant and i apologise, but what's wrong with the terms tme and tma? i know what it means but i dont really understand the (for lack of a better word) issue with these terms.

i looked it up and it didn't really help me all that much :<

I could've sworn I had several posts tagged w it explaining a few reasons why but now there's only 2? 🤔

Here's a starter (link)

There are a few reasons, on their own it's whatever ig, but it relies on the assumption oppression is based solely on identity and not ever considering how your oppressors see you. There isn't a "ableism immune" or "homophobia immune" bc we understand hate crimes are based on PERCEIVED or actual status, not just actual. What's happening to Imane Khelif is being called transmisogyny everywhere, so clearly it's not limited to just transfems, but many will then turn around and say those who were AFAB can't experience it. Some have discussed using "targeted" to convey how it's disproportionately faced rather than arguing how people are incapable of facing it, and I understand that argument better but....

One of the big things is the issue of how people use them. I wouldn't have an issue at all if they were solely personal descriptors, similar to AGAB, to describe your own experience. Instead, people use them to deny violence and oppression. People thinking they get to determine others experiences.

On another side, it's basically used as the Top Misery Award and The Mild Expierence. If you're TMA, it's treated as facing the most or worst oppression, if you're TME, are you really oppressed? Actually, you're privileged (not HAVE a privilege, ARE privileged). This aligns with white feminism believing misogyny is the root or worst oppression.

Most of the people who use it tend to think trans men don't have their own type of oppression faced disproportionately, oftentimes erasing that violence as well. A lot outright deny intersexism and refuse to engage with any points made by intersex individuals about how it affects us as well.

Then there's the whole aspect of how it's "supposed" to mean everyone but transfems (which is kinda a weird thing to want a word for when calling similar ones co-opting), but they only ever use it to mean trans people who were AFAB. You can tell this by how things are said (tme being used for intercommunity), or something like "TRANS TMEs since I guess I have to say that to make it clear 🙄"

There's also the fact everyone defines it differently. Some way you need to have been born w a penis, others say you need to have been AMAB, which contradict each other as someone who was AFAB could have been born w a penis, and some people have multiple AGABs (such as at birth and then a few weeks later)

If you only use it to describe yourself, idrc

[eva-does-their-best]

“You don't need to do any comparison for that, you just need to know the issues, the root, and think on how to (kinda) fix it.” okay… and “misandry”/“androphobia” aren’t real forms of oppression, and misogyny is. misogyny affects women more than it affects men. trans women are women and trans men are men; therefore, trans women are hurt more by misogyny than trans men are. knowing the issues and roots of oppression /involves/ understanding how “transandrophobia” can’t exist and that what transmascs face is transphobia. transandrophobia is misogyny the same way transphobia and homophobia and lesbophobia are misogyny, that’s what the “roots” are. there is no man-hating “root” of oppression to intersect with transphobia for trans men. and saying that isn’t saying transmascs aren’t oppressed! we’re oppressed by transphobia!!

Ok you are totally missing the point, so allow me to explain things to you because it seems either no one bothered to or maybe you just never read it.

•You cannot take the trans- prefix away from transandrophobia, because it is the specific intersection of transphobia for trans MEN and transmascs. The prefix trans is 100% a requirement because we are talking first and foremost about transphobia, of the specific kind faced by men and men/masculine adjacent people, alright?

• Transandrophobia is not an intersection of transphobia and androphobia/misandry, it is an intersection of transphobia and misoginy, just like transmisoginy, it simply needs a different name because it is specific for men and men/masculine adjacent trans people, and its manifestations and issues are many times different from transmisoginy. Ok?

(Transphobia + misoginy) Applied to women and fems= transmisoginy

(Transphobia + misoginy) Applied to men and mascs= Transandrophobia

•No, before/in case you say it, we won't use transemasculation, transandrophobia doesn't always manifest in a stripping of masculinity, it also appears as the opressors and discriminators weaponizing trans men amd transmascs' masculinity against them.

•Of course, trans men are men and trans women are women, but you cannot just ignore the whole trans prefix. Like it or not none of us is cis (except maybe cistrans people and multigender people with at least one gender they consider cis), so discrimination, opression, how we are treated, etc will NOT look 1:1 to how cis people are treated. Cis feminism does not work for us because we were not accounted for in the patriarchal system, we are all outcasts.

•You cannot just invent a whole category (transmisoginy) for the issues specific to one kind of trans people and leave everyone else with the default transphobia, I think it's fairly obvious to see how that just doesn't work.

•Again, you're misunderstanding the language as I explained above. You are discriminated as trans but also specifically a trans man, not as a man, as a trans man, and as much as a trans man IS a man, it's not the same as a cis man. Cannot let desires of affirmation blind us to the fact the trans part matters and differenciates.

[the-most-humble-blog]

🚨 WHEN THE WORLD GOES DARK, PANTSUITS DON'T LEAD—THEY HIDE

💥 “You don’t vote your way out of gravity. And you don’t cry your way out of war.” 💥

“This is satire. If the shoe fits, it’s probably your Etsy bio.”

🪖 REALITY CHECK: THIS AIN’T A DRILL, IT’S A BLOOD-SOAKED INDICTMENT

There is a sickness in the modern West, and it wears empowerment slogans like armor while demanding not to be hit back.

It wants the power of men without the burden of being men.

It wants authority without the risk.

It wants the privilege of command, but the insulation of victimhood.

This sickness peaked when Kamala Harris lost to Donald Trump—again—and the aftermath wasn’t policy critique, it was a nationwide estrogenic scream into the void.

Liberal women didn’t just react. They unraveled.

Collapsed.

Posted stories of trembling fingers.

Filmed TikToks of soul-crushing grief.

Scribbled essays about how the patriarchy had once again “stolen” history from the uterus-wielding savior we never asked for.

This wasn’t politics.

This was a spiritual breakdown.

Because deep down, they know.

💣 THE BOOTH WAS THE ONLY SAFE SPACE LEFT—AND EVEN THERE, WOMEN WHISPERED “NO”

You want to hear something that’ll put the fear of God into feminism?

Women turned on Kamala too. Quietly. In the booth.

They didn’t want Putin staring her down.

They didn’t want Xi hearing her nervous giggle in a trade war summit.

They didn’t want the most powerful country on Earth flailing under the weak hand of someone selected for optics.

For symbolism.

For gender.

They wanted to live.

Even if they’d never say it publicly.

So they marked the box for the devil they hated because they feared a weak angel even more.

🧠 WHY THE WORLD LAUGHED: THE GLOBAL CHECKMATE OF AMERICAN FEMINISM

Imagine you're Vladimir Putin.

A man with a black belt in psychological warfare, a sniper’s eye for leverage, and the soul of a predator.

You don’t lose sleep over feelings.

You don’t hold press conferences to apologize for microaggressions.

You don’t legislate pronouns.

And then across the ocean comes Kamala, hailed by the Western media as the “future of leadership.”

Her CV padded with ceremonial ribbons, token promotions, and PR victories.

Her campaign surrounded by hysterical praise from people who’ve never once stared down death, starvation, or geopolitical collapse.

You know what a man like Putin does with that?

He waits.

Because weakness always folds.

Kamala wasn’t a threat.

She was an opportunity.

So when she lost, and America’s feminist vanguard imploded emotionally, he didn’t even flinch.

He probably raised a glass.

Because he understood what our own people have forgotten:

This world is still run by men with cold eyes, steel guts, and trigger fingers.

💥 “HISTORIC FIRST” MEANS NOTHING WHEN THE ROOM SMELLS LIKE BLOOD

Feminists chanted:

“It’s time for a woman in charge.”

But let me explain something to you:

The battlefield doesn’t care what time it is.

It doesn’t give a sh*t about your grandmother’s suffrage struggle.

It doesn’t owe you an apology for the 1950s.

It doesn’t soften because your resume looks good on LinkedIn.

The battlefield measures:

Who can absorb pressure without flinching.

Who can make decisions that cost lives and still sleep at night.

Who commands respect without demanding sympathy.

Kamala brought none of that.

She brought smiles, buzzwords, and the emotional bandwidth of a middle school guidance counselor.

