#i get the whole thing was being a feminist to get laid but like

[cherryberg]

btw the best black monday character is literally yassir

[adh-james-version]

Why have I been seeing so much Regulus, Barty, Evan, and Jegulus hate? And hate on every James ship that ISNT jily?

To all the older people in the fandom that are hating on the new ships, and characterization: This is NOT the same fandom it was 10 or so years ago!!

#1 - Fandoms evolve!

Everything you don’t like isn’t racist, everything you don’t like isn’t facsist, everything you don’t like isn’t fetishizing, everything you don’t like isn’t misogynistic, everything you don’t like isn’t destroying the fandom, shipping James with someone else isn’t anti-Lily, personality head cannons that don’t perfectly align with yours aren’t gonna bring the fandom to its knees.

Every fandom changes as people leave, join, create, write, draw, etc. So when I started seeing people hate so extremely on certain characters, ships, and headcanons, to the point that they are willing to tell someone to off themselves and/or call people stupid/racist/facsist ect. It took me by surprise because not likening something and talking about it or keeping it to yourself is different than telling someone they are misogynistic for liking a mlm James ship over Jily.

#2 - Hypocrisy Regarding Deatheaters

One thing that I see a lot of is people hating on is the fact that canonical deatheaters like Regulus, Evan, and Barty got revamped or “babygirled”. My first point here is that the same people who believe that are also Pro-Snape. While there is nothing wrong with being Pro-Snape, you can’t be Pro-Snape but Anti-Regulus. Both of them defected from the death eaters! They both laid down their lives to try and help! Even if the impact wasn’t the same the want to be on the right side was. You can definitely not like the personality that a lot of the fandom has given him, but you can’t hate him merely on principle without kinda looking like a hypocrite.

Now onto Evan and Barty: yes they were terrible adults and did horrible things, BUT, we don’t know them as school students. That’s why the fandom took them and fleshed them out how they wanted to, they were a virtually blank slate. That’s why many people like the headcanon of them being forced by their families into getting the mark. We don’t know what truly happened so we took some artistic liberties. Again the same sentiment about Snape from earlier can apply: you can’t hate Evan and Barty on principle when in canon (because most people making this argument care religiously about canon) Snape took the dark mark willingly and again canonically we don’t know why Barty and Evan took the mark.

#3 - The Whole Jily Thing

Okay, look. Liking a James ship that’s not Jily, not a big deal. Liking Jily and not liking other James ships, not a big deal. Not liking any of the James ships, not a big deal. Liking some, one, or none of the first two options, not a big deal. Calling someone misogynistic for liking Jegulus or any other James mlm ship, however, is odd. Saying all people fetishize mlm just because they like an mlm James ship over Jily, is odd. That’s the equivalent of someone who ships Jily over an mlm James ship being called homophobic.

This really ties back to points 1 and 2, the fandom evolved and more ships were added. And calling someone a misogynist for not shipping Jily but shipping Jegulus or another mlm ship when in reality they could be the biggest feminist on the planet but just not a Jily shipper.

#4 - Personally

They’re ships, characters, and headcanons that I really don’t like/hate but you don’t see me saying that the ship is going to end the fandom or that it is fetishizing the characters?

For example, I don’t like Snape (as a person, no knock to his his accomplishments) AT ALL, but I don’t think the people who do are racist! I don’t really like the trans ftm Remus headcannon, but I don’t think all the people who do are fetishizing the trans community. I like the Mary x Pandora x Lily ship but I don’t think the people who don’t are anti polyamory!

#5 - Conclusion

Older members of the fandom and people who have been in the fandom a long time really need to calm down a little bit.

And for the people who say things along the lines of “what about canon” and “it can’t severely affect canon”

The EXISTENCE of this fandom goes against canon! You ship wolfstar and nobleflower but you “care about canon”?!?

Okay that’s it.

[abearinthewoods]

Hi, I have in fact ended up on this page from velvetvexations reblogging you to mock you, so you've got that right lol

And scrolling through your blog for a while I agree with almost all you're saying, but I'm left with two questions I'm really curious about, and I hope you do take them in good faith

Why do you describe yourself as, as you said in that post, MRA? I kinda get both people being extremely wary of hearing that term *and* wanting to reclaim it, since yeah, "men's rights activist" shouldn't be an inherently bad thing to be, but it does associate you with a specific movement that was actually really shitty, and did way more to be sexist to women that to even address the actual issues men face - which you genuienly do! That's the reason it perplexes me. In my country there's a really cool charity that works for men's rights while making it known that it's working for equality and not what the MRA movement wants - and while a lot of people do hate them just because they don't care about men at all, like, I've seen their subreddit - it's an extremely toxic environment that very much supports the same structures that do oppress men.

And second question, what do you mean when you tag your posts with "anti feminism"? I haven't seen a post when you talk about it more, sorry if I've missed that, but it shows up in your tags a lot and I think may be the other reason people are fast to dismiss you. Because, yeah, the general feminist movement has a fuck ton of flaws, and a lot of it is way closer to radical feminism than the people involved would like to admit. The theory behind it, the central idea is about equality, and there are a lot of people who still do care about it though. I generally consider "the purpose of a system is what it does" a good rule, and I'm certainly not opposed to critiquing the current feminist movement, but calling it "anti feminism" specifically does sound more like opposing the core idea, and it is what usually people mean when saying they are anti feminism . It didn't seem, reading your posts that you're against actually treating women equally, so why do you choose to use a term that does imply that? It feels kinda hypocritical if you discard the whole movement/idea, but still align yourself with the MRA movement when it's even further from ideal

Again, I'm asking this out of genuine curiosity. Sorry if you've discussed it before, I didn't manage to find it, but I also haven't scrolled too terribly far.

I get why people dismiss you, but I don't think that's fair. I'd be really happy to see more of your point of few

Context: https://abearinthewoods.tumblr.com/post/768152067433021440/everytime-misandrist-assholes-like

This ask has three parts:

Why do I call myself an MRA given the connotations™?

Simple, the connotations were always bullshit. I have been posting on reddit about men's issues since obama's first term. (and arguing about it among school since the bush administration) People have always had an *idea* about what a mra is about before they ever meet one. Reactionary people (as in reacting negatively out of impulse to the basic concept of men's equality or caring about misandry) have an even stronger idea. It infects how they see the entire movement and how they interpret our words. They read this bias into everything we write, and it doesn't matter what we say or how we say it, its always some how coming from a place of misogyny.

We want to end the male only draft because it re-enforces harmful gender roles and male disposablity? Clearly its just an excuse to imagine women dying on the front line if we actually cared about men instead of using it as some excuse for hating women, we'd fight to end the draft altogether. We want to call out misandry among women? Clearly we are just neckbeard losers who can't get laid and are lashing out at women. Want to address male rape? No if we didn't hate women we would fight against rape culture and rape of women so that there would be time for men's victimization. We want to discuss our experiences being discriminated against? No, clearly we just want to drown out women's voices. Accused of claiming women oppress men, or of hating women. Interrogated with questions to prove we aren't trying to dismiss or take away from xyz "real" oppression.

Hey wait a moment, this is starting to sound like the transmasc oppression discourse. You can take any post of a trans man talking about why they use transmisandry and transandrophobia instead of what ever assholes on tumblr tell them to use and transplant that post on to my answer to the question of why I call myself an mra and not a feminist.

