#i'd rather be a liberal than a misogynist

[2mo3cm-man]

Reminder: This is the second time that self-identified "progressives" have rejected an eminently qualified female presidential candidate for reasons that TOTALLY have nothing to do with the misogyny of the political left that feminists have been warning us about since the sixties.

[lafemmemacabre]

🥀🔮 G A B R I E L ⚰️🕯️

BACKUP ACCOUNT for @vampiricvenus

🦇 TME • they/them (ENG) & elle (ESP) • 32

🦇 Lesbian • femme4butch • monogamous • married 🥰 (April 12th, 2024)

🦇 Chilean • mixed non-Black Latine • ENG & ESP

🦇 Hellenic Polytheist 🏺🏛️ (Culturally Catholic)

Aphrodite & Ares devotee // Hera, Persephone, Dionysus, Hermes & Apollo worshipper.

🦇 Goth since '07 • HEAVY preference for 90s goth

🦇 Autistic • multiply chronically ill • ambulatory rollator user (aka I'd love to use it full time but right now it's impossible 🫠)

🦇 Communist • anti-psychiatry • feminist

DNI ~ Not that it stops the wrong people, but...

No lesbophobes, misogynists, biphobes, transmisogynists, transphobes or homophobes.

No transandrophobia bros.

No racists (including antiblack poc), antisemites or zionists. No US or otherwise imperial core chauvinists. Your lives aren't more worthy than those of the global south.

Very much uninterested on liberals interacting with me or my posts, for the love of God please leave me alone.

I'm very against the whole m-spec "lesbian" bullshit and no you will not convince me that it's #Valid. I'm not interested in the politics of the validity of identity labels, I'm only interested in labels in their capacity to describe our positionality within hierarchies of power and oppression. Lesbian identity describes specific gender relations within our established patriarchy, and part of those gender relations is as women or women-adjacent people who do not willingly form sexual or romantic relationships with men outside of sex work or other similar survival needs.

I'm similarly opposed to TME people claiming the transfem label. Fuck off.

If you're an able-bodied person who thinks physically disabled people have it somehow easier, are more believed, or are given more compassion/sympathy, and/or you co-opt our struggles, kindly kill yourself. <3

If you're someone who thinks misogyny is Oppression Lite™ also kindly kill yourself yes even if you're LGBT/disabled/etc. I don't care. Die. <3

I'd rather swifties stay the fuck away from me purely because you're all insufferable even if the mediocre white woman you all were worshiping wasn't a snake billionaire polluter bully.

[gor3sigil]

Your post about "why be a man when you could be a GNC woman" resonated so much with me. I'm a nonbinary transmasc person who still often has these kinds of thoughts about myself and it hurts so much. I guess it's this sort of weird feeling of guilt that I'm somehow degrading myself or being anti-feminist/misogynist for being transmasculine. Like, the fact that I hate being a woman somehow translates to "I hate women." I think a big contributing factor is all the rhetoric in queer spaces lately about how being a man can't possibly be as revolutionary or subversive as being a woman in any context (as though transmasculinity is the exact same as cismasculinity) and that I'd be doing a lot more for queer liberation and feminism if I just remained a woman. Plus, my mom knows I like to dress more masculinely but she's always gently pressuring me to be more feminine and I kind of feel like I'm betraying her too. It sucks because she otherwise is very feminist and very queer friendly, so I genuinely think it comes from ignorance rather than malice

There's also this fear that I'm "not doing enough" to justify my transmasculinity. Like I said, I dress pretty neutral/masc, but I don't bind (yet) and I'm not on T. I don't plan on getting surgery either. I'll likely never pass. It feels like I'm making a mockery of transmasculinity or watering down what it means to be transmasc, and that it'd be better if I just stayed as an androgynous woman instead of appropriating "real" trans men's experiences. I just feel like such a fraud.

Sorry if this doesn't make sense, I have a hard time articulating my feelings and I just wanted to vent a little...😭

(Just to be clear, I don't feel this way at all about other transmascs, just myself...)

Hi ! I totally understand that you're dealing with imposter syndrome. When I used to feel this way, ne thing that really helped me was to turn to queer history, and see how the people who paved the way for us came in "every shape". Trans people in history haven't always transitioned, some never did apart fropm whanging their names, yet they're still trans and they built the community we have today.

And I totally get the feeling you have about being "more useful" to the community as a GNC woman, I still get it from time to time. But queer men and mascs are just as queer, and have fought so hard too. You being yourself is enough. I don't really like how anti-masc the queer community has become these last few years. While I understand that it stems from people in the community being traumatized by cishet men, I think that it's a big, big step backward, and the way a lot of activists now are king of trying to erase masc individuals from our history is genuinely scary to me. But, while I'm mostly online and don't really participate in my local queer community for a variety of reasons, I think that part of it comes from a loud minority of online queer discourse. Not saying that it never happens IRL because I've seen it and have been a victim of anti-transmasculinity pretty badly in IRL queer spaces, but I think that the ratio is more online than offline. Still, it helps to know about our history, and remind people that queerness isn't fem only, it comes in a variety of ways, and that every one of us face similar hardships.

You are not betraying anyone.

[roxannepolice]

What do you mean exactly by Saxon representing “Post Politics”?