And when it came time to choose, America said:

“We’d rather take our chances with a bastard who knows what pain feels like than a symbol with press-approved talking points.”

🩸 THE LIE OF RIGHTS: WHY THEY’RE A FICTION YOU’RE ALLOWED TO BELIEVE—FOR NOW

Let’s rip the last Band-Aid off:

Rights aren’t real.

They are imagined contracts, held in place by nothing more than the threat of violence.

Every “right” you think you have?

Exists because somewhere, a man with a rifle has agreed to shoot someone who tries to take it from you.

You live inside a dome of male restraint.

That’s not misogyny.

That’s reality.

And it’s ugly.

And if every man tomorrow decided—not angrily, not violently, just decisively—to revoke those rights?

You’d scream.

You’d protest.

You’d demand justice.

And no one would come.

You know how I know?

Look at Iran.

Look at Afghanistan.

Look at Saudi Arabia.

Do you think their women were less brave than you? Do you think they didn’t march? Didn’t chant? Didn’t believe in equality?

They did.

And they lost.

Because the monopoly of force is not gender-neutral.

Because human civilization has never been an HR meeting.

Because "equality" is a game you get to play only when the lions aren’t hungry.

🎭 THE CLOWN SHOW COLLAPSE: WHEN LIBERAL WOMEN REALIZED THEY WEREN’T QUEENS, JUST COURT JESTERS

They weren’t supposed to lose.

The narrative had been rehearsed.

The magazine covers printed.

The glass ceiling ready to shatter.

But the people—men and women—walked into the booth and said, “No.”

Not because they were mean.

Not because they were sexist.

But because they remembered what the world used to feel like before delusion took over.

Before every late-night comedy show turned into a feminist sermon.

Before every debate had to be softened for feelings.

Before every strength was deconstructed because it made someone cry.

They remembered a time when a leader didn’t need applause to be effective.

When leaders didn’t flinch.

Didn’t sob.

Didn’t beg to be seen.

They remembered the smell of war, of fear, of consequence.

And in that booth, surrounded by silence, they voted for strength.

Not perfection.

Not likability.

Just strength.

Because the world is a battlefield, not a Pinterest board.

And Kamala showed up with a ring light and a slogan.

🔪 AOC, HILLARY, KAMALA: DIFFERENT OUTFITS, SAME LACK OF TEETH

You can throw all the names you want at me.

Hillary?

AOC?

Kamala?

Same template.

Same cowardice, polished into civility.

None of them would survive a week negotiating against predators.

Because predators don’t care what magazine you were on.

They care if your pulse drops when you speak.

If your eyes lock on theirs without fear.

If you carry the weight of your people like a hammer, not a hashtag.

And none of them do.

They are mannequins in power suits, positioned to fulfill the liberal fantasy of progress.

But you don’t progress if the enemy is still willing to kill for his vision.

You submit.

And right now, the West is crawling.

⚰️ FINAL WORD: FEMINISM’S FUNERAL WASN’T A BANG. IT WAS A WHIMPER

You want the truth?

Kamala’s loss wasn’t a political event.

It was a verdict.

On feminism.

On symbolism.

On the great lie that you can out-feel, out-cry, or out-hashtag real power.

When she lost, the people spoke.

And their voice said:

“We don’t need a mother. We need a motherf*cker.”

And that’s what liberal feminism will never understand.

💀 YOUR RIGHTS EXIST AT THE PLEASURE OF THE STRONG. REMEMBER THAT. OR BE REMINDED.

🧠 REBLOG IF YOU’VE HAD ENOUGH SYMBOLISM.

💬 COMMENT IF YOU’RE DONE PRETENDING.

🔁 FOLLOW FOR THE STORM THAT NEVER ENDS.

⚖️ LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This post is written for the purpose of artistic expression, cultural commentary, and psychological exploration of social and gender dynamics. It does not condone or encourage violence, harassment, or discrimination of any kind. Any references to power, strength, restraint, or critique are metaphorical, symbolic, and rooted in historical and cultural analysis. This is not a call to action — it’s a cultural mirror. If you feel offended, ask yourself if it’s from actual harm — or from seeing something you hoped no one would say out loud.

✨ TL;DR: If you're mad, it’s probably not because it’s wrong — it’s because you know it’s true.

[genderqueerdykes]

Not expecting a reply but wished to express (as a transfeminine person) thanks for your post regarding transandrophobia, had been seeing a large amount of my trans mutuals on this site begin to buy into a perception of transmasculine people which was an identical duplicate of those held by members of the TERF movement here in the UK, that they are entitled, immature, incapable of self determination and unneeding of liberation. Despite awareness that any individual can adopt cruel beliefs and that it might be comforting to do so (and despite awareness of this sites history of bullying campaigns targeting highly specific marginalised groups) I was confused as to why so many people found that perception in any way legitimate, especially during a time in which trans people of any assigned sex are so conspicuously in peril.

i wanted to thank you for taking the time to send this, i really appreciate you!

honestly, having so many transfeminine people step forward and say that this is making them uncomfortable has been amazing. it really is the minority of people behaving this way. most transfeminine people do not want to see someone else being hated for their gender or assigned sex- i mean, why would we want that...? that's what people do to us, why would we ever benefit from doing it to someone else?

a large amount of my trans mutuals on this site begin to buy into a perception of transmasculine people which was an identical duplicate of those held by members of the TERF movement here in the UK, that they are entitled, immature, incapable of self determination and unneeding of liberation.

dead on the money, i could not have articulated it better if tried. beautifully worded. people, whether or not they realize this, are 100% parroting terf rhetoric when they treat trans men this way. this behavior was born in terf circles, and now it's spreading to other people. people are not realizing that they're being radicalized in a way that harms other people. terfs hate trans women, of course, we know this, but they hate trans men and mascs as well, and that's not a good thing. i have no clue why people look at terfs and rad fems and go. they're evil for hating trans women/transfems. but they're BASED AS FUCK for hating trans men and mascs. like HELLO?

i have no idea why people look at rad fems and go "wow they're actually so based for hating men that is so awesome they're right all men are evil girlboss gatekeep gaslight fuck men uwu but i promise i don't hate trans women!!! i'm not a terf i don't hate trans women! terfs hate trans women and i'm not like that! i can't be a terf if i don't hate trans women hating trans men is good because all men are bad!!!!!!!!" why are you agreeing with ANY of their politics? they hate ALL trans people: that is a bad thing! hating any group of trans people is a bad thing! that is transphobia!!! people seem to think that terfs only hate trans women which is so far from the truth. why do people think it's okay to condemn part of their beliefs but not all?

like y'all wake the FUCK UP rad feminism is not progressive! you do not look cool for saying you hate trans men and transmascs! you are not pushing queer rights forward. you are not lobbying for trans women if you throw trans men under the bus.

I was confused as to why so many people found that perception in any way legitimate, especially during a time in which trans people of any assigned sex are so conspicuously in peril.

this is exactly what i don't understand. i do not understand why people think that attacking a group of trans people will somehow lessen our suffering. as if splitting up and fighting with each other will somehow bring down cisheteronormative patriarchy.

how does any of this help anyone? like seriously. how? please explain to me how this helps anyone. how does this help trans women get access to gender affirming care? how does this help trans women who are single mothers? how does this help trans women of color who are dealing with racism on top of transmisogyny? how does this help trans women who need medical care? how does this help trans women find jobs that won't turn them away for being trans? how does this help trans women who are scared about coming out as trans? how does this help trans women who live in transphobic towns and countries? how does this help trans women find community support? how does this help homeless trans women? how does this help trans women who need help with addiction? how does this help trans women escape domestic violence? how does this help trans women who are too poor to stay afloat?

thanks for stopping by, i really appreciate this message, and it does a lot of people good to hear other transfems who are not okay with this. your message will do a lot of good, so i think it's very important to publish. :) take care of yourself, thank you so much for being a compassionate person! this was a very insightful ask, thank you!