I'm not interested in preforming my gender advocacy under the banner of feminism, and I am not interested in giving way to people operating in (sometimes subconscious) bad faith misreading our posts to fit the ideals in their head by changing what words I use to advocate for myself or my gender to fit their biases. Its pointless because subconsciously what a lot of them object to is the advocacy in general. They are so clearly doing it to trans men now that anybody who has been paying attention on tumblr shouldn't be blind to what I'm talking about. Is it really that farfetched to some of that which was directed at trans men's advocacy was directed at cis men's advocacy?

The rest of it, the bad apples, i consider to be a counter part to something that exists in feminism. We have our terfs you have your terfs. We have our tradcons, you have your radfems. A lot of the most "known" MRAs are just the most viral who are only viral because they are controversial and get shared via ragebait. (To the point that even the less reactionary/hatefilled MRA influencers admit to dipping into ragebait just to compete. (i'm people)).

I think MRA in particular should be protected because I found it at 4th grade. it was the obvious set of words. This would be y2k bug panic year 2000 pre reddit, google, youtube, tate, peterson 4th grade me. Its a descriptor. it can not ever be allowed to be anything else. In the name of every boy who will naturally stumble upon it after facing sexism against themselves and waking up to the concept of sexism against men like I did.

Why do I tag posts anti-feminism given I seem to genuinely be for gender equality for both genders?

One reason I do it for is to normalize criticizing feminism. Its gotten way too easy to dismiss as originating from misogyny or bad faith something or another. That needs to change.

But on a bigger note, I do consider myself a kind of anti-feminist.

I think feminism has gotten too comfortable having a presumption of the moral high ground that it does not analyze its own biases about men.

A big example of what I mean is how feminism will all too often try to theory craft some gender stereotype and harmful trope filled reason for why men do xyz thing and what I need you understand is that from my position, this theorycrafting is itself an expression of bigotry. Manspreading being casted as a "patriarchal signal of domination over public spaces"? How the fuck is that not just 100% stereotype fueled bigotry? Men spread their legs in the train more than women because parents teach only girls to cross their legs (for mostly dress reasons). Not because we are operating out some malicious desire to dominate the world. Jesus fuck. It is anxiety inducing to know feminists are looking at your actions under this kind of light purely because of your gender.

There is also the issue with how feminism's way of looking at the sexism issue actually contributes to misandry. I'm referring to the obsession with privilege and "oppression" as class descriptors and how this is used to excuse "punching up" or denying men access to services they also need, its just women need a bit more. I consider this to be a core aspect to the overall ideological identity of feminism that opposing it is essentially opposing feminism as it currently exists.

The path forward is to remove the concept of oppression and privilege and patriarchy and all the petty dick measuring and bullshit excuses about "punching up" they entail from the conversation. I think this is required to move forward on gender equality. Anybody who has seen how the same fucking arguments mras were having 16 fucking years ago about the existence and validity of misandry as a concept and term, are playing out on the transmisandry tag can plainly see by now the oppression olympics have done more harm than good. Its time to stop.

Allowing this way of looking at gender issues to exist in the culture zeitgeist harms men. I read a post on here about a guy who got SA'ed in highschool because someone made his ride back home contingent on, well, things. He mentioned how he didn't have a cell phone to call his parents for a ride home but his younger sister did, specifically so something like that wouldn't happen to her. Because of this us vs them oppressed vs privileged bullshit he was not given a tool to prevent sexual assault his younger sister got.

Nope, no more. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander. I will except no less moving forward.

Aren't I a hypocrite for doing both at the same time given I'm trying reclaim the MRM from the connotations set by the worse while holding feminism to the worst?

Here's the difference. When I find out somebody calls themselves a feminist, I don't assume things about them, laugh at their face, make some flippant remark based on my ideals about feminism, or even make them prove what kind of WRA (Women's rights advocate/activist) they are. I watch, listen and let them demonstrate what that means to them.

Be mindful of the distinction between The movement(the waves, etc), the general concept(anti-sexism), the ideology(the theory and written work), and the people who are associated by means of either of the three (feminists).

And lets be real. Feminism sits in the culture limelight, the men's movement does not. Feminism has the sway within corporate culture and mainstream political ideals to actually harm men when its misandry is allowed go unchecked. Meanwhile the MRM is listed as a hate group by organizations that command respect purely because of the existence of the same types of bitter hate filled vocal minority. This listing subtly hinders any men's advocacy, because, as i've said, Men's rights Advocate/Activist, is a *descriptor*. Like Civil Rights Activists or Women's Rights Activists. When you tie that strong of a negative connotation to a descriptor people will have a hard time differentiating between what ADL and SPLC are talking about and men's advocacy (what the the descriptor points to) in general. This can not be allowed to remain the status quo. It has to be pushed back against.

If feminism as a whole starts getting listed as a hate group because of "the worst of the worst" members by orgs with a lot of respect around the world and this hinders feminism's ability to gain any traction or do any advocacy for women calling me out for hypocrisy would start to become a fair cop.

One final note, I'm not even defining feminism by the worst of the worst. That once piece of shit radfem with her male tears coffee mugs aren't the standard i'm judging feminism by. The countless men and women who took to twitter to defend her right to have said mug and mocked any man who objected to it, is. The feminist leaning major publications that were pushing articles defending it as punching up and mocking any man who dared to express his emotions about it as a fragile wittle wite male, are. They (sadly) define feminism more than intersectionists on tumblr do. (as does Jezebel mag bragging about their staffers domestically abusing men) Ps: saturnian-catboy, I hope this helps you view my prospective a bit better. I could write for ever on the topic of feminism. thats why i got this blog, so i'm sure there are points i'll punch my self for forgetting. thank you for the kind words about my blog. I appreciated them.

[boku-no-anime-phase]

I was about to joke that Laid Back Camp doesn't get enough recognition for being queer-friendly (not to mention feminist!) anime, but you know what? Forget the joke, I'm saying it for real.

Laid Back Camp doesn't get enough recognition for being feminist, queer-friendly anime.

I don't have a ton to add to that. I haven't watched the show with a dedicated "is this queer friendly" mindset, but as a queer person I can't remember any moments that made me uncomfy, and I can remember several moments where a lesser show would've easily made queer people the butt of the joke, and this one didn't.

Also I think even though we don't actually see whether Nadeshiko and Rin get together in the end, what we DO see is a beautiful relationship of mutual trust and affection, handled with care by every aspect of the show, developing between them. Their natures compliment one another and their sharp edges soften into one another as they grow closer. All of the relationships in this show are important, but the one between Nadeshiko and Rin is the real heartbeat of the whole thing.

I definitely think there should be more expressly queer representation in all media including anime, but I also enjoy and am comforted by this kind of ambient queer-friendliness. Where anime typically keeps me on my toes as far as objectionable content and badly handled tropes go, it's nice to be able to just relax into a show like you'd relax into a nice camping chair in front of a fire. I love Yuru Camp

[aurum-rays]

When you rewatch most childhood movies, the cult classics, the nostalgia rides, I realize how sexist and problematic they were, and I was secretly hoping Veer Zaara wasn't one of them (I watched it when I was like 10 so I don't remember). This movie surprised me.