Hi! First, a bit on post-politics:

Basically this is all bound up into the naive optimism of post-cold war "end of history" hopes, where liberal democratic free market fuelled welfare state becomes the total norm that can only spread throughout the world now that totalitarian centrally steered empire has fallen. Like, the idea for a world without politics understood as various ideologies opposing each other and replaced by state becoming a purely administrative institution has actually been seen as the utopian goal of history- except in practice it resulted in detached from reality technocrats fighting for power with equally but differently detached from reality populists.

But somewhere at the beginning of the 21st century there was this clash of democracy with politics-as-election-of-administrators becoming just straight up boring, leading to elections being less about ideologies and more about personal feelings for a party and even more glaringly - particular person. And that is not to assume that historically people have been very considerate of reading through the agenda of each official, but rather what becomes the norm that politicians rely on. Empty but passionate and eloquent statements about things being bad ("This country has been sick. This country needs healing. This country needs medicine. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that what this country really needs right now, is a Doctor."), lifestyle of the politician (Harold Saxon's model wife, excellent background on a website, also sth sth would you rather vote for an art loving vegetarian from working class or a rude misogynistic chain smoking alcoholic aristocrat), or just freaking LOOKS ("I think Mister Saxon is exactly what this country needs. He's a very fine man. And he's handsome too.") become infinitely more important than actual policies or ideology ("Why do you say that? What was his policy? What did he stand for? I don't know. He always sounded good. Like you could trust him. Just nice. He spoke about. I can't really remember, but it was good. Just the sound of his voice.")*.

Yes, fandom has generally decided Harold Saxon was from a conservative party, but he's explicitly not from any party whatsoever. If anything, BBC really took advantage of having a talented actor that looks like Tony Blair, a LABOUR PM (though I'd say Harriet Jones is more of a Blair stand-in). It's a party whose only premise is the personal charisma of an individual. And that is NOT how you should elect politicians.

*Ngl, this is why I facepalm at Arachnids in the UK. If you think the problem with Donald Trump as one of the most powerful people in the world is that he has OCD and is generally a bad person, then no. No it's not.

[polniaczek]

If you could rewrite the last season of the facts of life and give the show a proper ending what would it be like? What would you change and what would you keep the same?

Great question! I'm sure there's lots of things I'd change in theory but most of my "wish this happened differently" feelings happen at earlier points on the show.

Some Things I Would Change:

S9 Jo isn't so feminine for starters. S8 Jo is as feminine as I ever want her to be. In multiple episodes, by multiple characters, it's agreed upon that Jo wearing traditionally feminine clothes and makeup, softening up her appearance for guys, isn't who the real Jo is. So, she wouldn't fall victim to the trope of the hard, rebellious tomboy becoming a soft, conforming woman. S4 Jo would neverrr pay someone else to work on her bike.

Either she doesn't let Rick pressure her into marriage, and the wedding doesn't happen, or Rick flat out doesn't ask. In my dream world, Rick and Jo are both queer and there's a whole "self-recognition through the other" moment early on in the season and they ARE going to a drag party in that one ep and I like him a little more. lol In the real world, I say Rick is no one special to Jo, just a goofy, annoying friend who doesn't recur too often. And we already had one of those, his name was Roy.

I just need to vent about something for a sec because what show is this? This is not our show. This looks like Home Improvement. Step by Step. This looks like a misogynistic 90s sitcom, and the season has been touched by too many men, and if you look at the writing and directing credits for it on wiki you'll see I'm right. Get these men out of here. Fuck S9 actually, anon, you've uncanned the worms. 😅

Mrs. Garrett and possibly George return to bring more energy to the show. Beverly Ann’s presence doesn't serve much purpose (though I do think she's funny), and Andy's storylines are lowkey half-baked and boring and could've benefited from George's presence over Pippa.

Pippa doesn't show up. Sorry to any Pippa stans out there?? I don't hate her, but what a waste of screen time.

Tootie gets to act her age. The writers treat her like the others, but that girl is like 19 and practically married herself. We also get to see more of her career pursuits rather than her just showing up to scenes with these big announcements or passing mentions of auditions.

Natalie has BEEN the sexually liberated one, so there's no need for the show to focus on it so seriously. One or two quick cracks about her satisfying sex life and that's that. On the flipside, I kind of hated how unserious her episodes about journalism/writing were in comparison to the episodes about Blair's and Jo's career pursuits.

Also

Things I Would Keep the Same:

Blair’s arc in S9 is solid. I liked that she was forced to confront her issues with self-image. I liked that with law she found a source of confidence outside of her money and looks. It was a great way to wrap her story up. I wouldn't have been mad if she had chosen the law route in the end, but I'm not mad about the Eastland route either. The episodes themselves are nonsensical, but the grandiose effort does suit her and it would've been a watchable spinoff.

Jo ending up at the center is a good fit for her character. It's interesting in comparison to that one scene in New York, New York where she and Jessie go to the center in the Bronx, and Jo is the one trying to help people. She does mention the interest in becoming a legit social worker, so as far as I'm concerned that's her real ending.

Tootie's personality and goals never change which is about the only great thing they ever did for her.

Jeff becomes the hunky college-educated boyfriend after his illiterate beginning on the show, love that for him.

Natalie's spinoff ep was decent enough. Definitely would've needed to be retooled if it had worked, but she had more chemistry in one scene with David Spade than in all her scenes with other guys.

