#seeing it as neutral (except for misogynistic men)

[drbased]

i’m kind of a baby radfem and im learning about being gender critical and i definitely agree with most of it, the only part that i have thoughts about is the nonbinary identity. i believe that a gender non conforming woman and a nonbinary woman can mean the same thing. in that, i believe that you can be a nonbinary *insert sex here* and it basically just means you’re gender nonconforming. and then it’s like well why do we need two different terms to mean the same thing and we definitely don’t, but i think it’s dangerous to conflate being nonbinary with being agender bc it’s not the same thing and it just makes gender rhetoric even more stupid & ridiculous lol. i’ve seen plenty of people identify as nonbinary and still identify with their sex-based gender. i also believe you can be female and see yourself as a woman and still use they/them or even he/him pronouns. what do u think??

(Bear with me on this, this is a long response but I hope you find it illuminating)

People regularly accuse radfems of being nazis/right wingers and I take those accusations incredibly seriously, and as I result I regularly take time to doubt my position. But the thing I keep coming back to is that:

There is no proof, and perhaps there cannot be proof, that gender exists: it is fundamentally metaphysical, spiritual, soul-like, a product of mind-body dualism, the belief that there is some nebulous internal sense of self that happens to share some labels with sex classification but also happens to completely subsume it in modern leftist discourse, despite that

Regardless of whether or not 'gender' is real, it does not form the basis of the male class oppression of women as a class, and the moment you engage with any feminist theory this fact becomes impossible to ignore. There is no true biological backing behind race and yet we are (in theory, anyway) comfortable with being able to identify and codify the oppressor and oppresses classes in that scenario; however, arguments from the mainstream left will vaguely gesture towards sex being 'fluid' as justification for the dissolution of classic feminist arguments. It's important to be suspicious of why this is and who might benefit from it;

To build on point one, due to the fact that gender has no material basis in the real world, the only 'signifiers' for it are ones that already exist as cultural schemas - and these are, naturally, taken from existing sex roles designed to uphold misogyny and, more broadly, patriachy itself. 'Gender fluid' people are at this point infamous for their tik toks of when they're male or female, and the way they demonstrate this is through short hair and comfortable clothes vs long hair and feminine styling.

Occam's razor + feminist analysis will inevitably point towards women 'identifying' with nonbinary, agender etc. simply being women who are uncomfortable with the misogynistic connotations of femaleness, and who naturally wish to disassociate from them. When you see things under that lens, you can immediately notice patterns of behaviour and language that signal the belief system they hold. To 'identify' as anything is fundamentally meaningless, and signals nothing to both yourself and others except perhaps language. As a person recovering from depression, I have been detaching myself from all rigid concepts of classifying myself and instead focussing much more on being who I am in the moment. It it much healthier to be this way (and a lot less stressful, too)

When we call ourselves 'women', this is nothing more a neutral description of our biology. And due to our status as an oppressed class, especially one based on our biology, it is of paramount importance that we retain language that succinctly names us as such. Dworkin states in Pornography that one of the powers that men have is the power of naming. We still live under patriarchy, and the language we use cannot be separated from male ideas and male thought. Men had, and have, no problem naming us as the oppressor class when it benefits them (especially in the case of prostitution and pornography), but as it has become less, let's say' popular to be seen as a man in recent years, we have seen an explosion of transgender rhetoric enter the popular consciousness. Without the ability to recognise ourselves as women, we lose statistics, we lose safe spaces away from the oppressor class, and we lose class consciousness.

As for using 'they/them' and 'he/they' pronouns - well, I'm a straight woman, but I'm aware that there is a certain lesbian tradition of using masculine pronouns. But that's in a very different context to what's being described here. I've already addressed language but let's put a laser-sighted focus on pronouns for a second:

As a culture, we default to 'he' pronouns for a reason. For a long time, we were 'mankind' and everything akin to humanity is given masculine pronouns. Cute little critters are assumed to be male, probably all your soft toys are male, the most basic of doodles are assumed to be male and only allowed to be female once they are given a dress. It should be no surprise that women who want to escape the shackles of femininity want to be called he/him - they want access to the percieved full humanity of men. Meanwhile, the only times we attribute she/her to things other than people are to things like cars, ships, and natural disasters (with the exception of mother nature, of course) - tools of warfare, accessories of masculinity, and symbols of 'hell hath no fury like a woman scorned'.