Veer Zaara features strong, resilient female characters. Be it our protagonist Zaara played by Preity Zinta or the catalysts of the love story Saamiya (Rani Mukherjee) and Shabbo (Divya Dutta) or even Zaara’s mother (Kirron Kher) and her Bebe (Zohra Sehgal).

Zaara Hayaat Khan is a feminist, one who is against the societal norms laid for a woman. It's refreshing to see this in her introductory song "Hum to bhai jese hai wese rahengey" sung beautifully by Lata ji, but as this 3 hour musical drama progresses it gets disappointing to see Zaara whittle herself away to the same norms she was against in the first place.

Everyone around her constantly tells her it's her responsibility to be a good wife and a good mother and to guard the respect of their families. Zaara crosses the border to fulfill a final wish of her ‘BeBe’(grandmother) all by herself.

In the midst of a rescue operation, she demands her things be lifted off along with her all while hanging on to an Air Force professional in his uniform.

She pushes the crowded men away and speaks with authority "I have a ticket and I need to get on this bus". In all these instances Zaara is scared yet heroic. She phones her mother and tells her that all her life she didn't do anything and probably won't in the future too and will probably end up being just like her mother - a good wife and a good mother, so she wants to do this one thing so she can respect herself. This is what irked me. I understand she's from an orthodox family but she can still have dreams and ambitions. From the start of the movie, she is portrayed as a rebel, one who doesn't comply with societal norms and laughs in the face of stereotypes. I can only imagine how curious she would have been as a child. That alone is enough to give her some dreams.

She fearlessly tells Amitabh's character what he is doing is unfair to the girls. If I went to someone’s house for a day especially someone I barely knew, I wouldn't even dare to question their acts. Zaara does and she makes him spellbound. She doesn't go “I'm just here for one day so I’ll just mind my own business and leave”. She questions the injustice. "Imagine what girls could do if they were given the right education. Some of them might even surpass Veer".

I loved Zaara in all these scenes. She fearlessly stands up against mistreatment and calls them out no matter who the other person is. All this makes you root for her until it doesn't.

In a scene where Saamiya visits Veer's (Shahrukh Khan) hometown and finds Zaara there, she says to Shabbo "Yeh kis sadi ke log hai… ?" (transl. “Which century are these people from?”)

That's exactly how I felt too. “Kon hai ye log? Kahan se aate hai?”( transl. Who are these people? Where do they come from?) Spending their whole lives in the name of the person they never got to be with. Sacrificing everything and working to fulfill someone else’s dream. Zaara has always been that kind of person. She crosses borders to fulfill her bebe's wish and gives all her life to fulfill Veer and his Tau’s wish. She keeps doing everything for others. She spends her life making others’ dreams come true. She lives her life in the memory of her lover. This also reminded me of Sita aka Princess Noor Jahan from Sitaramam (also maybe Madarasipattinam's Amy).

If Saamiya saw these women she'd again say "Kon hai ye log?"

Even after decades of releasing love stories on-screen this "sacrificing" trope hasn't changed and remains to be a classic which I am not a big fan of. Why do these characters not have any characterization of their own? (Zaara) even if they do, it all changes when a man comes into her life (Sita/Noor Jahan). Ultimately the heroine has to either die or spend her whole life in the memory of her Romeo. (Remember what Mr. Dashwood says to Jo in 2019’s Little Women?)

Maybe I don't understand love stories. Maybe I don't understand love? I don't know. But I think in real life none of us are that insane to write our whole life in someone else’s name and live and breathe just reminiscing our lost lovers, at least I am not. Maybe that is why these movies will remain classics because they are too insane to happen in real life.

[ruinedbylanadelrey]

as good as you are at writing the whole "losing virginity" thing, how about you write something sort of like that but with a twist? Frankie with a college-aged reader. she has never had good sex in her life, because all of the college aged boys she has done it with make it about themselves rather than her. so she lies to Frankie and says she has never had sex before, thinking if he thinks it is her first time, he will take care of her. then when the night comes to have sex for the first time, he gets the room all set up with candles and nice sheets and chocolates and lingerie and so forth. reader lets slip that she is not a virgin and explains why she lied and is afraid Frankie will be mad at her. he is not. he is angry at the college boys obvs, but he promises to take care of reader. then they have sex for the first time. (maybe a bit with that daddy/little girl caretaker thing that reader and Joel had in ceilings).

Hot | Frankie Morales x f!Reader

I wrote this while high. My mind is powerful

Hot by Avril Lavigne inspired me

Happy friday, y'all!!

masterlist

warnings: 18+, MINORS DNI, SMUT, oral (f rec.), anti feminist!reader, frankie is the pussy eating king, DIRTY TALK, unprotect p-i-v sex, pet names (baby, little girl, sweet girl), DDLG, HEAVY DADDY KINK

Frankie was a walking Greek god to you. He was beautiful and capable of taking care of you. When you came into his life, he showed you how older men are better college boys. you loved how you realized how much you love the stereotypical housewife who lives to serve her husband, obey him, and submit yourself to him.

When you dated college boys you thought it was stupid to submit to the opposite sex. it should be the other way around, women should be the ones who could be promiscuous in nature and men should be the ones who are shamed for being slutty, women are simply better than men.

How did all this come about? Well, you lied to Frankie about being a virgin when that wasn't entirely a lie because you hadn't experienced an orgasm from another person. Frankie had the whole thing planned out, he took you on a nice and very experienced date and then brought you back to his place.

He had the bedroom lit up with candles and a bottle of champagne. You couldn't help but become overwhelmed by the romantic gesture. "Frankie," You gasp, your hand muffling the sound. You just looked at him and saw how he holds the moon in your eyes. "I want to show the pleasure that I've been waiting to show you, baby," His eyes darken and the look in his eye went straight to your aching core.

This will be the first time you sleep with Frankie since you guys started dating. Your heart was beating out of your chest, he is thinking that he was taking your virginity. Frankie set this whole thing up so you could feel special. His hands brush your hair as he pushes the strap of your dress down your arms.

Frankie hums while your body becomes exposed to him. You shifted under his intense gaze. "Frankie..." You took a deep breath and now decided to tell him the truth. "I'm not a virgin..." you said as you step out of your dress, wearing the baby pink lace lingerie set. You look like a doll with all the lace decorating your figure.

"I'm sorry for lying...I just never had someone make me feel good..." You continue to speak too quickly and Frankie crashes his lips into yours, "Don't be sorry...I'm sorry that you haven't had an experience where you're taken care of..." Frankie said into the lip lock. The hunger of the kiss was animalistic, Frankie licking into your mouth, his hands roaming your body, your hand fists in his hair. 

"Let me take care of you, baby...let daddy do his job..." Frankie whispers into your ear, you could feel yourself submitting to the other sex. You whimpered when he called himself 'daddy' it made you tingle all over. Frankie leads you to the foot of the bed and laid you out before him. You were like a ragdoll, letting him position how he wanted you. You grew wetter at the thought of just being a submissive frail woman for a man...that man being Frankie. 

He just oozed masculinity, just strong and knows what he is doing...that's the military in him, he was taught to never second guess his actions. They are fulfilled with the purpose of that either killing someone who is a threat to the ideal American life (drugs or communism), a threat to your life or the other purpose was to give you the pleasure that you deserve, from being a good girl your whole life, by saving your first orgasm for him...a good girl waiting for her daddy. 