Believe it or not, I've not thought about this much, so I have no idea how I'd prefer it to end differently

[rf-times]

Hello, I'd like to share with you this article I read about imperialist feminism.

https://redsails.org/imperialist-feminism/

You're one of the only radical feminists out here who speak out against imperialism so I thought this might be of interest to you. It touches on a lot of things like criticizing “Beauty without Borders” campaign in Afghanistan and also about how Iraqi women were forced into prostitution due to US imperialism and many other such things.

I hope you enjoy reading this and sorry if you already read this before. Thanks!

Thank you for this brilliant article, I hadn't seen it before! Sorry for the very delayed response: this is very insightful and highlights the exact issues that come with an imperialist feminism: I recommend everyone has a read of it as it an angle that is rarely addressed here on tumblr. I especially think the analysis of NGOs is very pertinent. And a very good outline of colonial feminism, how it is cannibalising and an acknowledgement of how women in imperial centres have leveraged imperialism believing it to empower them and other women without denouncing feminism as a whole.

"The question we might ask is why this campaign is called “India’s Daughter” rather than “America’s Daughter” or “The American Problem” because, after all, not only is sexual violence against women a massive issue in this country but also, around the same time as the Delhi rape, in Steubenville, Ohio, a sixteen-year-old girl was gang raped and sexually assaulted by a group of men. Why didn’t this case become the focus of a documentary and global campaign?"

"the message is that rape, sexual violence, and other forms of female oppression take place elsewhere: in the Global South, in cultures that the West considers backward and barbaric, and not only is it not a problem here, but it the responsibility of women in the West to wage a moral crusade to rescue their Brown and Black sisters. This then is the logic of imperialist feminism in the twenty-first century, shaped by the deeply racist framework of the “clash of civilizations,” which is based on the idea that the West is a superior culture because it believes in democracy, human rights, secularism, women’s rights, gay rights, freedom of speech, and a whole host of other liberal values, whereas the Global South is barbaric, misogynistic, driven by religion, and illiberal. From this follows the “white man’s burden” and the “white woman’s burden” to intervene through any means necessary, including wars of colonization, to “liberate” less fortunate women in other parts of the world."

"It is not enough to simply talk about rape culture and misogyny here and “backward cultures” there, but instead to ground our analysis of sexual violence within the structural context of neoliberal capitalism and the ways in which it is restructuring people’s lives in various locations in the twenty-first century. When our feminism is based in an anticapitalist and anti-imperialist politics, we have a real basis for solidarity, one, moreover, that is rooted in material interests rather than morality and charity. At the end of the day, it is not beauty campaigns that are going to liberate women but their own self-activity and a politics of transnational solidarity based on a rejection of neoliberalism and empire."

More of my favourite passages from this essay to come!

[the-rainbow-lesbian]

Wouldn't you rather radical feminism strive in general to make women safe and happy? If a woman chooses and is not forced to marry or have children with a man, who is she hurting? Her personal choices are not an attack on you or any other lesbians and also does not change or affect your own life in any kind of way. I'd rather a woman be happy with a man who loves her rather than miserable and alone thinking every man in the world is going to snap and kill her at any second. There are many men in this world who are capable of feminist thought and are capable of not inflicting mental or physical harm on their significant others.

You seem very backpilled to me and not at all like a radical feminist, specifically because you seem to think non-lesbians are beneath you or somehow not as enlightened as you seem to think you are - and before it even comes up because I know your side of radblr love to use this as a gotcha moment - no, I do not consider the feminists in Asia who call themselves radical feminists to be actual radical feminists, I consider them to be separatists many of them incredibly misogynistic and no I or any other OSA woman does not need to learn from them, thank you but no thank you. I think you should really consider focusing on the wellbeing of all women by first not being judgement towards women who you seem to want to demand solidarity from, if you can't look past the fact there are women like me who have a husband and baby and we chose to do these things after becoming radfems, then I also won't look past the fact that you're clearly anti-woman.

I am clearly “anti-woman” but homophobic women are not? anon I hope you also talked to the OSA women who were homophobic to lesbians on here or at least took the time to call it out on your blog, instead of demanding way too much of me to basically coddle my oppressors, I have a fatigue problem I am way too tired for this shit specially when the feminism here is a fucking joke tbh

women are losing their rights right now in the US, and in some parts of the world they have none and they are literally fighting with their lives trying to get these rights. you know what women need? women need to come together, they need to actually invest their time in activism and solidarity with other women to protect our rights and liberate ourselves, how do you suppose women have the time or the mentality to do that when they are so focused on finding mr right who may or may not exist? statistically speaking he doesn’t. if you call yourself a radical feminist then I expect you to you know, actually be a radical feminist? but you know I am just anti-woman and I think women are beneath me so who fucking cares. your feminism is a joke, you are too male centered, and you are not angry enough on behalf of all women are brutalized by male violence, you are too pacified and instead choose to project your anger on lesbians online who are not disillusioned by disney prince charming propaganda. you are too focused on men that you hate on lesbians and asian women to please them. I am not gonna pretend to be hopeful when women as an oppressed minority still choose to invest their time in their oppressors on the expense of themselves and the women around them. “it doesn’t hurt anyone” except the children you have with this man and every girl and woman in your life who now that man now has access to. I am actually invested in the wellbeing of women, are you?

[vampiricvenus]

🥀🔮 G A B R I E L ⚰️🕯️

🦇 TME • they/them (ENG) & elle (ESP) • 33

🦇 Lesbian • femme4butch • monogamous • married 🥰 (April 12th, 2024)

🦇 Chilean • mixed non-Black Latine • ENG & ESP

🦇 Hellenic polytheist 🏺🏛️ (Culturally Catholic)

Aphrodite & Ares devotee // Hera, Persephone, Dionysus, Hermes & Apollo worshipper.