There is a study somewhere that shows that when you use 'they/them' as a neutral pronoun, people assume male - especially if you're referencing a prestige profession. If I were to say, I went to the doctor yesterday, they were great - you would automatically assume a male doctor. This is no accident - as already stated, maleness is the default. Women who want to use they/them are dissociating themselves from femaleness but in doing so they are accidentally using language that signifies maleness. This is why feminist analysis is so important, and why 'identifying' as something holds little water in the real world. In an ideal world, perhaps they/them could be genuinely seen as neutral - but we don't live in an ideal world; we live in a world where women are oppressed.

So to answer part of your question, no, I do not believe that 'nonbinary' and 'gender non-conforming' are the same thing; nonbinary is an attempt at classifying someone according to some nebulous, unprovable sense of internal identity that has no real material impact - and any attempt to 'express' this gender are simply taking existing sex roles and mashing them together. Gender nonconforming has a different meaning in radfem circles as it does in transgender ones - TRAs take it to mean that someone is indentifying with a different gender than they were 'assigned' at birth, but radfems simply use it to describe the physical act of being a woman (or man) who doesn't conform to expected sex roles. I am 'gnc' but that's just a neutral descriptor of my dress-sense - and it's a loose descriptor because in many ways I'm definitely not gnc in my behaviour, although I am working on my self-confidence, especially in contexts such as physical fitness and DIY. Gnc is useful shorthand for 'not conforming to sex roles in some major capacity enough to be noticeable by others' - and the only reason it's important, especially for women, is because femininity (our expected behaviour) is designed by the patriarchy to dissociate us from our bodies and keep us decorative, fragile, weak and sexually vulnerable to men.

[lightsoutletsgo]

What is your hot take on what's been happening over the last 24 hours with RB and Ricciardo and the other drivers? I don't wanna start anything and I'm not here to argue with anyone I'm just super curious because everyone seems to have a different opinion?

I have a lot of thoughts about the situation and like you've said, they won't ever line up with everyone else's because everyone is going to feel a little differently about particular things and people, even if the overall feeling of disappointment and frustration towards the situation is the same.

am I disappointed with the lack of speaking up from a lot of people on the grid? yes. am I surprised? not in the slightest. even if you set aside the fact that they're mostly rich white misogynists (there are some exceptions obvs) it's clear that they've all been given the same PR instructions of 'remain impartial or neutral and do not engage' which is why some of their answers just looked/sounded the same (with the exception of lewis who did what they all should have done in my opinion)

do I wish that they'd all stood up and used their massive following and worldwide platform for good? absolutely! but I also know that that will never happen. f1 is a sport but it's so political in terms of who knows what and who has the final say and who gets to make decisions.

my biggest upset/frustration with this whole situation is that the victim of this situation has once again been made out to be the villain and what does that say to anyone else who was thinking of coming forward and sharing their story? if I was also a victim of any kind of workplace harassment at any level in the world of F1, I would be shitting myself right now and either handing in my resignation or keeping a low profile and keeping quiet.

this whole thing has been majorly mishandled by so many people on so many levels. my biggest upset/frustration with this whole situation is that the victim of this situation has once again been made out to be the villain and what does that say to anyone else who was thinking of coming forward and sharing their story? if I was also a victim of any kind of workplace harrassment at any level in the world of F1 I would be shitting myself right now and either handing in my resignation or keeping a low profile and keeping quiet.

tbh that's exactly what my friend who works for a midfield team is doing. over the last week we've had so many conversations about whether or not she wants to keep her job and if she is actually safe or not. it's broken my heart to see her crying over the phone because she is trying to decide between giving up her dream job that she's amazing at, or feeling and being safe in her workplace. no one should ever have to decide between those two things. why should she have to sacrifice one or the other?

f1 has never, is not and will never be an equal or safe space for women. motorsport has always been run by men and they will fight to keep it that way. so ✨happy international women's day✨ I guess y'all

[synonymouswithanonymous]

losangelesoriginal

Nope, I don't think it's weird to point out irrational, ridiculous hate. Lol 😂😂 I also find a lot of it so ridiculous it has often made me spit out my coffee for being so ridiculous. In a how did they manage to leap there.....over a ladybug video? But some of the hate comes off as being very deranged, delusional, dehumanizing, misogynistic, and horrible.