[abattre]

Naruro is a Japaneese manga right, so it only makes sense for us to take the Japaneese culture into consideration when watching the show. I don't know how to explain this but all I can find are americans using only their own culture for describtions. For example Sasuke being called emo and edgy, that's not even a thing in Japan, how is Sasuke nicknamed that when Kishimoto himself probably has no idea what that even means. (He's traumatized, not trying to act diffrent)

Another example are Sakura, Temari, Ino, who are seen as some sort of girlbosses and queens who would never take any shit from any man when in reality they're doing all the cooking and the cleaning in their houses, just like the traditional japaneese woman in real life. (I've read the Shikamaru novel and bro's never in the kitchen, it's always Temari. And I know Sasuke is usually absent but when he comes back it's always Sakura who's making dinner)

There's also Hinata who's considered the best girl in the series, the wife material, the keeper, the woman of every dudebro's dreams, while Sakura is seen as the toxic crush who rejects the poor, sweet, good guy and chooses the hot 'badboy' over him. (I'm not her fan but I swear I've seen some people hating on her only for not loving Naruto back. Maybe she reminds those insecure men about the rejections they got from their real life girls?)

And don't even get me started on Sasuke getting called abusive and misogynistic for defending his life when ninja women attack...

I'm just saying, lots of fans project their own lives and beliefs onto the show and it often dosen't make any sense

(I hope you understood my broken english, I tried so hard, it's my third language so it's not easy for me, I also hope you don't mind the spelling mistakes but feel free to correct them for me if you find any)

oh that's really interesting! i'm not well versed enough in japanese sociology to corroborate on the subculture aspect there, but i agree that the western fandom's interpretation of sasuke is heavily weighed down by the stigma of being put in the emo trope box. i think the emo thing has become so kitsch now that it's kind of just an easy out for the fandom to avoid engaging with the moral aspect of sasuke's story. like.. they want a light-hearted excuse to justify characterising sasuke's reactions as superficially as possible so it fits their narrative of him being just a straight villain in shippuden

as far as kishimoto's motivations go, i think the intentions there were just a bit lost in translation then? also the fact that we don't get the whole context for why sasuke behaves the way he does until the end of the original series run is probably what ingrained the idea most people have that sasuke was just standoffish because he was arrogant and nothing else... i guess a lot of fans have a hard time overcoming that initial impression. even after we find out about the massacre & itachi most of the fandom is like.... utterly incapable of forgiving that he had priorities outside of his friends and konoha because they can't get past the notion of thinking he's just power-hungry for the sake of it. they're fundamentally uninterested in engaging with the nuance of sasuke's situation because they didn't find sasuke likeable enough to show some grace for his circumstances and trauma by the time we get that information. which crazy but ok... skill issue i think

as for the girls.... kishimoto cannot write them as has been said by everyone for forever.... but yeah. the way he tried to paint over his misogynistic writing with the girl-boss feminism thing is a really weird counter-balance that doesn't work for me. i think sakura is probably the best example of that... she has a Big kinda aggressive personality that gets cut-up with kishimoto pacifying her in both the story and her behaviour but he's tropifying her so hard on both ends they never meet in the middle in a way that makes sense. so it comes off as a really disjointed characterisation on the whole with her motivations & actions being kinda flip-floppy one way or the other depending on whatever situation she's in. the housewife thing was probably just kishimoto not knowing how to end their stories in keeping to the girl-boss side of things he halfway set up, so he threw them all into the same fold of what he thinks is the ideal Happy Life conclusion all girls must have in his head. which is just getting married and being a traditional japanese housewife because of course it is

funnily enough, i think the sakura hate on that end also just goes back to people resenting sasuke for his role in the story. they exalt hinata for always being loyal to naruto and never being interested in anyone else... but sakura is Evil because she never fell in love with him and couldn't get over sasuke so she must be irredeemable and the Worst Ever. the self-inset bias etc etc. it is most definitely a projection issue lmao. it's been like 20 years and they still can't get over it so i'm not really holding out hope for an overhaul on sasuke's mass mischaracterisation. rip </3

[separatist-apologist]

Your take on Mor is so refreshing to see! I’m sick of people saying she’s dragged him along for 500 years and she’s at fault for not explicitly sitting him down and explaining that she’s not interested!

Like imagine that in your real life, if you have shown through your actions time and time again that you aren’t interested, that person should back off. Women don’t owe men an explanation! And it’s not like he ever came out and professed his love to her directly either. I know he’s her friend too, but that still doesn’t mean she has to spell it out for him (which she has basically done anyway with how she acts) He’s 500 years old. He should have gotten the message by now.

Anyway, rant over. Glad to see you have the same, correct opinions as usual 😘 wanted to send this incase your getting hate in the askbox now

I could talk about this for 1000 years and never get tired of it. You don't have to like Mor, for the record, in order to understand this concept. I find it comes, typically, from hardcore Eris/Azriel stans who want to absolve their faves from some of their less savory behavior.

But with every other character, they can list and name how the male LI overstepped and was wrong...until its Mor. And then all feminism flies out the window in the rush to argue she led Azriel on or is a liar trying to make Eris seem like a bad guy (he literally needs 0 help accomplishing this just btw).

[thehydraethereal]

⁎✵࿔෴𝐆𝐄𝐓 𝐓𝐎 𝐊𝐍𝐎𝐖 𝐌𝐄

My name is 𝐕𝐄𝐍𝐔𝐒, I'm European and I am a young soul. This is what you have to know about me:

𝐅𝐀𝐕𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐂𝐎𝐋𝐎𝐔𝐑(𝐒): Burgundy, Maroon, Scarlett, Navy Blue, Forest Green, Baby Blue, Baby Pink.

𝐅𝐀𝐕𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐃𝐑𝐈𝐍𝐊(𝐒): COFFEE. And Granita.

𝐑𝐀𝐍𝐃𝐎𝐌 𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐍𝐆𝐒 𝐈 𝐋𝐎𝐕𝐄: Ribbons and bows. Biceps. Vogue routines filmed by celebrities. Hailey Bieber. Water. Older men. Cats. Leopards. Dark clouds and storms. Nighttime. Early mornings and crisp air. Pines. Perfume. Mascara. Spicy chicken burgers. Wired earphones. Purses. Short skirts. Large shirts. Sunglasses. The moon and stars. Lacy underwear. Showers. Curly hair. Pinterest. Messages and asks (on tumblr). Gum. Mangoes. Pop Music. Polaroids.

𝐅𝐀𝐕𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐓𝐎𝐏𝐈𝐂𝐒: Feminism, history, geography, philosophy, phsychology, literature, poetry, mathematics.

𝐅𝐀𝐕𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐀𝐂𝐓𝐎𝐑𝐒: Chris Evans, Brad Pitt, Daniel Day-Lewis, Frank Grillo, Tom Hiddleston, Heath Ledger, Jodie Foster, Demi Moore, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, Natalie Portman, Aaron Taylor Johnson, Henry Cavill, Tom Hardy, Colin Farrell, Sebastian Stan, Angelina Jolie.

𝐅𝐀𝐕𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐂𝐇𝐀𝐑𝐀𝐂𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐒: Rafe Cameron, Steve Rogers, William Wallace, Achilles, Brock Rumlow, Pietro Maximoff, Wanda Maximoff, Natasha Romanoff, Tony Stark, Thor Odinson, Loki Laufeyson, Sarah Cameron, Emperor Geta, Marcus Acacius, Andrew Barber, Ari Levinson, Curtis Everett, Nick Fowler, Lloyd Hansen, Steve Abnesti, August Walker, Walter Marshall, Cyrus Hanks, Benjamin Martin.

𝐅𝐀𝐍𝐃𝐎𝐌𝐒: 𝗠𝗔𝗥𝗩𝗘𝗟, Outer Banks, Pedro Pascal, Chris Evans, Lana del Rey, Chris Hemsworth.

𝐖𝐇𝐘 𝐈 𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐑𝐓𝐄𝐃 𝐖𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐍𝐆 ?: The darkened side of the human nature has always fascinated me, and I believe that by writing what I write, I will understand how it works even better so I decided to share with you what is blooming in my mind, to explore new points of view and to not just let my creativity die. Writing is also my coping mechanism.