"You are breathtaking, sweet girl." He purrs while his hands start at your feet and massage their way up to your thighs, close enough to feel how your submissive pussy is drenched with arousal. You smiled at the praise, and start to feel lightheadedness...was it you slipping into a space of vulnerability or was it you losing brain cells every time you thought of submitting to the lesser sex? 

"Thank you, Daddy," You batted your lashes, the innocence of your tone had Frankie at his knees with his face between your legs. Inhaling your scent through the sopping wet lace. His mouth opens and kisses your core through the panties. You sighed just watching Frankie crumble to his knees, kissing your clothed pussy and worshipping your cunt. He pulls away and rips the lace with his fingers so effortlessly. You gasped as the sound of fabric tearing filled the air, then you giggled as Frankie kisses each hip bone. 

"Daddy wants to eat your pretty pussy, princess...you're dripping...so pink..." Frankie says as his finger holds you open so he could see all of you, he leans down and practically makes out with your cunt, your juices coating his beard and the tip of his nose.

It was so primal how he just made out with your pussy, like he was kissing your mouth, the way his tongue would fuck your hole, his teeth lightly grazing your clit. His lips move to your thigh and his teeth sank into your plush thigh with light pressure. Frankie wanted to devour you, your moans coaxing him into never letting you go. 

You threw your head back when two of his thick fingers slip into your entrance. "Oh fuck, daddy…i’m coming!" you whined as his finger pumped in and out of you, his mouth latching on to your clit. Your flutter around his finger, your moan growing closer together while you tried to breathe. The familiar knot in your stomach is about to snap.

Frankie replaces his fingers with his tongue and his thumb pressing down on your clit. Your skin broke into a sweat, the knot snapped and a wave of white-hot pleasure flows through your body and Frankie lapped up your release. The sounds of the room were filled by Frankie's animalistic drinking from you, your moans added the lewd noise. 

Your mind was gone, all you can think about was how amazing it felt to receive pleasure from another person, how beautiful you felt with Frankie between your legs. "Can daddy fuck you, baby?" Frankie stands up, his gaze not leaving yours while his hands unbuckling the belt, his hair sticking up from your hands playing in the locks.

You nodded biting your lip and watching Frankie undress. A smirk grew on his lips when he wraps your legs high on his torso. You smiled at him, just loving how he is such a beautiful person, how he takes care of you like a man should. 

"Okay, baby...Daddy is going to fuck your pretty pussy now," He talks you through it, his length sinking into your warmth. Both of you panting while he bottoms out, your pussy clenching around him making Frankie feel lost in a sea of bliss. You could feel him in your stomach, you looked down to see his tip bulging a bit.

"F-fuck you're so deep, Daddy" you stuttered when Frankie pulls out and slams himself back inside you. Frankie grunts with each thrust, being so hard and rough. His pace picks up, Frankie pounding into your cunt, "Fuck, you're creaming, little girl," Frankie moans when he looked down at how his cock coated in a white cream. You were feeling so light while his hips slam into yours. 

You sat up to reach Frankie's lip, your mouth lazily molds into his, and you could taste yourself on his tongue. Your moan flowed into his mouth and you swallowed his whimpers and pants.

"Say you're mine, baby, please" he begs still chasing his climax, his hand sliding between you and his thumb rubbing your clit. You jolted against him, you cry out as another wave of bliss seeps out of you. "I'm yours, daddy...all yours." You submitted entirely. Frankie thrust into you deeply and his seed spills into you. The feeling of being full with his cock inside of you and his cum flooding your pussy made feel you overwhelmed with love. 

[thehummingbirdpost]

Jewish Voice for Peace Advocates for Palestinian Rights

Dale Colleen Hamilton

edendale24@gmail.com

April 2024

My friend Esther Farmer has lived in Brooklyn her whole life. Her parents, Palestinian Jews, immigrated there in the 1920s. Her father, a politically progressive activist, was labelled a communist and black-listed, making it difficult for him to find work. Her mother was way ahead of her times and her support for the Palestinian cause was loud and often fierce and she battled sexism fearlessly.

Esther calls herself culturally Jewish, religiously atheist, politically non-Zionist and passionately pro-Palestinian. She’s been involved with Palestinian rights organizations for decades and is on the leadership committee of Jewish Voice for Peace, whose membership has exploded since the war on Palestine began. Their protests have attracted thousands of people and have included shutting down Grand Central Station and the Manhattan Bridge.

On my recent visit to New York City, I went with Esther to several pro-Palestinian anti-war demonstrations. She says there’s some form of pro-Palestinian protest almost every day, so there were plenty of choices. While I was there, she did a reading from a book she co-edited, A Land with People as well as several zoom presentations. She lives and breathes Palestinian rights these days. One of the most moving things I’ve heard her say is that her grandmother told her that Palestinians, Jews and Arabs used to live just fine together in Palestine, until in 1917 the British decided, in their imperial “wisdom,” to "declare" that Palestine should be a Jewish state through the Balfour Declaration.

The first protest we went to was intended to take place in front of the Brooklyn home of Chuck Schumer (Democratic Senate Majority Leader) but police in riot gear blocked his street. Schumer is being targeted, in part, because he was given over $100,000 in campaign contributions by pro-Zionist AIPAC (American Israeli Public Affairs Committee). In response to the police blockade, the effigies of dead swaddled children being carried by the protesters were laid at the feet of the police. And the protesters read aloud a list of 64 names of dead Palestinian children. These names represented one tenth of one percent of the children killed since Oct 7th. It would have taken 24/7 for 2 days to have read all the names. As the names were spoken, I found myself watching the faces of the police officers for any glimmer of support or remorse, but they were well-trained to show no emotion. However, as the procession wound through the Saturday farmers’ market, many people stopped and quietened respectfully.

Another protest we attended was staged in front of the United Nations in Manhattan. Again, riot police were in full force. Although no arrests were made, Jewish Voice for Peace always has a lawyer present and a team of members ready to support anyone who does get arrested, as was the case during the Grand Central Station action, where over 300 people were arrested. To me as a Canadian gentile outsider, the most striking element of this protest was the range of participants, including Armenian and Kurdish rights activists, an Iranian Feminist group and about a dozen Orthodox Hasidic Jews, who have been demonstrating for Palestinian rights and denouncing Zionism and the Jewish state for years. It was the Sabbath so they aren’t allowed to take public transit or drive, so they had walked from Williamsburg, over 6 kms each way. Although Hasidic Jews are sometimes criticized for sexist practises, I couldn’t help but admire their dedication to the Palestinian cause.

In between demonstrations, we had the best Middle Eastern food I’ve ever experienced at a Palestinian restaurant called Ayat on Cortelyou Road in Brooklyn. Their menu includes a call for an end to the occupation and asks diners to “pray for peace for all”. The meal we had there felt sombre, but it also felt like a celebration of the swell of awareness and support for Palestinians and a rethinking of what it means to be Jewish and Israeli and the role US-made armaments play in the genocide.

By a stroke of dumb luck, I got the last rush ticket to see a sold-out play called The Ally, at the Public Theatre in Greenwich Village. In keeping with the apparent theme of my trip, it was a play about the Palestinian Israeli conflict. It presented all sides of the issue, which left my head spinning. In the lobby after the performance, a man who sounded like he knew what he was talking about said he thinks it will be remounted, which makes sense, seeing as it’s such a timely and important topic.