And if it's weird to you that that i post about how judgemental, misogynistic, dehumanizing the hate against her is, then so be it. This isn't the first woman he's known to have this happen to her. I'm quite glad to be weird.

If you don't understand why it's wrong to hate anyone, then I can't help you. If you don't understand why it's wrong to hate on someone you cannot know, then I can't help you. If you think you know more than everyone else in her very real life, bc of IG and a couple of interviews, then I can't help you. If you don't understand that dehumanizing a person is wrong, then we are at an impasse bc to me, that isn't right. I will always talk about things I don't think are right. And point out the ridiculousness of it.

And I will always support/defend women (Unless they've committed a real crime). And men too. So yes ridiculousness and hate that pops into my feed, I'll respond to it. I won't be censored just bc you don't like other opinions or some realities regarding the couple in question. Or censored for pointing out how the playbook keeps collecting checks. Lol Or how this is a pattern that keeps getting recycled for every woman, no matter who she is. Not even his own MOTHER is safe from the hate.

And now I've blocked you bc you don't know how to communicate without being rude and hateful. I gave you a chance. Less rude than your original ask, but still rude and hateful. Except for just you, the asks I receive are informative and encouraging or neutral, it's nice to know others also see what's going on for what it is (even ones who are like "meh" about her agree). Mostly I don't post those bc they ask me not to post them, bc they fear they'll be the next "stan" target and talked about by their real names. Like so many have been before.

I prefer civil conversations on my page.

[voiidlizrd]

JUJUTSU KAISEN CHARACTERS IF YOU LAUGHED WHEN YOU FOUND OUT THEY CHEATED

A/N: I’ve seen so many angst fanfictions of characters cheating on Y/N and they cry and can’t really get over them. What if it was just Y/N laughing because they don’t take shit and probably stand by the “you loose me, you loose me loser.” Of course they are hurt but can’t let people control them for it.

If you have been in a very toxic relationship, you are awesome and I hope the best for you!

This is my first time writing a bit of angst (if you can call it that) and this will probably be OOC, but I’m not sure.

Gender Neutral Reader for all parts except Naoya (we all know how he feels about women). Badly written angst.

Warning: toxic relationships, slight angst, just reader being a badass, Naoya being Naoya.

As much as I love Gojo, he would totally cheat on you. He’s a guy with a huge ego and pride and probably lacks commitment to actual romantic relationships, it isn’t surprising that he would cheat.

You found out when his phone went off next to you one day. Giving into curiosity, you checked to see what it was about.

It was a text from a someone you didn’t know, or care to know. The text read;

Last night was fun I can’t wait to do that again sometime.

You aren’t stupid. You knew what they meant by that. You only hummed at the message, setting the phone down and trying to ignore the pain in your heart, rising to your throat. You had suspicions, but of course didn’t push for the sake of trusting Gojo.

Gojo came back to the living room and saw you there, phone in hand. His heart immediately dropped but tried to smile at you.

“Last night was fun,” you read from the text off his phone. “I can’t wait to do that again sometime.”

His blood ran cold when hearing the casualty in your voice, like you just told him about the weather.

“So, got anything to say?”

“What’s there to say? It shouldn’t matter right? It was just a one time thing.”

He expected you to start screaming or crying, that’s how most people he had a relationship acted when finding out about his affairs. But not you, no. You smiled at him.

“You’re right. It will be a one time thing. We’re over.”

What?

“What do you mean ‘we’re over,’ and why the fuck are you smiling!?” Gojo tried to get mad at you, to rile you up in hopes of something at least. If you didn’t care why should he? But at the same time…

“I said what I said and meant what I said. I’m smiling because it’s funny.”

“The fuck is so funny about this?”

“It’s funny you think I’d actually cry over something like this, over you.”