𝐀𝐑𝐄 𝐌𝐘 𝐖𝐎𝐑𝐊𝐒 𝐌𝐘 (𝐒𝐄𝐗𝐔𝐀𝐋) 𝐅𝐀𝐍𝐓𝐀𝐒𝐈𝐄𝐒 ?: No, actually, not at all. It is a response to the trauma and issues I have, I do not find what my characters do attractive. It is only for creative and fictional purposes. DO YOUR RESEARCH about this topic, it is not my bussines to explain how dark writers and readers' minds work.

𝐇𝐎𝐖 𝐋𝐎𝐍𝐆 𝐃𝐎𝐄𝐒 𝐈𝐓 𝐓𝐀𝐊𝐄 𝐌𝐄 𝐓𝐎 𝐖𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐀 𝐑𝐄𝐐𝐔𝐄𝐒𝐓 ?: It depends. If I feel inspired by it, I will write it in one hour or one day. If the request doesn't really appeal to me, I will delay it and prioritize what inspires me. Some requests really inspire me, but I take more time with them, because I'm a perfectionist and I want them to turm out good.

𝐖𝐇𝐎 𝐀𝐑𝐄 𝐘𝐎𝐔𝐑 𝐅𝐀𝐕𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐖𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐄𝐑𝐒 ?: If you are following me for a good amount of time now, you will know pretty well my love for @highonmarvel. I could write pharagraphs about her. Also, my Pedro side is dedicated to @pedrosyouknowwhat, her talent is brilliant. My mother, literally, is @rvfecamerons, she inspired me to write for Rafe. Her writing and talent is out-of-this-world.

𝐖𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐈𝐒 𝐌𝐘 𝐎𝐏𝐈𝐍𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐎𝐍 𝐀𝐒𝐊𝐒 ?: OH, I LOVE asks. People really don't understand how important their support is, every single encouraging message or comment warm my heart and help me keep going.

𝐖𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐖𝐈𝐋𝐋 𝐈/𝐖𝐈𝐋𝐋 𝐈 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐑𝐄𝐏𝐋𝐘 ?: You can ask me to talk about certain celebrities, about my fics, about a character, about life experiences, but I will definitely not reply to very intimate questions. Hate is also gross, just scroll and block me if you do not like what I say or write. Literally.

𝐖𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐀𝐑𝐄 𝐌𝐘 𝐅𝐀𝐕𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐀𝐋𝐁𝐔𝐌𝐒 ?: The Tortured Poets Department, Midnights, Born to Die, Lust for Life, Eternal Sunshine, Evermore, Folklore, Hit Me Hard and Soft.

𝐖𝐇𝐎 𝐀𝐑𝐄 𝐌𝐘 𝐅𝐀𝐕𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐀𝐑𝐓𝐈𝐒𝐓𝐒 ?: Lana del Rey, Taylor Swift, ABBA, Gracie Abrams, The Neighbourhood, Arctic Monkeys, Ariana Grande. THESE ARTISTS INSPIRE ME. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE RESECT FOR THEM, GO AHEAD AND BLOCK ME.

(𝐂𝐔𝐑𝐑𝐄𝐍𝐓) 𝐅𝐀𝐕𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐄 𝐒𝐎𝐍𝐆𝐒: The Albatross, I Can Fix Him (No Really I Can), The boy is mine, Video Games, Cherry, Forever Young.

𝐖𝐈𝐋𝐋 𝐈 𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐑 𝐃𝐎 𝐀 𝐅𝐀𝐂𝐄 𝐑𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐀𝐋 ?: No.

𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐍𝐆𝐒 𝐈 𝐖𝐈𝐒𝐇 𝐓𝐎 𝐃𝐎/𝐀𝐂𝐇𝐈𝐄𝐕𝐄: Visit the world. Become an influencer. Kiss someone. Interview a celebrity. Move out of my town. Get a therapist. Record a music video. See the Grand Canyon. Buy a polaroid camera. Be Tumblr famous. Finish all my requests and series. A speech in public. Punch a man in the face.

[daughter-of-sapph0]

I keep seeing terfs with "dysphoric" in their bio, and I feel like fucking Inigo Montoya. like, do they actually know what that word means?

like, the way they seem to use it makes me think that it's just a catch all for "being female sucks and it's so hard. because of periods and misogyny. and the evil tranny faggot troons who are invading the west and stealing the blood from our children. I am personally the victim of every situation I am in. I once told someone to kill themselves and they told me "no fuck off". how rude. I'm so oppressed."

like, 99% of their problems are completely made up. they side with nazis and fascists and the far right on almost every issue. they all hate each other almost as much as they hate trannies. they don't have any irl friends because everyone who knows them apsolutely despises their horrid personality. it's a death cult on the brink of collapse. the alt right hates them because they're women. actual feminists hate them for being sexist as hell. the only thing they have going for them is that a washed up children's book author and holocaust denier is the figurehead of their movement.

but on the other hand, there's a decent amount of terfs who are very clearly closet trans men, and I'm pretty sure they don't know it. like, especially the ones who have been groomed into thinking that violently hating your body to the point of serious depression is something that's normal for every single women to experience. cuz holy shit, if you think being a woman is just pure suffering, there may be something wrong on your end.

and I sorta feel bad for a lot of them. because they're in a death cult. they're so deep in this hateful ideology, so far down the pipeline, that they would rather suffer for the rest of their lives and try to make other people's lives worse, because the alternative is transitioning and that would be going against what they've been groomed to believe.

when I say that radical feminism is a death cult, I genuinely mean it. it creates a bunch of depressed suicidal shut ins who spend all their time and energy in their echo chambers online trying to make other people (trans people in particular) feel just as depressed and suicidal as they feel.

I'm not even trying to be like "transitioning would have saved him" or anything. but if these people just logged off, talked to actual human beings, and maybe had someone explain to them that sending suicide bait to strangers online 24/7 is not a healthy way to live and told them that they're being groomed... idk maybe they'd be able to escape the nightmare they live in.

hating being a woman is a good sign that you're not a woman. hating being a man is a good sign that you're not a man. you do not need anyone's permission to be yourself. live your own life, regardless of what other people say.

[pokegyns]

my hot take is that on radblur a lot of conversations about how hard separatism is are immedietly labeled as lesbophobic one way or another. usually bc they mention how selfidentified separatist lesbians will tell straight women how easy not dating men or being celibate is. I'm not saying lesbians oppress straight women, nobody ever says that in those conversations, but it's obviously full of shit, celibate lesbians, who aren't doing it for safety reasons, are either uninterested in romance or didn't find their dream girl YET. this is nothing like refusing to date when you have the desire purely out of principle. while there are other aspects of separatism not dating men is obviously the bulk and I'm not surprised when straight women are salty bc this is literally "Luigi wins by doing nothing" of feminism. you wouldn't have dated these men anyway...

and this is on anon bc saying "lesbians do this thing" is considered lesbophobic even if lesbians actually consistently do this thing 😁

not all lesbians etc etc but you get what I mean

i honestly agree. i'm personally a very romance-driven creature, and i know 1000% that if i wasn't a lesbian, if i had either been bisexual and fallen in love with a dude or been straight, i would never have stopped myself from feeling that love and still done feminist activism within that relationship by holding him to a very high standard and maintaining strong feminist friendships, monitoring things in a smart, emotionally intelligent way, and taking all the happiness i can out of life while also being a badass activist.

some of the hardest working female activists had happy marriages to men! and still made a huge impact, at times bigger than some separatists who scoffed at them and wasted their time just talking shit about women all day. separatists do awesome work, work that often is really valuable especially for young girls who feel like they have to dedicate their lives to dating. but if a woman gets a huge amount of happiness from dating, and is willing to be firm in her feminist convictions and handle it in the way that some non-unhinged so-called "femcels" do it, then i'm all for it and i'll be happy to hear her gossip about her bf anytime the same way i get happy hearing about my lesbian friends' gfs. seeing women happy makes me happy, i just want them to have a really good safety net and to know what they're getting into, and i love seeing male-dating women and transmascs exchange tips on how to date bio men as safely as possible and juggle dating a man and being a feminist. saying that separatism is inherently The Most Feminist thing you can do erases work that ONLY women who date men can do; they still hold something that men desire, and they get to make the rules. they also at times end up being the mothers of the next male generation, and that too can be a very powerful position to hold, as controversially as that is to say on doomerist radblr, if only because it can lead to some level of harm reduction on female kids & their female teachers etc. instead of letting only conservative women bear future kids and populate the earth - because we know they will regardless - raising kids in a feminist household can prove to be very valuable. you ofc can't prevent them from being radicalized down the line, but you can still have a meaningful impact.