And oh yes, by way of contrast, while in New York I also experienced cherry trees in bloom (eerily early), an earthquake (4.8 magnitude centered in New Jersey) and the solar eclipse, which we watched grow to 90% totality in Prospect Park. And after the intensity of the protests, back at Esther’s each evening, we’d sit on the couch and watch Democracy Now and Aljazeera, trying to make sense of a world apparently on a collision course with itself.

[sissa-arrows]

That french show "j'irai dormir chez vous- Algérie" received so much (negative) attention, when they posted the teaser it was already the most number of views the show had gotten, but a lot of people expressed their deception after watching the whole thing and many speculated the episode was made specifically to tarnish Dzayer's image.

Antoine had been to Kabylie and Ghardaïa , hadn't met police there, when he went to our Sahara close to the borders he was asked to have a local guide, he refused so instead of kicking him out, the police proposed that a civil followed him from afar to ensure his safety , he did not refuse, he then wanted to get a permission to adventure outside of the city that was refused.

The security agents had all been dressed in civil and calmly talked to him, they shouldn't have been filmed yet he filmed them, they explained that they weren't worried about the city or its lovely people, that it was safe but they wanted to be extra safe, the country is just opening up to tourism and receiving so much hate, it also has troubled borders, so while it is safe tourists (even Algerian) need to be accompagnied with a guide in the Sahara, a lost or dead journalist would not do good to the country's image.

With all that in mind, Antoine really said: oh i get it now you want to keep me safe to give Algeria a good image, no problem i'll give you a completely different reason to worry. And it become a subject of trends between all those journalists outside who has a job to criticize everything relateed to the country, they need to earn money after all.

All of this doesn't bother me, French ppl who come here have the tendency to bring out the worst in us, we are used to it, the police should have been more subtle or told him off right off the bat, altho you do imagine that they'd still be criticied no matter what (if they didn't care and something bad happened , if they were more stern, or laid back) But the realiy is that this whole fuss is made because a white man ws stopped in a third world country.

It's easy to reverse the situation, if i, an Algerian had been to France to film an emission and the police stopped me from going to a certain place alone, worried about my safety, and filmed it, i would be the one criticized for being irresponsible for not cooperating. But when a white man does it, he he is denouncing corruption and toxic behavior , while he sounds objectively completely insane (not to mention offensive with his offhanded comments on M'zab women and the Kabylie status) Even though we all know how are people can be treated aboard, it is always assumed it is our fault, but never the fault of the more responsible white man on backwarded countries.

Also just one thing, the security wasn't aware he was a jornalist at first and Algerians are also stopped when they want to wonder alone in the desert, it doesn't have to do with nationality, although yes french channels are usually kept abay, it doesn't have to do with colonialism as much as their more recent behavior . Also there has been a case of a european tourist dying in the desert last year, i assume security was blamed then.

(sorry for info dumping ;-; the previous anon made me think, i didn't know where to put this)

The first time I wandered alone in the Sahara with my grandparents we wanted to cross the border with Mali, we had the paperwork and all but the border agents said no. They said only my grandpa could cross the border but not my grandma or me. The feminist inside me got angry and then the border agent was like “My sister, the Malian authorities told us there was potential terrorists near the border and that it wasn’t safe for women right now that you could get kidnapped. So sit down I’m not letting you cross the border.” The feminist inside me immediately calmed down 😂

But yeah all of that to say that if he was in the Sahara it 100% makes sense that the authorities were watching over him. Some places are protected too and only Kel Tamasheq/Touareg can go there. There’s also the area around Tindouf and the border with Western Sahara…

Anyway thank you for all the informations!!

[greengrungeemo]

Why Hayley Williams is among the most BADASS people I know of

So, I've recently been to a Paramore concert with someone just as badass and amazing and had the best time ever!! Hands down the best concert I ever been to (I've been to 4 now)! It was of course, amazing because of the perfection that is Paramore's music, but what was far more extraordinarily compelling was Hayley herself.

I'll post ALL of my recorded concert vids soon so you can see for yourself, but she is the epitome of feminism and women empowerment. Think about it! She's been touring since 2005, and the amount of ENERGY she has compared to previous artists I've seen! Night and daaaaay! The highlights for me were her mood-lifting dance moves and running in place while she performed! It made an introvert like myself get the zoomies and really just... express myself at a concert! So hype and made me so happy. I cried twice during this concert too! xD

Another oustanding thing to note was her understanding and connection to the crowd, you'll see in vids I'll post, but like she said on stage: "Thanks for spending your money here, seriously! I'll make sure to make the whole thing worth it" She knows the struggle out there in this economy. It takes a lot to see a concert when there's just so much to worry about in this world, especially financially! With everything in the world going on, she adds, "Let's just forget all of our worries for these 4 hours. Completely forget it all together." To some, that may not seem like much of a statement, but to those suffering from anxiety, trauma, depression, among a whole lot of other things, this helped create a bubble of escape. Admittedly, even in this trip down to the U.S, I still have a lot on my mind on a daily basis. A lot of inner demons to battle, regret, guilt, worry for others, etc etc. Hayley helped put that on pause, especially with a statement like that!

Men can learn A LOT from women, and if they tried to take a page out of Hayley's book, it'd make a big difference, because this next point is on social issues! A huge highlight was a really tear-jerking and awesome statement she made. She made us all hold up our 2 pinkies! We all held them up, and she said, "This is a promise. To hold people in higher power accountable." I got goosebumps and was in pure shock and delight. What a powerful statement and thing to do. What's even better, is that she followed up with, "and let's also remember, to vote. Let's not vote for people with small dick energy please?!" Absolutely true. All of those politicians so insecure about how people simply wish to identify as or express themselves? It hurts, knowing there's people who feel trapped out there that just want to come out of their shell and feel happy for who they are. I will retain this double pinky promise for as long as I live. As a man, I will understand my privilege and do my best to voice myself and protect friends and all under LGBTQ++ and their rights. I will stand by women and be a proud feminist, and voice myself whenever I see injustice. I will educate other men when I see them being shitty, when they denigrate, dehumanize, or categorize women as any lesser than them. It bugs me so much. It's important. I will also vote thoughtfully where it counts!

Hayley has also pointed out the massive amount of misogynistic criticism laid out to her over the years. Again, since she's been performing in the early 2000s, you can imagine how bad it must have been, being a woman and head of the band? A bunch of sexist males criticizing what a "real band should be", etc. She proves what a real band is. She carries it with her whole heart. 🖤 She even made fun remarks about how she's just a girl, "I got long hair? So what? I brush it. Actually, Taylor(?) brushes it." Referring to one her band mates teasingly. Loved it. Women power right there!

There's so much more to say, but I will keep it brief, Hayley Williams is and always will be among my heroes for her inspiring words, her addictively fun energy, and reminding me to be a proud feminist. It doesn't take a lot of effort to be kind, and to treat others well. Do your part as a man, do your equal share at minimum, and stand up for what's right!