🦇 Goth since '07 • HEAVY preference for 90s goth

🦇 Autistic + multiply chronically ill + ambulatory rollator user (aka I'd love to use it full time but right now it's impossible 🫠)

🦇 Communist • anti-psychiatry • feminist

🦇 Backup account is @lafemmemacabre

DNI ~ Not that it stops the wrong people, but...

No lesbophobes, misogynists, biphobes, transmisogynists, transphobes or homophobes.

No transandrophobia bros.

No SWERFs or otherwise people with conservative and/or reactionary views around sex work and sex workers. Sex work on itself is neutral like most other forms of compensated labor, and the more we stigmatize, criminalize and/or marginalize the work itself and its workers, the more we create space for coercion, violence, abuse and trafficking within or masquerading as sex work. Sex workers are no more "selling themselves/their bodies" than other workers slowly but surely permanently disabling themselves for a paycheck. The key to the safety of sex workers is giving them workers' rights because we live under capitalism hell, not berating them, patronizing them, or much less jailing them. Similarly the products of sex work (such as porn) often do contain misogyny... As do the products of law workers, marketing workers, creative workers, construction workers, healthcare workers, and so on. Because we live in a misogynistic society, stupid. Same for all other forms of bigotry often found in porn. You're not exempt, they're not worse than you.

No racists (including antiblack poc), antisemites or zionists. No US or otherwise imperial core chauvinists. Your lives aren't more worthy than those of the global south.

Very much uninterested on liberals interacting with me or my posts, for the love of God please leave me alone.

I'm very against the whole m-spec "lesbian" bullshit and no you will not convince me that it's #Valid. I'm not interested in the politics of the validity of identity labels, I'm only interested in labels in their capacity to describe our positionality within hierarchies of power and oppression. Lesbian identity describes specific gender relations within our established patriarchy, and part of those gender relations is as women or women-adjacent people who do not willingly form sexual or romantic relationships with men outside of sex work or other similar survival needs.

I'm similarly opposed to TME people claiming the transfem label. Fuck off.

If you're an able-bodied person who thinks physically disabled people have it somehow easier, are more believed, or are given more compassion/sympathy, and/or you co-opt our struggles, kindly kill yourself. <3

If you're someone who thinks misogyny is Oppression Lite™ also kindly kill yourself yes even if you're LGBT/disabled/etc. I don't care. Die. <3

I'd rather swifties stay the fuck away from me purely because you're all insufferable even if the mediocre white woman you all were worshiping wasn't a snake billionaire polluter bully.

[amoralcrackpot]

Terry, Please Shut Up

Terry screamed and bled out all over the carpeted floor, and Paulence and Jennda bickered.

Aside from the blood-thirsty, flesh-craving ghouls now eager to force their way into their house, it had been an otherwise boring Sunday night until just a few moments ago. Jennda preoccupied herself for most of the day by arguing with strangers on the internet about the racist connotations of ordering a burrito platter from a burger joint owned by a sweet Korean couple. Paulence, meanwhile, once more pleasured himself with a flaccid attempt at something resembling a novel, which mostly amounted to several social media posts about writing his novel rather than actually writing any of it. And it wasn't until they got around to arguing about what to order out for dinner that they finally noticed their neighbor, Terry, had the gall to invite himself in, barricaded their door, and taken to dying and bleeding profusely all over their carpet.

"Terry!" Jennda huffed. "You know we just had the carpet cleaned last summer!"

"Sorry," Terry coughed through a mouthful of blood and viscera. "I forgot."

"I hope you plan on paying for another cleaning," Paulence said.

"Actually," Terry died, "that's what I wanted to talk to you about."

Jennda clapped her feet and laughed. "You hear that? He wants to talk about it!"

"I'm sorry, Terry," Paulence said. "But you're bleeding all over our carpet. I really hope you don't think you can convince us to pay for your mess."

"I wouldn't dream of it," Terry said with a gentle wave of – and splattering of blood from – what used to be his hand. "No, I wanted to warn you about all the zombies."

"Is that what those are?" Paulence replied, looking out at the horde looking in from the living room window.

"I thought it was the Mormons again," Jennda added.

"It's zombies, I'm afraid."

"How can this night get any worse?"

"I think I'm dying," Terry replied.

"Don't be stupid, you stupid, stupid man," Paulence snipped. "You're not dying."

"I'm not?"

"No, you're slowly turning into one of the undead."

"I think maybe I'd rather die, if it's all the same to you."

"All the same?" Jennda spat, then spat a second time on Terry. "We respect the sanctity of life in this house, Terry."

"That's right,” Paulence said. “We won't kill you until you're already good and dead."

"Undead," Terry corrected.

"For God's sake, shut up, Terry," Jennda said, spitting yet again.

"Sorry."

"You ought to be after suggesting such an awful thing," Paulence continued. "There's no need for such needless suffering and violence."

"I'm suffering rather bad, to be honest."

"Perhaps. But have you even stopped to think about how much worse Jennda and I would feel if we were forced to help you suicide yourself?"

"I'm sorry, guys. It won't happen again, I swear."

"I should hope not."

And it was about that time that Jennda noticed she had been bitten sometime earlier by Mrs. Cervix from across the street. "Uh-oh," she uh-oh'ed.