it's really weird to try to explain to normie leftist-ish women irl who aren't deep on radblr that saying "you can date men and have kids and be an awesome feminist regardless" or "i personally want to see humanity continue, i don't believe in ending it, i want feminist mothers raising the next gen" or even "i believe transfems face unique struggles" can lead to you being mocked, shunned, and get hate anons outta nowhere (though nowhere near the shit i've gotten in tra circles lmao). it's a really wacky culture we have going on in here, and ngl it makes me cringe. it's just so... unproductive.

i 1000% want separatism to be an option. i think it's a great side of radfeminism. but i personally want to tackle issues between male and female people by actually interacting with the male population meaningfully and figure out the issue of gncphobia ppl - including male ppl - face so that the gender boxes can be destroyed... and even that recently got me in trouble, despite me being a lesbian and obvs not dating men. chronically online spaces in general foster really extremist views that aren't helpful at all to any social movement. we can gather more separatists for the movement and let male-partnered feminists do activism their own way. obviously i've received lesbophobia from the other side as well, but i'm honestly sorry for the way that lesbians and het-attracted women generally uninterested in dating treat women who enjoy and benefit from dating emotionally. having a romantic partner is a huge part of my life, and i can never see myself give up on it. it would then be insanely hypocritical of me to expect it of someone else just bc we happen to have a different sexuality. even if a febfem ended up falling for a man and going through with it, that wouldn't be a betrayal either! female happiness is my #1 priority. and no, that isn't me being a hetero bootlicker or male apologist or whatever the fuck separatists have called me before in radfem spaces. i'm just being realistic. is our main goal as feminists to abolish the hetero dating scene? bc if so, we're gonna have next generations full of conservatively raised kids, including male kids, who will then be more likely to be sexist.

thankfully normie feminists irl, who aren't deep in either extremist tra or extremist radfem spaces, would be in total disbelief if you told them about this stuff. and they would just go back to their activism. and i think we should do the same. don't listen to those voices, do what's right for YOU in your heart. just maintain your convictions, don't let male ppl trample all over you, ditch them the very second they say anything antifeminist or shitty, and chase your happiness. your personal life does not need to define your feminist activism. you are still 100% welcome here, in this nuancefem corner of radblr!

-mod pikachu

[pillarsalt]

Anon who said we should admit there are extremist wackos in radfem communities here, I'm sorry it wasn't targeted at you specifically!! You're one of the few who keep the focus on women's rights, safety, and freedoms, which is why I sent the ask to you.

You finding the "vaginas don't have nerve endings" lady is what spurred my ask. Because she's a perfect example of nearly everything wrong with some people in radfem spaces:

- Taking correct observations other women have made about sexism and using them to say controversial, incorrect, often-sexist things for attention because they don't know how to get attention for *insightful and good* observations because they don't know how to make their own. "Women's biology is sidelined and causes a ton of medical issues and misinformation" becomes "Because of the above, I can take any random fact we *do* know about female biology and claim it's a lie made up in ignorance."

- Taking the fact that, because misogyny is so normalized, a lot of feminist messaging comes off as radical (in the other sense of the word) even if it's not, and turning it into "Every belief I have that causes a huge uproar... that uproar is proof that I'm right."

- Taking the above and combining with the stubborn, "I won't let you get away with your misogynistic arguments" radfem activist mentality and turning it against other feminist-minded women. "If you disagree with me, a feminist, on how to handle this topic, you must be anti-feminist, hate women, and want us to suffer misogyny forever."

And now the comments section!

- Taking the fact that there are a lot of mansplainer asshole men who don't argue in good faith and turning it into "Everyone who disagrees with me, a feminist, is a male MRA troll."

- Taking the fact that so many TRAs lie about what radfems believe and are willing to create fake proof of us being alt-right and/or wanting to genocide trans people, and turning it into "Whenever someone who posts in radfem circles says crazy shit, it's a TRA impersonator."

Just the way women on here reacted to this poster alone is evidence to me something's rotten. You've got different women saying she's a troll, she's a man, or both... and no one is willing to believe that maybe she's genuine? No one sees how there are factors in the community, especially when a lot of the popular posters exhibit a lot of these negative things and outright state "Yeah my feminism isn't for all women fuck you lol", that might lead to women like this poster genuinely thinking this way? No one in a feminist community is willing to believe the misogyny we constantly talk about being so pervasive and insidious might not just affect "normie" women and conservatives, maybe well-meaning women trying to be feminist, too?

Thanks for your input, anon. It's a weird complicated situation. I think really the reason people are wary of this account being bait or a troll is because, well, we're on the internet and feminists are a big target for men who want to fuck with us. There have always been (and will probably always be) bad actors trying to sow discordance between women in these spaces, so understandably many of us are wary. It happens very often. And a pretty featureless (as in generic looking and unpersonalized) account aggressively defending inflammatory views that are just unreasonably removed from reality, despite being shown evidence to the contrary, and supposedly in the name of feminism, I think that pings a lot of people's "shit disturber" radars.

But yes, the benefit of the doubt is usually best... I tried to explain why I disagreed and why her line of thinking is harmful, but when it seemed like it wasn't going anywhere, I decided to let it go. I didn't mean for it to get so much traction, and I don't think arguing incessantly with someone who has a foundational difference in beliefs and who is not willing to consider other viewpoints is gonna go anywhere. But I also really can't blame the women who are offended by the "dick worshippers" thing, and that she's now insisting any lesbian who likes sex toy penetration (with no male involvement whatsoever) is actually not homosexual but in fact secretly bisexual, and that lesbians who use toys to pleasure their partner are mimicking men instead of just... having sex in a way that feels good. It's genuinely hurtful rhetoric. Calling it when you see it is part of holding each other accountable, no matter where the vitriol stems from in the first place. Now, just saying "you're not a radfem if you do/think _____" is not the way to go about it, I agree. That's really just identity politics again. But yeah, insulting a bunch of women on an aspect as personal as sexuality, that's going to create a lot of backlash in any circumstance. I understand the reactions, but I also think it's better for everyone to realize that a stranger's opinion of you is not actually important, and can be easily ignored and moved on from.

I also have to disagree that no one has considered she genuinely holds these beliefs, you can find women in the post's notes talking about their own experiences with OCD and other dark mental places that previously led them to similar patterns of illogical thinking. I've had a couple asks and replies to asks with the same thing. I think we shouldn't be antagonistic, but I also don't think anyone's required to be friendly with someone who's lashing out at them with misogyny and lesbophobia. I really hope that she can heal and find solidarity with other women and other lesbians, the women who talked about their own blackpill experiences in their younger days give me hope that she will find her way out.

But hostility towards others with similar longterm goals WILL isolate you, and I'm not sure what the solution is for someone who functions like that. The only thing I can think of is that hopefully she will continue reading and learning from other women and open her mind to the full spectrum of women's views and experiences, and maybe finally understand exactly WHY what she said has had such a negative response.

You sound like a compassionate person and I appreciate your dedication to nuance.

[athena5898]

I probably shouldn't do this with the nature of my blog at this point, but I want to take a moment and rant a bit about gender shit.

I am genderfluid. I will never completely pass. I am technically a trans masc cause while I identify as both a man and a woman and both and neither at various times, all the time. I have a vagina, I have tits and i'm moving towards a more masculine build until I don't want to, and I have no idea when that will stop.

Yall…we have got to change how we talk about gender. Our struggles and our issues.

You need to actually talk to trans masculine people and stop fucking assuming what they go through. Please i'm fucking begging you. How the hell are you queer and just talking over us and around us and never including us?

I see so many weird assumptions about gender and oppression in regards to being a masculine woman and it never includes intersectionality.

I just heard a transwomen in a video say "If you are a woman it's almost seen as admirable if you act like a man and are seen as a man"

I'm going to talk about how fucking bad and wrong that is. How honestly gross it is to assume something like that.