[papirouge]

papi, I keep hearing about how evil women who want divorce will learn what it means to be lonely but most divorced women I know seem happy to be single or if they do pursue romantic partners, they don't end up marrying them. meanwhile divorced men are far likelier to remarry

a lot of this rhetoric just sounds like a cope, like most manosphere stuff is. like they'll assume every woman seeking divorce is doing it for entirely selfish reasons and take great (and perverse) delight in thinking of her being miserable somewhere down the line. I am sorry but what sex has entire movements obsessing about being miserable and lonely? most women's movements are about looking forward and improving themselves and society, or about being away from men, men's movements meanwhile seem very vindictive and focused on punishing women for not wanting to be around them anymore. it's like MGTOW... most MGTOW and MGTOW-adjacent social media content I ever see are about how mad women make them lmao and you could say the same for feminism, but at least that's grounded in women having grievances against male-run civilizations treating women poorly. the manosphere has like two legitimate points and the rest is just "I'm so mad I can't get a girlfriend"

then there are those who think women shouldn't get anything in a divorce settlement, as if every married woman is a stay at home wife and only her husband is bringing in money... I'm sorry but most women contribute financially to their households nowadays. so why is she supposed to get nothing in a settlement?? is that not her property too lmao

like, idk, I've never known a woman who wanted to get a divorce for no reason, or worse just to make her husband sad lmao (I've heard stories of people seeking divorce out of spite but it seems split pretty evenly between the sexes). three of my female relatives divorced because their husbands either became abusive or started cheating, and divorced female friends of mine have similar stories, that their husband was a piece of crap. but the divorce was a last resort, they tried to make things work before giving up entirely. there are absolutely women who ruin their marriages (I've known women like this too) but the way people just vilify EVERY divorced woman and blame her for the failure of the marriage is weird to me

sorry for the rant. I hope you're doing well

Hi ! yeah I'm doing well - currently trying to edit my next youtube video but my laptop is so slow I'm lowkey losing it lol

Of course all of this is a major cope. Reality & stats actually prove that MEN are those suffering the most from female rejection : Dating app are dominated by males, clubs have to offer free entry for women to appeal to them, males literally created a movement to whine about how they couldn't get laid.... Men ACTIVELY pursue women, but they're trying to gaslight women into thinking that it's the opposite and that if they don't lower their standards, they're going to end up old and alone, when none of this is backed up by actual reality. Don't you find interesting that those incel NEVER bring up actual objective evidence about "women hitting the wall" ? they only bring up older men age preference, but NOTHING about how actual WOMEN live their singleness at older age. It's just pure projection ; they assume that because older like younger women, then older women feel misrable about, which is untrue. Actually, those men are the first to seethe at silly tiktok of childless mature women enjoying their life..... Sorry but their behavior betrays their words. Meanwhile, there are plentiful data available about how men outnumber women in dating app- and let's not forget sexual violence because men "need" women for their sexual depravity. So it's pretty obvious which sex is actually desperate to find companionship.

Say what you want about feminist, but at least they're consistent in advocating for a certain emotional independence from men (there's a whole discourse about removing ourselves from the male gaze, internal misogyny, etc.) but most male activist movement are seething against women.....while actively seeking fulfillment FROM women. It creates a cognitive dissonance (those men seek to dominate women, but by relying on female sexual availability, it ultimately makes them dominated by women) that why Which is pretty funny to witness considering that those men pretend being the rational sex....🙃 That's why female movement like FDS/hypergamy are actively attacked by men (FDS reddit got routinely raided by scrotes to the point they left the platform) because they are threatened by the idea of women elevating their standards, because that would mean even less sexually available women for them. It's no coincidence MGTOW caught less traction than the incel movement (+ all these dating coach/"how to become an alpha male" grifters) because the former is for men trying to remove themselves from dating women, but men cannot stop themselves from being reliant on women sexually speaking, so they'd rather whine about it online than learn to seek independence.

[secondhandhandyhaversack]

I think this relates to general media literacy in a big way, although the example in the original post is a more positive, lighthearted version, I think the principles are the same.

I think the Harry Potter debacle has made us all a little too susceptible to this. When Joan starting tweeting about all her heinous opinions, we all started scouring the books to see if there was something amiss we had missed; As it turns out there was. But now we do it with everything all the time. We are constantly on the look-out as if the content of the books matters far less than the beliefs of the person that wrote them, which, in my very humble opinion, is a very lazy way to do media literacy. No need to actually think critically about the media, just need to know if the author sucked or not.

Ursula K LeGuin hated it when people did this. She thought it was extremely invasive to believe that you could glean the inner thoughts of a writer from their writings. Sometimes a writer writes what they write because they're trying to highlight a specific type of problem, sometimes they write someone into their book because the beliefs they have fit someone that might have those beliefs in the real world. Does that mean the author really believes those things? Not necessarily, and it is the weirdest form of hubris and parasocial bullshittery to believe that you can glean whether they do or not without any proof other than the story.

I'm going to use use myself reading LeGuin's EarthSea novels as an example here:

While reading the novels, I was intensely upset by the way women were treated. They were often sidelined in favor of characters who were men, and in the first book, there was hardly any women at all. This was confusing to me because I knew, from reading her own essays, that LeGuin was a feminist and progressive to the core. So why did her books make it seem like she hated women so much. If I ended with the first book, I probably would have been upset forever, and confused forever, but I kept reading.

By the end of the sixth book, the whole picture comes into view. She doesn't hate women at all, and you can tell! She was just slowly through the books highlighting how women often had so much bullshit to deal with that of course men ended up running the college at Roake, and of course they were assholes about it, and once a man was in charge, and specifically once an asshole man was in charge, of course they stopped admitting women even though it was a woman who had founded it. Ursula K LeGuin didn't hate women at all, but she wasn't telling a story about how women can do anything. She was writing a story about how being a woman is hard and how men make women's lives harder. And, how the world goes out of balance when men are the only ones in charge.

It took six books for me to get it, and even then, the only way I was able to really "get" it was because LeGuin had written countless essays on politics and feminism from which I could actually read her opinions and beliefs as she presented them. It was only through the framework laid down by the author herself that I could understand her views from the books. For me to accuse LeGuin of hating women, after reading only one book, or even all of her books, would have been silly, and quite simply, wrong.

Without a framework from the author themselves, you're just shaking a stick in the night. You can't possibly know. So you must engage with the media in a conscious and critical way. In cases where the author is on a tirade, witch hunt, or crusade, then please avoid supporting them in ways that will empower them. Otherwise, if the media can stand on it's own legs, let it stand, if not, let it fall.

Saw this on Twitter and I obligatory need to share it

[cazort]

I like how neatly you laid out what you want for trans politics and trans rights.

For my part, while transmedicalism *is* unfortunately common in leftist spaces, I personally consider it a conservative/controlling concept - there’s a long thread of “if you *must* transition, do it like this, don’t challenge too much of the larger system of gender” stretching back through Harry Benjamin’s “true transsexual.” It’s currently showing up as transmedicalism, a lot like how old radfem concepts keep popping up in new feminist discourse. Legitimizing transition through surgery is also enforced by entrenched legal means - for example, requiring sterilization to change gender marker.

And other leftists push it the other way - “feeling dysphoria means you’re gendering bodies, and that’s regressive, so you should just learn to see yourself as your ~true gender~ without surgery.” Works for some people. Other people find that no amount of conceptual reframing will ease the constant dissonance from feeling a phantom dick. Or just don’t want to change how they internally relate to their own body in that way. People of all stripes get real weird about bottom surgery in particular.