Paulence groaned. "I'll go get the gun."

"Why does she get to be mercifully put down?"

"My body, my choice," Jennda recited.

"First you bleed all over our carpets,” Paulence huffed, “and now you act like a misogynistic ass to my wife as she needlessly suffers a fate worse than death? You really are a selfish bastard, Terry."

"No wonder your wife left you,” Jenda added.

"She didn't leave me – she was the one who bit me."

"And where is she now?" Paulence asked.

"How should I know? She's a zombie."

Jennda scoffed. "A woman liberates herself from an abusive, ignorant piece of shit like you, and the only thing you can be assed to do is start with the name-calling!"

"I really think it's time you left, Terry," Paulence firmly, but politely suggested. "Terry?"

Several minutes of deathly cold silence and Paulence repeating Terry's name until it stopped making any sense later, Jennda bothered to notice the unresponsive Terry was, in fact, dead. "I think he's dead."

"Better go get the gun, then.”

[wizard-of-the-forest]

with the way the world is, the overton window has shifted far more left-liberal than before. there is a point of liberality where the notion of facts themselves are something that do not have to be considered true, where anything is the truth and if you disagree then you are making lies.

that point is where the trans movement has slowly drifted the public conscious towards. what was once cold, hard facts have been radically thrown up into the air and cast aside for the idea that everything could be up to interpretation, and yet that interpretation must follow the general consensus otherwise it is wrong and you are an evil radical, or a terf

it is undeniable that women have had a history of oppression. from restrictive laws & freedoms, to social expectations, and even to where power could be allocated, for a long time women were expected to be caregivers & to offer support, whilst men took charge. from i'd say the late 90s until around 2013~2014, there was a slow shift in the views towards women with there being a greater focus on equality and equity, with pushes like getting women in STEM and more women founding/running businesses. more freedoms, more equality. but, some point around 2015, that changed.

the world started to change; obama's presidency was entering its end after nearly 8 years, and the internet was more popular than ever. people were well aware of it, but now it wasn't just the people more on the fringes of society: everyone was on the internet. and that meant that some of the values of the internet were gradually taken into the cultures of the world. this globalisation meant many particular cultures who held particular views drifted towards each other via the internet, picking up the culture of the internet along the way.

and that culture happened to include a more liberal, free approach to identity. everyone on the internet is used to going by different names, different identities to who they were; facebook and myspace had usually who you truly were, but spaces like MSN, early Steam, teamspeak, the chatrooms & forums of the world, even the fanfiction sites, when you were there you could be anyone you wanted. but slowly that changed even more, and became more 'real'. the people who had crafted their identities online wanted to be them, not just identify as them.

people were already doing this for years before. many of us remember the "on all levels except physical i am a wolf" guy, an otherkin. he wasn't the beginning (that was, in an internet context, from the elfinkind digest (https://www.murkworks.net/~elflist/)) but he acted almost as an ill omen for the future of self identity.

slowly, but steadily, the concept of who people were began to change. the equality between men and women seemed present, achieved almost, and then people began to think "well, what's the point in those identities? they're restrictive, misogynist/misandrist, why can't i be a man/woman/neither/either?". actual trans people were and still are suffering, but this wave of internet-idolising people (predominantly from tumblr) brought into the culture of the world the idea that one's own gender identity could be malleable, and that it wasn't tied to one's biology. and with how the overton window had shifted into this hyperliberal approach, there was room for discussion over one's gender and one's sex, and discussion over how they can be divided or aren't mutually exclusive. after all, if trans people exist, then surely it can't be, right?

the minority were chosen to represent the majority, again in another element of the small and powerful (in internet spaces) began to control the large (being the world trying to adapt to the internet, rather than the other way around). in the end, there are many who claim to be trans and claim to be oppressed based on their gender, yet in the end they are the truly most powerful in the online world. and, if you disagree with them, or try to combat their ideals, they will villainise you and socially ostracise you, so you become an outcast, a victim to cancel culture. but, the more you ostracise, the larger that audience of people who disagree with you becomes, until eventually the dynamics shift.

all i am hoping for is, when that dynamic does shift, that we are more merciful than they are. they are mentally unwell and need help, and the right thing to do is to try when the time comes

tbh I don’t think I’ll ever really forgive the trans movement for indoctrinating so many people into the belief that women speaking about our sex-based oppression is “terfy” and shouldn’t be allowed and any woman who does it wants to genocide trans people. even if they back off of this stance, the damage is done.

me saying “women are oppressed on basis of sex, not gender identity, and we cannot identify out of that oppression” does not mean I think it’s okay to kill or hurt trans people. it does not mean that I agree with right-wingers when they say gender non-conformity is destroying civilization. It does not mean that I am going to vote for politicians who think all gay people/gender non-conforming people are groomers.

it literally just means you cannot change your biological sex (which was never a controversial statement, even among trans people, up until like 5 years ago) and females should have special protections and spaces since we are constantly being preyed upon by males who see us as subhuman sex objects. that doesn’t mean I think all trans people are predators, it means that enough males are predatory toward women that we deserve to have spaces away from them (especially spaces where we’ll be not fully clothed).

we deserve to be able to talk about female-specific oppression without being told we’re evil genocidal nazis. and the fact that they constantly have to misrepresent what our actual beliefs are tells me they know we’re right and it scares them.