Like, I get it, it comes from trauma and I don't hate the person for saying it, just…wish they didn't. It comes from this idea that "well me being AMAB and being a woman is seen as a bad thing, therefor the opposite must be good and celebrated"

it is not seen as good

It is not celebrated.

People get confused about what it means to be a masculine child and Girl Boss TM. Honestly, to explain how Girl Boss TM is actually just another form of subservient feminity wrapped up in an aesthetic of power and influence would be its own novel of a post, so I won't get into it here.

First. There are white women that are just at fault for upholding the patriarchy as men. Period. End of story. The idea that women are inherently victims and weak and can never do anything (including oppression) is patriarchy shit.

it was not men who held me down to force makeup on me. That was teenage girls. (This was after they chased me down)

it was not men I locked myself in a bathroom to get away from cause they were threatening to do my hair when I explicitly said I didn't want to. That was a woman.

I was not seen as desirable. I was not praised. I was not a woman or a man. I was a thing. A creature. A child at best. Because it's okay to be a tomboy as long as you grow out of it.

I am still seen this way even in the queer community.

I was bullied and picked on constantly. Going to school felt like going into battle every day.

Also, the "being seen as one of the guys" thing is a myth. They don't actually see you as a man or a guy. You're this weird third thing at times and a woman when you have an opinion that goes against the group. You are still a "woman" but just not a fuckable one. They don't take your opinions seriously and they'll slap that woman card on you real fast if you raise a fuss about bad behavior.

I'd love to say I was strong throughout but there was a period where I caved a little. I shaved my arm hair cause I got made fun of by this one kid on the bus in front of everyone. (Btw I have dark coarse hair and a little stubble facial hair even as a teen) I wore "girl" clothing a little bit. Women cut shirts, jeans etc. I always felt gross and wrong. People would tell me I looked cute but I felt terrible. I got depressed. I never could get my hair short enough cause some asshole would go "oh it's so nice long" "You don't want to cut it too short! you'll look like a boy!"

I just, I don't know where this privilege is that I'm supposed to have? I have fought every step of the way to be who I am now. I have had to grow and accept me outside of praise or love of anyone else and just rely on self…well not love but acceptance. Like I am privileged but it certainly isn't because i'm trans. (I'm white, I have a house cause I was able to get government assistance cause of said whiteness etc)

Even as I've come out as trans, I get overlooked a lot compared to others. There is this air that like, idk Like i'm not really trans or something?

Why is it okay for transwomen to talk about what I've been through? Why is this seen as okay? If I tried to talk about transwomen experiences I would rightfully be called out for that shit. Why is this okay? It…hurts a lot honestly.

Like…why is it okay to treat other trans people this way? I'd never dreamed to say "Oh being a man is better than being a woman" or "Feminity is always celebrated" even though yeah that last bit kinda feels that way sometimes, but I know that's not true and it's just the pain talking.

I'm just kinda tired of this oppression Olympic crap. As trans people shouldn't it be understood that intersectionality exists and while transition might be easy for some people, by the large it's a hell of an experience and it takes a lot of bravery to go down that path?

Cause like i'm making this post to share my experience cause apparently some of us need to yell more about these things. But like being trans is fucking hard. I'm sorry but without the analysis of intersectionality on a personal scale this whole "this group is more oppressed than the other" is fucking shit and honestly psyop level in it's stupidity.

Trans people are abused. Trans people are being targeted. Terf logic is fucking shit and upholds the patriarchy (also it's a cult) Patriarchy is centered around white colonist ideology.

GNC is not respected and is subjected to abuse

These things are true. and about as broad of a brush we can paint and still not get a full picture.

just…idk can we just stop diminishing trans oppression???

[lexygabe]

queen bee aka elmatagirl critical post

i know this appeal will be useless as hell but i felt an urge to do it so i will try to explain to you how stupid "how me being straight woman has anything to do with my [gay] ships" argument is. and maybe not stupid per se but definitely harmful.

and before we start i am fully aware of the whole defense line elmatagirl will use to justify herself, so even if there are some lgbtq people that followed you and support you and don't perceive what you do as problematic it doesn't mean that my opinions and opinions of most of the supablr are less important. so pls don't use "but my lgbtq followers like what i do and they are not touched by what i say" argument bcs it's not an argument in this case. let's use example of your beloved feminism which isn't a thing we are talking about but you like to bring this up whenever somebody calls you out on what you've done wrong. if there are women who are saying that something is very misogynistic and man replies with: "but i have multiple female friends and they are not offended by that" it doesn't change the fact that by some people it will be seen as misogynistic. it's about finding the golden middle.

the next argument elmatagirl will probably use is that "she has depression and she has severe depression" and i'm sorry but for me it doesn't change anything. for me even if she had multiple other disorders it wouldn't stop me from telling her: miss, you speak bullshit. and maybe now i will be perceived as heartless but idc everybody who lives more than one year in internet know that NOBODY cares what you are suffer from. and i mean nobody. if somebody will like to criticize you (in more radical spacies pour out hate on you) they will do it and nobody cares if you are at your lowest or not and i also don't care. i just think that if somebody is making 0 sense about particular topic they are talking about i have this power as a rando from internet to tell this person they are wrong.

and the last argument that isn't argument but i know elmatagirl will want to use it is anything feminism related. we are not talking about this. we are not talking about what you witnessed as a feminist. bcs it's not conversation we are having now. for me you could even be the one of them the first suffragists but if you were doing something that is considered as slightly homophobic i wouldn't care.

so since we have everything explained i can back to what i wanted to say.

"how me being straight woman has anything to do with my gay ships" i think you all are familiar with phrases: "male gaze" and "female gaze" and it has very good reflection in our case but instead of "male/female" we have "straight gaze" and "gay gaze".

for me and for the other people i know "straight gaze for straight women" are in most cases mlm ships with two attractive men included. and where is the problem? the problem is right there, because said ship was supposed to be for this two male characters (let's not start conversation if this two characters have good relationship/toxic relationship/or fall under proshipping line, bcs that's what i'm gonna talk about in next paragraphs of my essay) AND FOR TARGET GROUPS but instead of being made for target group (let's say lgbtq community by default and if we want to be even more specific so it is for other mlm people) it become pair to make straight women comfortable. and this is the problem because whole the gay couples finally represented in media wasn't made for straight women to feel comfortable in their little cozy beds to think: "oh gay people are not so different than us/oh why gay people are always the most attractive ones", i would even say if you are straight and cis and you are obsessed with gay ships and projecting everything what you feel on these characters (yeah it also applies to making hundreds of fanarts when you are strangely always in the middle, between this two characters), when one of them you headcanon as homosexual (in elmatagirl case this is el matador), then you are fetishizing it.

and what is fetishization? fetishization is excessive fascination/sexual fantasies about things that aren't sexual by definition for example: identity, race, religion or body parts that aren't private. and we are focusing on the first instance.

oh my gosh we have a lot of to talk about here. firstly, i would like to focus on... weird fanarts of elmatagirl and i'm not talking about nsfw ones bcs yeah they are nsfw and even if i don't like them i'm not gonna talking about them here.

there was a famous redrawing of - i don't remember now if this was comic panel or scene from the show but it doesn't matter - el matador.... i don't even know how to put this in words, el matador tied in... el marador tied in this position......

(gabe and their digital painting skills)

and what can i say.... if she just idk make joke about it, then it's okay i probably also made comment about this kind of scene BUT ALSO MOVE ON AS SOON AS THIS JOKE MET WITH LAUGHTER FROM MY AUDIENCE and not started making whole ass fanart with sexual subtext of my favourite gay boys because from context of the show this scene wasn't made to be sexual, it was meant to be funny/visual gag etc.