I personally want radical bodily autonomy, backed up by institutional and social change to make the choice meaningful. I think that anything that pushes people to be a particular gender, or to understand or present their gender in a particular way, or to have a particular body configuration or internal relationship to their gendered/sexed body, will have transphobic and intersexist effects. I think that medical transition should be readily available to people who want it, and that we should have an expansive enough view of gender to make the choice available without pushing either way. And, especially around medical transition, I think this is a larger conversation that has to come from a disability perspective as well as a gender one.

Thank you! I'm not sure what specific post or collection of posts you're referring too but you have definitely understood my stances correctly, and I appreciate the additional commentary and insights you've added.

I've often been frustrated that my takes on trans issues seem not to attract a whole lot of attention, whereas I see bad takes both from a right-wing and left-wing perspective, getting a ton of attention.

For anyone interested I would encourage you to read posts in my transmedicalism tag, because that's where a lot of this stuff is.

I also agree with your insights here that a lot of transmedicalism is a form of far-right thinking, a sort of binarism, just repackaged to make it palatable to left-wing people. And I agree about it being analogous to how TERF is a right-wing movement manifesting as feminism. Another example of this are the ex-fundamentalists who become radical atheists and retain the "us-vs-them" and judgmental attitude, just changing the target.

All of these things have in common black-and-white thinking and an us-vs-them mentality.

And I totally agree with your goal here for trans people, making medical transition available to all but without any pressure one way or the other. I personally feel great pressure for medical transition from both right-wing perspectives (people refusing to acknowledge my identity unless I look a certain way) and left-wing (transmedicalism) and it's so frustrating to "get it from both sides" like this. I just want to be free and make my own choices, and I think most people do, so I fail to understand why it's been so hard to build a consensus around this stuff.

[midnightsslut]

okay finding a swiftie and scandal/olitz blog just made me super happy and now i need your season rankings and scandal hot takes

omgggggggg I am very excited to answer this. I am obsessed with this show rn. disclaimer: I am a huge fitz stan and will defend him in almost every situation but I try to be rational I promise. that man is crack for me. I feel like shonda studied my brain before writing him.

rankings first:

season 3 > season 2 > season 1 > season 5 > season 4 (would’ve been top three without the fuckass kidnapping plot > season 7 > ninth circle of hell > season 6

now my hot takes. I typed this up after I finished the show for the first time about a month ago (I’m rewatching rn). I’ll put a cut bc I don’t wanna bother y’all

- this goes without saying but I love fitz. I enjoyed his character thoroughly throughout the show and he never really did anything to annoy me. he gets a LOT of shit but does the least egregious things out of all the characters except mellie. I will defend every single one of his actions and he gets a lot more interesting when he grows a backbone instead of acting like a human ping pong ball that his wife, mistress, and chief of staff use (so after his son dies and his mistress leaves him to go be on an island because idk. reasons). he needs to get up though. post-rewatch update: he’s not a ping pong ball at all. he is manipulative as hell and idk how I couldn’t see it during first watch. however, he’s also a great president and generally i do believe that he’s a sincere, warm romantic who gets gradually corrupted by his time in office especially during his second term. he is super warm and supportive towards the end though. the scene in season 7 where he tells olivia that he sees the old her again even though she doesn’t made me cry.

- this brings me to mellie. I adore her until she’s president. she is one of the best developed characters in the series (even though I think the rape plot could’ve been done better bc it was clearly not planned/later shoehorned in). her presidency was built up for six seasons only for her to whine about girl power, deserving a presidency she was never elected for, and wanting to get laid. at least fitz was actually in love with olivia. meanwhile Mellie is now a doormat bc ??? this is really Shonda’s fault bc you can tell trump being elected threw a wrench in her plans. also the feminist speeches are so bad. ‘shattering glass ceilings’ okay cut your hair into a hillary clinton bob while you’re at it. the modern day political commentary is a bit much during the latter half of the show as a whole but I digress.

- this brings me to olivia. I always root for her even when she annoys the shit out of me. Kerry Washington is an incredible actress with boatloads of charisma (same as Tony). sometimes she’s entirely irrational but everyone worships the ground she walks on anyway until season 7, where she does one bad thing and gets crucified for it. unpopular opinion but I enjoyed the dark olivia arc and her ultimate redemption. she’s kinda horrible a lot post-kidnapping but no one gives a shit because everyone loves her which can be frustrating until they all do too much to ice her out in s7 (except fitz bc he’s fitz).

- everyone on this show has daddy issues. every single person. olivia’s daddy issues are interesting but they’re never resolved

- papa pope is incredibly inconsistent. sometimes he will send a man to his daughter’s bed. other times he will kill her boyfriend’s son because he took his child from her (????). really he ruins her psychologically for multiple seasons but gets away with it because she kills one innocent person and he crawls to fitz to save her (??????)

- jake was my third favorite character until season 7. they butchered him at that point. shonda makes it exceedingly clear that Olivia will never choose him but it’s a bit much sometimes. his ending is also horrible and undeserved

- the ending in general is ????? we deserved a little more than a damn hi. why did David die. why did Cyrus get away with everything. also ik that portrait scene is supposed to be powerful but it doesn’t make a ton of sense. also papa pope gets away with everything because the senators are worried about the optics of being controlled by a black man. also the whole ‘papa pope was the mastermind behind everyone and everything because he could manipulate people’ thing was very tired

- Shonda does not understand her own characters because wdym Cyrus Beene isn’t a villain? Maybe in the first few seasons when he’s loyal to fitz but after? he’s the worst person in season 7

- I love Quinn and Charlie. I mostly enjoy huck but we needed closure about his damn family. I love abby too but her ending was also meh.

- overall I very much enjoyed the show even when it annoyed me and made no sense

- the scandal subreddit watches an entirely different show based on the conclusions they draw. one thing we agree on is that the ending sucks.

[lavender-history]

Empty Chairs at Empty Tables

(A candlelight vigil for those who died in the AIDS epidemic, dated May 30, 1987. Source)

AIDS - A pandemic of the past?

A lot of people have written about the AIDS epidemic. Raging against Reagan, breakdowns of the biases that left people dying in hospital rooms alone, essays on why Rock Hudson and Princess Diana had such huge impacts - it's been written on before. But what about the women of the aids pandemic? How do we remember them?

Ever heard that lesbians were the 'nurses of the AIDS crisis'? It's not wrong - medical caretaking was a huge part of activism at the time. However, according to Yale University Library, in 1991 40% of HIV positive people were women, and due to the CDC's focus on masculine symptoms, "65% of HIV-positive women died without ever being diagnosed with AIDS" (Source).

Pride was a riot. Mainstream recollections of the fight for queer rights, however, is not one of direct action. Many think 'gay marriage legalized" and their mind goes towards the Supreme Court, not the tireless people who worked to get the case there in the first place. How were the die-ins on the Capital steps organized in the first place? Well, lesbian activism was not just the fight for gay marriage or helping men dying from AIDS - it was organizing fundraisers, getting involved in local government and being loud and proud. An intresting example of this is the The Lesbian Avengers Dyke Manifesto - a flyer put out by the Lesbian Avengers in 1993.

(Source)

Everything is included here - tips on direct activism, how to be safe while engaging in activism, information on how to access more resources, and talking about all the places lesbians have been involved in social change.