[osmiabee]

As much as "trans inclusionary misogyny" is an amusing tiktok trend and can be funny or wholesome in certain contexts, we should all do more to recognise that there isn't an excuse to just let trans women endure misogyny because "it's gender affirming!". It's still misogyny, and on the whole it's just pretty shit.

[wintertidewater]

https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-well-being-of-transgender-people/ oh look its science :O

Hey bestie lowkey thinking this was sent to the wrong blog? I looked at your link and while I've seen plenty to the contrary, let's say I'll dismiss it all and take the data you present in good faith. So what? I will always put women and girls first. This whole movement has led to an erosion of our rights en masse, and that's aside from the blatant misogyny ("makeup = woman tehehe"). It's so weird some of y'all think you're a countercultural movement. The president and every major institution supports you. You succeeded in bringing back the urinary leash, destroying female only scholarships, damning women's sports, and so much more in about five years. Women's only spaces are illegal thanks to you. You've set women's liberation back by at least 50 years. Men that call themselves women maintain male criminality rates. There is no "female soul", y'all run a misogynistic faith-based ideology. The damage and trauma you cause to people are real. The three largest factors that determine whether or not a girl transitions is her being: lesbian. autistic. or sexually assaulted. Yeah it can be more comfortable to bend to the will of conformity by "becoming straight". It is understandable that some girls and women want to escape their bodies when they've been traumatized sexually. That doesn't change the fact that other people going along with your defensive self perception changes absolutely nothing structurally. I'll always stand against female oppression and homophobia. I don't care how unpopular it is. I believe that what I'm doing is right. You probably believe the same. Not sure why you chose that of all things to send, but I can assure you I'm well researched and I don't hate you, but you should do some more research yourself (maybe starting by leaving any vacuums you're in). I'd reccomend this book. If you're actually serious about exchanging ideas, I'll read one you choose at the same time and we can compare.

I can tell you're not familiar with me though, because I'm a very "nature knows what she's doing" type blog. I don't believe in the pharmaceutical industry, cosmetic surgery, or psychiatry. I believe in going barefoot so you develop calluses and can ditch shoes and I believe in acknowledging our place in the ecosystem rather than separating from nature through civilization. I find no appeal from either ideology you seem to subscribe to (transsexualism and transhumanism).

I think if more women knew how many lies they've been fed, they wouldn't feel so alienated by their bodies. The female form is so much more than you realize. You are what every male god imitates. You bleed in sync with the moon. You have a longer lifespan. You are better doctors, drivers, coders, surgeons, artists, musicians. Animals prefer your company. You are less prone to disease and less weakened by famine. You are so much more than what you have been taught. Quit porn. Pick up a feminist book. Heal your relationship with your body. You can't hate yourself into a version you can love. Your true self doesn't lie in a pill or on an operating table. You need to learn self love and acceptance. Because becoming "transsexual" is chasing an impossible goal. You will always fall short. The high after each step will fade. And your health will decline. Because your body is not meant to have those levels of testosterone or be cut. It is self harm. Being alone in nature and taking a step back from patriarchal mass media will help.

It's clear you're female. That's not a limiting thing. You can still be anyone and do anything. In fact, you can do even more than men (no I'm not just talking about pregnancy). You can see more colors. You have better fine motor skills. You have better long distance stamina. The anonymous asks I get from males (trans "women" or "cis" men) are rape and death threats. They are not your allies.

[fedonciadale]

Hi Fedonciadale,

Thanks for that answer about Dany fans' refusal to accept her Endgame in the show. I have 2 questions for you: Does a person hating Dany symbolizes internal Misogyny???

I agree that she is a well-written, powerful, interesting, 3-Dimensional woman Character. But ever since she got her hands on that Dragon (Well, even before that... burning Mirri Mazz Dur is not something to be very proud of, as he stans claim to be), she was seen losing her humanity a bit by bit... And Dany burning KL was hinted since forever... That eerie HoTUD vision from Season 3??? And the way she poses herself as a Feminist but in reality she is an Hypocrite. When she could've been merciful to the Civilians in KL but ended up Burning everyone on a Whim.... She is a well-written Villain and I hate her. It's not just because of that.... It's totally because Dany passes off every cruel act of hers under the name of Justice, Greater Good, Breaking the wheel, Liberation and what not.

In short, She posed herself as a Hero/Saviour but ended up committing Mass Murders and justify it no less.

Is it so wrong to hate a woman character for a genuine reason???? [[For Some reason, I am called out for being a Misogynist... Because I love Sansa and Arya... Well, all the other women characters too... But not Dany]]

I see some people calling D&D and GRRM to be a Misogynist because they made the Lead Female Character to be the Greatest Villain and irredeemable. What do you think about this claim???

Sorry for the lengthy ask.

Hi there!

Well, you're certainly not a misogynist for disliking or even hating a fictional character.

And allowing for female villains is not misogynistic either. I'd even argue the other way round. Thinking that a character is good just because she is a woman plays into the saint-slut dichotomy that has been used for ages to put women into neat little boxes.

Let them be villains, let them be tyrannical and hypocritical villains like Dany. Let them become tyrants who think they are benevolent and in reality are the worst.

So, no, settting a lead female character on a dark path (a path she's trodden on since book 1) does not make a writer a misogynist. It doesn’t even mean that the writer uses misogynistic tropes (two different things).