"why gay men are always the most attractive men?"

it may sound innocent and yeah it is, because i also can say that some gay man is in my eyes attractive and deal with the fact that he doesn't look at me as his possible partner bcs i'm non binary who doesn't identify with - let's call it - "male gender role". but again i move on from this interaction and not run whole page with my two little gay boiiis suggestive content bcs it's suspicious

and again my fellow gay men of supablr can correct me because i'm not mlm, but i think that meeting with this kind of excitement from straight women would be very weird. i can't make example of my situation bcs im bisexual but if i was ever in established relationship with a woman and some dude would say to me that women in lesbian relationships are the hottest ones and then i would discover that he runs whole social media profile with only wlw ships in which he also includes himself i would give him a fucking stroke like man, you are super weird. i don't see you as an ally, i see you as a weirdo.

proshipping/toxic mlm

now we will be walkin on a thin ice so if someone doesn't feel comfortable with this kind of content i want you to scroll till next point written in bold font

proshipping is when a person supports shipping in general. no matter if two or more characters have huge age gap, are related to each other(it also applies to adoptive families), have bully/victim | abuser/victim type of relationship or one of them or more are minors in relationship with an adult(s)

and i want to talk about dingarra here. dingarra is ship between skarra and dingaan and like i said in one of my prev posts this is clearly an abuser&a victim relationship and i'm sorry no matter how many headcanons you made about it it's still abusive relationship. and if somebody make an argument that idk they have each others phone numbers or skarra handed dingaan a fucking toilet paper in episode 293719191 - i'm gonna get violent. i'm not joking i'm gonna get violent.

and if it's wrong to ship toxic ships? surprisingly no, BUT ONLY if you are aware of the fact that they are toxic. like people for a reason ship hannigram and i don't know batman and joker because they like their fucked up dynamic, are into character study or just think that in weird VERY VERY WEIRD way they match each others energy.... BUT NOBODY ROMANTICIZE THIS. ofc there are some people that think these type of relationships are the height of romanticism but still there is common belief that this ship is toxic for fuck's sake

............................

and shador

i don't know where el matador in rookie season is looking like 18 or 19 year old. i seriously can't see that but ofc i am the delusional one

and at the end of the day

being over excited because two fictional males is super duper weird

[insectfem]

your rs with your bf sounds awesome but as a radfem I don't know how to overcome the shame of being bi/attracted to men/wanting a rs with a man. how did you?

hi thank you! now, honestly, i do still feel a sense of shame, but im in love, and im not gonna hide a huge part of my life over the fear of being called a Fake Feminist. the biggest thing for me to remember is that.... a lot of feminist 'icons' or whatever were/are het partnered. jk rowling has been married for 23 years and loves her husband, and she's very popular on radblr. andrea dworkin (despite being a polilez) called a man the love of her life. norma mccorvey (jane roe) was bisexual and raised 2 children with a man. chimamanda ngozi adichie has a husband and a daughter with him. a huge part of feminism is helping heterosexual women live life while partnering with men (abortion, divorce, separate bank accounts, etc), considering the fact hetero and hetpartnered women make up the vast majortiy of female humans on this planet. hetero and bi women have done so much for feminism while being partnered with men, it's literally stupid to try and ignore it

there is no shame in being in love. if you have a safe, warm, loving partner that you share views with, and treats you with the utmost respect, there's no reason to have shame. most women on here who shame hetpartnered women are lonely, hateful, and misogynistic. they're not familiar with human relationships, and that is THEIR problem😭 it isn't our responsibility as bisexual women to defend our male partners and explain why we love them and all that. if they don't understand that people who are different can love and respect each other, then they're pretty much a lost cause

[lolia21]

I guess this is just what I do on this website now... 

Ok lets Go! 

One Piece, Law, and Femininity

Preface: Three warnings and a Request

Warning!!!

Let's get this out the way. I do ship Law and Luffy. That doesn’t matter to this particular theory/analysis but it's better to be upfront about one's personal biases. I don't think it's canon nor do I think it ever will be. But if anyone wants to use this for their own ship theories, have at it. 

This writing “theory” I have doesn’t apply to children because they kind of inherently fall into a third category. Their age tends to naturally make them more vulnerable and in need of assistance. When it comes to gendered writing children tend to get a pass. There are many reasons why but that's not what this is about.

Sanji is a newer and only other expectation to this “theory”.  More on that at the end. 

Request: If you don't think Yamato is a dude, this is not for you. The whole point of talking about feminism in this regard is to talk about how femininity is performed and perceived. Gender is a social construct and how we construct it is important to the feminine conversation. If you cant accept and understand that... read a few essays and come back later. Seriously I am talking about roles, behavior and presentations of gender here. Also I want to support my son (he’s older than me but, still). 

Part 1: Oda Writes the Backstories of Female Characters the Same Way he Draws Them.

A lot of people push back on the idea that Oda only knows how to draw the same female character by pointing at characters like Big Mom or Dandan. So I would like to change the phrasing. Oda only knows how to draw attractive women characters one way. When they're old hags, he's got options. But if they’re even supposed to be mildly attractive then he’s got one option in a variety of colors and accessories. He writes their backstories in roughly the same way. They have a lot of big differences. I can honestly say most important people in one piece have unique and interesting back stories and goals. But the skeleton of almost all the women are the same. I only say almost because One Piece has a stupid amount of characters and there is a 10% chance that some minor character from some obscure island in East Blue somehow flew under my radar. But this rule does apply to all the main women characters. Let's talk about it. 

1a. Oda Loves Taking Away Women's Autonomy. 

Seriously Oda cannot resist putting women in positions where they are either slaves, or working in a group that they are opposed to, or living under constant threat of imprisonment, or some combination of those. Nami was enslaved at a young age by Arlong, Robin had to join CP9 because she needed protection from the world government and then almost got imprisoned by enies lobby. Vivi joined Cp9 to save her country. Hiyori spent years living with and presumably fxcking a man she hated hoping that one day someone else would be strong enough to defeat Kaido to get revenge. There are countless cases of women, specifically women, being sold to Celestial Dragons for the sole purpose of sexual slavery. Like shows up so fxcking often. Aces mom had to hold her child in her stomach for an extra 15  months to him from the marines and probably died because of it.  If Oda is writing an important woman character who is relatively young you better believe she spent years of her life not being in control of it. And if she's older, she either a mom of some kind or was a badass and settled down because some man in her life died, or both. 

1b. Women Need to be Saved in Order to Achieve their Goals and Men Need to be Supported. 

This is gonna be a little hard to explain but it all comes down to how problems are solved, who solves them and why. Kinda. I think the best way to explain it would be to give an example. Lets look at the first two members of the Strawhat Crew. Zoro’s goal is to be the strongest swordsman. Simple enough. He tries to fight Mihawk the moment they meet, he loses and swears to grow stronger and defeat him.  Nami has two goals, or more accurately she needs to accomplish one goal in order to achieve her true goal. Nami needs to get out from under Arlongs control in order to achieve her goal of mapping the whole world. She also wants her family to be able to live in peace and not be broke. Unless she accomplishes that first goal, she cannot accomplish the other two. She needs to be saved in order to continue her story. Because she’s  unable to save herself. Which is reasonable. She's just a person and Arlong is a super strong fish demon man. So Luffy saves her. He punches her problem away real good and she is now finally free to do what she wants. If you know anything about Laws character I'm sure you can see where this is going . Robin is the same, Luffy punches away the people that want to control her real good and declares that he will fight the entire world to let her have the chance to live freely.  

I brought this up with my dad and he brought up a great point. Marineford. He said well Luffy lost pretty bad in the paramount war and needed to be saved by many people. Even costing him Ace. But, I would like to point out that the people who did that, Akainu and Blackbeard are still roaming free. Luffy needed to be saved in the moment but he’s still going to be the one to resolve the issue. Like Luffy, Zoro, Franky, Jinbei, and Brook have all needed saving at some point during a fight. But they always get to square up and finish the ones that are important to them. And their goals don't require them to be saved before trying to achieve them. The point comes down to who's allowed to deal with the finishing blow to their main goals/ problems. Luffy isn’t going to punch Mihawk for Zoror, or make Ussops dad respect him, or whatever the fuck Jinbei wants. But he did fight Arlong for Nami, Cp9 for Robin and Doffy for Law. 

1c. Girls got to College to Get More Knowledge, Boys Go to Jupiter to Get More Stupider

The women of One Piece are objectively smarter than the men. Emotionally and Intellectually. Women in One Piece are normally more patient, less stubborn and willing to retreat when they have to. They also don’t get as love sick as the men. I mean Boa lets her feelings for Luffy get her into insane shit, but that's the joke. Like One Piece women aren’t really known for having someone's looks  affect them. There's a reason there is a most Beautiful Woman in the world with no male counterpart. Like Smoker is Zaddy and no one cares. Most of the guy characters who are overly sneaky and plotting are villains or assholes. That's not to say there aren’t smart men characters, Franky is a genius at his craft. But being smart and careful isn’t part of his character or reflected in his behavior. 