An article written by Arawn Llwyd in 1990 says "Fighting Aids is More Than a Fashion Statement". He writes :

"Historically, the lesbian and gay men's communities have been divided by serious differences - in fact, it's been a long time since there was anything that looked even vaguely like a united lesbian and gay movement. The AIDS epidemic has opened up a new dialogue between lesbians and gay men. We're working together for the first time in many years. Yet, lesbians who have contributed so much in the fight against AIDS are viewed with suspicion by men who dominate the movement. Women have had to fight tooth and nail to be seen as anything more than junior partners... Yet, ironically, it was the feminist critique of health care, developed by the women's and lesbian movements in the early 70's, which laid the very foundation for our own response to AIDS." (Source)

An example of how lesbians continued to work on fighting against the medical field's biases and issues can be seen in the Lesbian AIDS Project's LAP notes, of which I have selected the 1999 issue as an example. This issue breaks down scientific research looking at AIDS at the time, specifically in regards to how it interacts with and impacts lesbians.

(Source)

This newsletter switches between discussing science, to obituaries for women who passed from AIDS, to first-person perspectives of being involved in research - they quote one lesbian, who says "I would really like to know, when I get asked the question, "Can a lesbian transfer HIV to another lesbian?" that I can give a concrete answer of definitely yes or definitely no."

Looking back at the AIDS epidemic, it can seem black and white. Regan left queer people to die of the 'gay disease', and queer people banded together in response to ensure their community's survival. Yet, that's not the whole story. Nuances often get lost, and individual voices are hard to find, but one thing's for sure - there was more to lesbians and AIDS than what mainstream accounts say.

Further resources:

Yale University Library's Women and the AIDS Crisis and Lesbian AIDS Activism

Barnyard Center For Research on Women's collections Lesbian Activism from 1970s to the Present and Feminism and Sexual Health

The Digital Transgender Archives

Vice - The Women Who Fought AIDS: 'It Was Never Not Our Battle'

New York Public Library's Gay and Lesbian Collections - AIDS/HIV Collections

[limeade-l3sbian]

Ew just saw one of my favorite blogs talk about how radblr is just “incels” for girls. What is it about handmaidens always comparing feminist to violent misogynistic men? Literally just saying the same old “feminist women are just angry bitches cause they can’t get laid” as if any woman wouldn’t be able to “get dick” as if men had any kind of standards that it’s so hard for women to find an ugly worthless moid to fuck if we really wanted to like??? And the worst of it all is that this girl used to be on radblr and that is exactly what happens when you get your info on an app instead of picking up a book or going to outside sources and making your own opinion instead of saying in your weird echo chamber on the internet. So tired of spineless women, women also contribute to maintaining the patriarchy, Im tired of pretending we have no play in it just cause we’re the victims of it. Sorry for the rant, honestly but it’s mind blowing to me how downright stupid some people are 😪

Don’t be sorry, anon. Bc it is frustrating.

I don’t entertain that notion that radfems “just need to get laid” the same way I don’t accept that incels “just need to get laid”. Neither instance fixes anything.

Radfems are not inciting and acting on violent thoughts towards their chosen effigy (women, in the case of incels). Radfems are not encouraging the systematic violation of men’s bodily autonomy as well as celebrating their mass harassment in all corners of the world. Radfems goals do not even center on seeking equality with men, but seeking liberation from the system they have constructed and walled the whole of the world within. Radfems are not demanding something unearned or unowed from men; they are demanding to either be treated as the true second half of the human race they are, or to be left the fuck alone.

In that same breath, incels are not oppressed based solely on their sex. Being denied sex and the spoils of an active social life because you have poor hygiene and bring up porn in casual conversation is not oppression. I’d call that ‘consequences of your own actions/inaction’, but whatever. They don’t seek to change the system they allegedly suffer under. In fact, they champion those men higher up in their constructed hierarchies of “high value” men, and agree with the “high value” men who call them (the incels) losers. They don’t want things to change, they just want to benefit from the current system. They may complain about “chads” or whatever tf, but ultimately it is “Stacey” who is to blame for not lowering her standards and doing her due diligence of giving every guy a chance but also not being a raging slut who deserves nothing.

Incels and their baseless ideology is a sword swinging in the wind, angry at everyone but boy holding the sword. Radical feminism is the shield. It has always been the shield.

[dhaaruni]

i'm curious to hear your thoughts on the demisexual podcast

So we're talking about this article, and its corresponding podcast.

Here's my response under the cut.

I read the article and listened to the podcast and I still honestly think demisexuality is fake lmao. It doesn't make you queer or otherwise ~unique that you wait to have sex until you know and trust the person, especially as a woman where there are substantial risks to casual sex, and I don't just mean pregnancy and STIs. I said this a while ago but for the first month or so when I'm seeing a guy or going on a first date, I always let someone know, whether it's a friend or my parents, because the reality is that many men are violent, and having sex with someone you don't know puts you in a vulnerable state where it's easy to be victimized. The way I frame it to men, namely those who'd never dream of being violent to women, is that 1/4 of women are victims of sexual violence but 1/4 men are not sexually violent since most predators are serial assaulters. Does that make sense?

I totally agree with the idea that it's really cringe and even harmful that we're encouraging teenagers to construct permanent identities to temporary feelings. Plenty of young teenagers are uncomfortable about sex, and claiming that state is permanent will only mess with their minds as they grow older and more comfortable with their sexualities. If you're 14 and uncomfortable with the idea of sex, you aren't demisexual, you're just 14 lol. I think parents should validate their children's identities obviously but allowing them to define themselves on things they may not even feel in a few years is detrimental to their development.

I think that there is kind of a tie between demisexuals and incels, both male and female. There's been a lot of focus on male incels, who want to have sex with women but can't do so for a number of reasons, but I think that female incels do exist although of course, a major difference is that male incels traditionally blame women while female incels blame themselves. It's not female incels who are shooting up colleges over not getting laid, it's the Elliot Rodgers of the world. But that said, I almost feel like female incels will cling onto demisexuality or even asexuality in a way to detract from the pain of social rejection. Like, if they're demisexual or asexual, they can rationalize their not being considered sexually attractive by others as a moot point since they only feel sexually attracted to those they have emotional connections with anyways or not at all. It's kind of a coping mechanism, you know?

There's also something to be said about adults who still identify as demisexual like it begs the question: why? Why do you need a unique identity that literally means "I only have sex when I feel comfortable with my partner?" That doesn't make you unique, that makes you a normal person. I think there's something to be said where women are uncomfortable being like, sexual adults but not sexually available like it's almost as if women are conditioned to feel apologetic for not being sexually available at the beck and all of men, so they construct this whole silly identity so they have an excuse to say no so to speak.

Speaking anecdotally, I've honestly a lot of hate for being selectively sexually available like I 100% got more slander (so to speak) in college than either women that were celibate or women that were very promiscuous because I always had agency. It was my choice, and I don't mean that as a feminist statement or anything, I just was conditioned to not do anything unless I felt like it, and that carried over from not taking my medicine as a little kid and ending up in the hospital with pneumonia as a result to refusing to have sex with people in college unless I felt like it in which case I'd have sex with them 2 hours after meeting them lmao.

Sorry for rambling but I hope this was interesting to you! Let me know what you guys think as well.