I actually think that people are blind for Dany’s shortcomings because of the fact that GRRM made her a woman. They see her abused in book 1 and see her overcoming it and they think it is a story of empowerment and overlook the red flags. Red flags that might be noticed if Dany were a man. That is exploiting some misconceptions or rather some tropes that are connected with female characters but it is not misogyny, and I would argue that exploiting the readers’ preconception about female characters is the opposite of misogyny.

I think Dark Dany is intended to make readers think, to question why they fell for the PoV trap, why they drank the Dany cool-aid. So in theory, they could become better at dissecting their own preconceptions about where female characters are headed. And that is actually a good thing.

I think that GRRM does the opposite with Sansa. She is a girly girly and that is why readers expect her either to just have a romantic endgame that is ultimately more important to the male characters than her or to be punished. That she is on a learning arc that does not involve her shedding her feminity is not on their radar.

So, look I am not saying that D&D or even GRRM do not use misogynystic tropes. D&D certainly have a problem with misogny (sexpostion, gratuitous rape, you name it) - I just remind you of the terrible “thanks” Sansa gave to the Hound for her abuse (*shudders*).

GRRM also uses some misogynystic tropes but I do think that he uses them for a reason most of the time - I would argue for example that the horrible sex scenes are there to show something about the characters and not to be horrible sex scenes. I think that he does in some cases fall for traps certainly with the child brides and the ever present rape threat, but not with Dany.

So. Let’s jot that down. Having a female villain who fulfills tyrant tropes that usually are reserved for men is not misogynistic. Trying to get rid of misogyny in media (and it is a problem) does not mean that suddenly only a certain type of women can now have a happily ever after. This is just dumb.

Newsflash: Literature can have an unhappy ending and still be good? Literature can depict an abused person becoming and abuser themselves without supporting abuse? Because it happens in real life and actually I think nothing is more horrifying than realising that an abuse victim can become an abuser. It really shows the spiral of evil and how hard it is to escape that.

Describing that does not mean that you think it happens every time, especially not if other examples are right there.

Thanks for the ask!

[considermygenderminecrafted]

The thing I think about is that despite all the lip service to progressive politics, it was always clearly secondary to his own feelings, whether they be positive or negative, and was always a means of gaining social capital. And also the degree to which is maleness, whiteness, thinness, southerness and prettiness (etc.) served to reinforce the harmless progressive soft boy persona he created and benefitted from. The way that protected him from being talked out about, and from being spotted for what he was.

He was considered "one of the good ones" by so many, after the comment he made about how teenager girls interests are always belittled (a sentiment he did not correctly attribute to the women that first pointed it out) he was in tiktoks for "men i'd feel safe in a lift with" and "men i'd leave my drink with".

When like, ultimately he was and is a self pitying labour cunt who engages in politics as a means to gain social standing rather than actually fight for the liberation of people. His abuse is an extension of his misogyny, and it is an extension of his views on others. As sophie said, "when every character you create is a self centered and narcissistic egomaniac, it makes me think it's not a character after all"

I'm frustrated at myself for extending the benefit of the doubt to him and presuming the jokes and relationships styles he had with people were discussed behind the scenes, and that he was playing a character when he was not. This is the case for niki, but also for tommy, tubbo, philza, eret and others. (I regrettably did not see much of him and shubble as she fell outside of my twitch sphere)

My take away from this is gonna be being aware of how easy it is to manipulate public image and how easy it is to talk about progressive politics as a means for social capital, rather than it being an expression of internalized ideas.

My other take away is to never presume that mistreatment of others is pre-discussed as a joke even if the people involved don't argue against it, especially if the people involved have a pre-existing power dynamic (e.i. mens misogynistic treatment of women).

Hello.

I'm going to dissect what is happening in Wilburs appology, partially for my own sanity, partially because there is merit in dissecting what is being said here, what is being implied, and understanding manipulative tactics (even when they are so poorly done because he is too blinded by his own misogyny to effectively manipulate the narrative.)

In conclusion:

He only believes the harm he did was making her clear his apartment and being selfish

Does not believe he did anything wrong in regards to ignoring her safe word, pinning her down, or causing her pain she did not want.

As such, he necessarily her feelings as irrational and his perspective as more accurate, a further case of misogyny.

Thank you to Shubble for making us all aware of this shitty mans awful behaviour, and for her bravery in being the first to step forward. Thank you all other who corroborated her words and added their own experiences.

Shubbles channel

Shubbles new minecraft series

Shubbles twitch

[moonstarfem]

This post kind of took me by surprise yesterday, and I'm curious to see what other rad fems who frequent FDS think about this announcement. It seems as though some of the mods are unhappy with the way the subreddit is going and are seeking to remind users that the whole point of the sub is to apply what you've learned on FDS by actually getting out there and dating men.

This is a poor take IMO considering that the sub exists to support women in all areas of life, not just dating. I don't think the moderator announcement is at all representative of the majority of the current userbase, especially when you take a look at FDS' most popular posts and the type of content that users are most frequently engaging with. I mean, just take a look at the flair options. There are multiple ones available for us to talk about a variety of issues, including "cultural misogyny" and "global resistance". Even posts that aren't inherently about dating are still relevant to dating. To quote a user below, "dating doesn't exist in a vacuum. The whole dating scene is very obviously impacted by the patriarchy. So raising consciousness among women about beauty standards, the sex trade, cultural misogyny etc are all important because they're tied together".