 Part II: Trafalgar D. Water Law,  The Saddest Little Uwu 

I haven't loved Law since the first time I saw him. I have loved him since punk hazard though which is pretty fxcking long. His strong Emo vibes and general refusal to go along with any of Luffy’s bits seemingly for the sole sake of keeping up an image that not one present cared about really endured him to me. I’m pretty trad goth and he reminds me of those emo kids that refused to wear pink or be nice just because they thought it wasn’t hard core enough. Then as the show goes on he develops into one of those healthy goths who know that being an outsider is about showing vulnerability, kindness and maybe dressing in a lil pastel. I really like Law and his weird role in the story so far. Ok, my I love Law rants are done let's get to what we need to get to.

Law before One Piece:

Trafalgar D. Waterlaw was born in Fleavance. He lived a pretty happy normal life, a doctor father, nurse mother and cute baby sister. Until he was about 7 or 8? Around that time the town of fleavance started experiencing some unknown illness. I will say in our real world it is pretty similar to what silicosis actually does to you. Minus the Vitiligo and some other symptoms.  In the world of One Piece its called amber lead poisoning and its almost completely fatal if not properly treated Which is hard to do on its own. But it's even harder in Law's case since the neighboring towns and probably the world government didn't really know what amber lead poisoning was or how it spread either. So they said fxck it, burn it down, kill everyone and call it a day. Problem solved!

So yeah, Law's family is dead, he escaped Flevance by hiding among corpses, and now he is slowly and painfully dying. 

Then it gets worse, it gets so much worse before it gets better. He pulls a Tim Drake and forces his way into the DonQuixote Family by threatening to kill himself and everyone else with a bomb. Because seeing everyone you know and love die painfully and then have the government cover that up will do that to you. Doffy sees a lot of himself in Law and decides, “yeah, this’ll do”. 

Doffys’ nicer but objectively less cool younger brother Corazon also sees a lot of Doffy in Law and decides to immediately put a stop to that shit. He slowly and secretly teaches Law how to enjoy at least some aspects of life. Shows him the first and true affection he’s been shown since his entire village died. It ‘s great. And then, TLDR, Corazon decides to betray Doffy, gets caught, stuff the Ope- Ope Fruit down Law's Throat so he can cure himself and then get shot to Death after saying I love you to Law for what is seemingly the first and last time. Also Sengokou was there.

We don’t really have a clear idea what Law did after this but we do know a few things. 

He became a pirate with the sole purpose of taking down Doflamingo 

 He seems to have chosen a submarine as a pirate ship in order to better hide from Doflamingo and also make it harder to attack him. Because Doffy is a devil fruit user. Even though Law is also a devil fruit user and this puts him in extreme danger. Especially since...

 He made a crew of people who are seemingly doctors 1st, friends 2nd and fighter 6th. Like none of Laws crew members appear to be even mildly good at fighting. I’m pretty sure Chopper could take most of them. 

He names his crew the Heart Pirates after Cora. Which implies that Spanish, just like real world Spanish, is canon in One Piece. And that also reminds me that Law is talking like a nun in his flashback. Is Law catholic? Or was he raised catholic? Either way it adds to the uwu and the trauma of it all. If you know, you know.

 He started working with Caesar Clown, a man he fxcking hates. In order to get closer to Doflamingos secrety secrets.

Pre-time  Skip Law

I’m skipping when we see him in Sabaody because all we learn is that he's edgy and has a bear. When we see him again after Marineford it's actually kind of interesting because we learn he’s also first and foremost a doctor before being a pirate. He saves Luffys life because that's what doctors do and Luffy doesn’t seem like a bad dude. 

Now the good shit.

Post Time Skip Law 

My booooyyy! Love of my life, my sad lil uwu. Law is introduced as one of the coolest, coldest, scariest Warlords. He will literally rip your fxckin heart out. Evanescence playing in the background and all. Luffy immediately undermines thats by not thinking he’s any of those things and tying chopper to his head. But we got a whole episode and a half of thinking he was actually too cool for school. Like we all thought he Shanks when he’s actually just Mihawk. Like his cool but also pretty easy to bully if he likes you even a lil and will let you get away with a lot. It’s just hard to get him to like you, at first. So we get through punk hazard, see what a glass canon Law is and move to Dressrosa. 

In between those two points we also see how sad Law is and how similar he is to both Robin and Nami in behavior. He was Robins darks sense of humor (from the trauma)  and general introvertedness (trauma!?) with Namis greed (did i mention trauma). Which makes sense for the back story we learn about. 

Dressrosa: The Holy Grail of Uwu Law 

Law, Luffy and Doflamingo in Dressrosa is what happens when you put Nami and Robins backstory in a blender with crack cocaine and Katya (the drag queen). It’s just this sad tired uwu man,that came to commit murder suicide, trying and failing to accomplish that goal. Only to be figuratively and literally dragged along by a lunatic that barely knows him. Like Law went to Dresrosa not hoping he would die but assuming he would and not really caring. He didn't have an exit strategy because he didn’t think he was exiting. His plan was to use Luffy as a shield, Ceasar as bait and then murder suicide himself and Domflamingo out of existence. He was so desolate by the time his second fight with him ended. He had no hope, his plans had failed and he even dragged a bunch of innocent people into the crossfire. He would die, the people of Dressrosa would die, the Strawhats would suffer and maybe die and all for Laws’ fruitless revenge. Then Luffy stopped that foot. And Law decided to stay. And Luffy beat up Doffy. And Law was free. For the first time in over ten years Law was free. 

Wano: Then He Stayed

Because he didn’t plan to make it this far. I laughed out loud when Law said they were enemies after Wano ended. Motherfxcker who? Law you don’t want to be pirate king. You barely want to be a pirate! Frankly at this point I think the only thing keeping Law from a non-deadly early retirement is Luffy, his bounty, and pride. And he can get rid (ignore) of two of those things (you won’t guess which!).  Law fought and almost died in Wano to fulfill the deal he made with Luffy. Even though Luffy would not have begrudged him on reneging on that deal. Law told him it was made in bad faith and he had fxck all to gain from fighting Kaido. But he did it, he believed in Luffy and Luffy punched the problem away like always. 

And this ends the story of the Saddest Uwu Boi, Trafalgar D. WaterLaw. 

Part III: You Have to See What I’m Getting At. 

Law’ backstory and character development is just that of any main woman character. Sad thing happened when he was a kid, putting him on the radar/ partially in debt to a bad man. He spent most of his life running from this bad man by working for/ with people he hated. He met Luffy. He tried to fight the bad man and system but didn’t have the strength of heart and/ or body to defeat him. Luffy punched the bad man real good and told Law he was pretty without makeup, he didn’t need it. Law was finally able to move freely as a person and decided to support Luffy in his immediate goals (and probably his long term ones too. Let's be honest he has nothing else to do)  even though that puts him and his crew in even more danger. But now he knew, Luffy would punch that danger just as good as the previous bad man. 

Honestly I don't know what this means or what purpose this knowledge serves. Like, this doesn’t change my opinion that lulaw will never be canon. This doesn’t change how I view Law as a character. This doesn’t change how I view Oda as a writer. This only serves the purpose of excising these thoughts from my head and putting them permanently on a website filled with people who will call me horrible things for even admitting I ship Luffy with anyone. So that's something I guess. 

About Sanji:

Sanji is going through a weird, unexpected but good character transformation right now. His writing is becoming more Law/Robin-esque. Which is weird and unexpected but very good. I have thoughts on that but its for a different post. I don't think it undermines my point though because this shift is relatively recent, only happening in the Whole Cake island arc and not fully forming until near the end of Wano. This either means a shift in how Oda choses to write male characters or a shift in how he views Sanjis’ role in the narrative. Only time will tell. 

*This unrelated but I’ m realizing Law shows just as much tiddy as Robin and Nami too.*