I think FDS ought to embrace the community they have established and the way it is continuing to evolve and thrive. I've seen some incredible posts on there in the months I've been subscribed. From an extensive list of why you shouldn't go 50/50 with a man on a date, patterns of behaviour displayed by abusers, calling out liberal feminism, analysing the glorification of sex work and much, much more. There are few spaces online where women are provided with such indispensable information straight off the bat. A woman who simply came onto FDS for dating could leave with a whole new understanding of the world and the misogynistic forces at play. I even saw a post the other day from an ex-sex worker who stopped escorting after discovering FDS and listening to the podcast. She encouraged other sex workers to do the same too.

It's actually quite insulting for OP to say that the "aggressive radfem idealogical grandstanding BS" has got to go. What a bizarre thing to say. I understand that not all FDS members are radical feminists, but considering that, 1. many active users are rad fems, 2. many have become rad fems through participating (whether that was the sub's intention or not) and 3. the podcast itself just hosted an "aggressive rad fem" last week (the incredible Gail Dines), I have no idea why radical feminism is being dismissed in this way. Why is it an issue if some posts include core radical feminist beliefs? It is still connected to dating, seeing as we are still attracted to men and have to navigate misogyny in all aspects of our lives. Radical feminism only strives to help women, not hurt women.

Also, OP seems to be unable to recognise a healthy middle ground between actively dating multiple men and opting out of dating completely. Yes, the handbook recommends multi-dating, but nowhere did it state that if you are single, you ought to be dating. She says, "It's okay to take breaks from dating because you're in a negative mindset, or focus on self improvement, or determine what you even want"...well, what if it's none of those things? If we're happy to just get on with our lives without actively seeking a man? What then? We are not "waiting for a HVM to come along" by not actively seeking them out. We know it's not that easy. I don't want to use online dating. I'm not going to join a meetup group for a random hobby just so I can cultivate opportunities to meet men. My life doesn't revolve around creating opportunities to meet men and I don't appreciate being told that I should "get in the habit of curating new experiences" with them. Like...no thanks. I will happily activate the vetting techniques I've learned when I come across men, but I don't need to go searching for them just to gain experience meeting and rejecting men. There are so many things I'd rather dedicate my time towards than to seek out men to practice FDS tactics on. Besides, there are plenty of non-dating situations involving men where we can still practice these techniques. Situations with male work colleagues, relatives, friends and strangers. Men are literally half the population. I think we'll be fine.

Anyway, I'm gonna share some comments from the post that particularly resonated with me:

Would love to see some more thoughts on this!

[triviareads]

ok so I have no one to pitch this idea to except your messages. sorry in advance. i’m a show only bridgerton fan so take this with a grain of salt probably. i’ve spent the past month kinda following the discourse around people (me included) wanting queer representation, specially considering how much eloise and benedict were queer coded in s1 (and still tbh), and some people bringing up that genderbending the sophie storyline would be kinda misogynistic. i see where the second group is coming from, and agree that the intersections of class, probably race AND gender are important to explore. but hear me out. what if instead of genderbending b and e’s stories, they switched them? make eloise meet a mysterious lady at a ball at the beginning of s3, a lady who she hangs out with now that penelope is out of the picture and that she has great conversation with, who has fascinating things to say about women’s lib, who is fierce and brave and interesting. have the lady disappear, and eloise not getting her out of her head, in a VERY different way than theo. i think it makes sense with the way eloise’s character has been developed so far that she keeps poking around outside of the ton either way, but specially if she’s intrigued by someone and wants to find them and thinks that that scene is where she might. maybe it’s even a way for penelope to start trying to mend their friendship, if she somehow finds out and wants to help eloise instead of discouraging her like with theo. and I feel like if eloise was having a crisis with her feelings and sexuality, she’d need a friend. benedict is there of course, but someone else as well. anyway, rebellious eloise seems like a great person to have a story with a working class woman that is not only a good romance but a good opportunity to tackle the issues people have been saying sophie’s story does. it’s even a good way to contrast privileged white liberal feminism with more complex struggles, a way for eloise to also grow and learn from someone as she falls in love with them. i also feel like the queen might be kinda lenient towarda eloise since she accused her of being lady whistledown and even without that, the queen is so much about love above all else that I don’t see why she wouldn’t be on board with a sapphic marriage. i guess this idea would mean changing the story orders but i’ve read that might happen anyway. and then s5 can be benedictxphillip crane (after s4 polin), hopefully without marina dying. maybe she even knows, and it’s part of their arrangement, phillip married her for honor but also because he wasn’t planning to marry anyway. then marina can get another chance at an actual happy and loving romantic relationship. i just think show!phillip’s nerdy sensibilities and love for nature would be a good match for benedict’s artist soul. so as a book fan who knows these characters much better than i do, how do you think this would work?

I don't see Benedict x Phillip happening, and I'm not the biggest fan. I'd much rather Benedict end up with a man we've yet to meet.

It would be interesting to see Eloise with another working class love interest, but this time, a woman. I'd be curious to see whether they handle the intersectionality of feminism and class better than they did in S2, esp. with Theo mansplaining feminism to Eloise, and Eloise (lowkey rightfully) being accused of just wanting to slum it for a bit.

But yeah, otherwise, I'm all for the queer!Bridgerton agenda, because quite frankly, in a family with 8 siblings, surely a few of them are queer, and more importantly, in a romance show in 2022, surely the writers realize that we deserve queer love stories that aren't sidelined, because they sure as hell existed in 1814.