You aren’t crying over him. You only chuckle at his surprised expression, holding back laughter. He didn’t get a rise out of you, your sobs and yells of not being able to have him truly.

You weren’t upset over him.

“Wh-“ “I’ll pack my things.”

With that you just shoved your things into your bags, taking everything with you and giving Gojo a sickeningly sweet smile at the front doorway.

“Whatever.” Gojo spat with a smirk. “You won’t find another guy like me, yknow.”

Your smiled widened, much to Gojo’s hatred. “Good to know.”

With that, you left. You left without a fuss, without a tear. Fine, Gojo thought, I don’t need you anyways.

You’d be back either way. You’d crawl back to him realizing you can’t get over someone like THE Gojo Satoru. You just can’t!

Gojo probably slept around, trying to get rid of the thought of you and tried to enjoy this “freedom.” In truth, each time after the one night stand was done, all he remembered was that goddamn smile you gave him, how casual you were about leaving him.

No second thought, no second chance.

You just left.

He shouldn’t care. There were plenty of women and plenty of men who were more than willing to be with him, of course.

So why does he feel so empty without you? Why did it set a heavy weight of guilt on his shoulders. It was only then he realized that you really wouldn’t come back.

Okay it is canon that Toji here can’t be bothered to be in a committed relationship. So it isn’t a surprise he probably cheats.

You found out when you ran into him on the way to the store. He was with some random woman, you didn’t pay much attention to who she was really.

You two just stared at one another. Toji didn’t seem to bother to explain himself, nor did he seem to care. Of course you ached on the inside.

“Gonna say anything? Cause I gotta get goin’.” Toji finally said.

“Back to your date?”

He just rolled his eyes, ready for the waterworks and the screaming. He waited, and waited. Looking back at you, all he saw was a smile. His brows furrowed.

No screaming. No yelling. You just laughed and looked at the woman;

“Good luck.”

You just walked passed him, shoulders bumping into one another roughly. It left a bitter taste in Toji’s mouth. You just… Walked away with no fuss. Sure. Fine by him right? Right.

He didn’t care and you didn’t seem to neither. No problem with him.

That’s a lie.

He saw you go about your day to day life. Despite the look of casualty on your face, you looked… worn out.

Ouch.

Right through Toji’s heart was the spike of guilt.

You were hurting, that much was obvious, but you tried to get over it. After all, plenty of fish in the sea. It would be a waste to just save it on some dude.

‘Course Toji tried to get you out of his mind. It was obvious he couldn’t. Always thinking about you, sometimes even waiting to see you text him some stupid shit he could roll his eyes at. Something.

But you didn’t. You couldn’t and you shouldn’t. If he didn’t care about your relationship, neither would you.

It was over and it was done.

But there’s times Toji really wishes he wasn’t such an asshole.

How you two got together is BEYOND anyone’s understanding. He’s misogynistic and a complete asshole. It’s surprising how you are able to put up with him sometimes.

What’s not surprising is him cheating. He believes that his male needs need to be satisfied whenever. After all he works hard so he clearly deserve it.

You were blissfully unaware until a sympathetic servant informed you of what your husband gets up to when he’s not around.

You just smiled but it was clear by the ache in your eyes you fought back the tears. You knew. You had a gut feeling but you tried to trust him.

Upon returning home, he was greeted by you sitting on the bed with your things packs behind you.

“The fuck is this?” Naoya demanded.

“I know you’re cheating on me.”

Naoya just scoffed and rolled his eyes. Women and their emotions. “I’m a man. I have needs you know.”

“I know. Whoever she is, she can do it all the time with you. I don’t really care.” You smiled.

Naoya grinned, figuring you saw it his way like a good wife. But his smile dropped when you took off your wedding ring and set it on the bedside table. No anger behind it and no hesitation.

“What the fuck are you doing.”

“Letting you have your way as a man. I mean, you won’t have a wife to be nagging you about that, right?” You grinned even wider, venom pouring from your words while your face said otherwise.

You grabbed your things and tried to walk past him. Keyword, tried.

“You aren’t going anywhere! You are my wife!” His hand gripped your wrist but you just tugged it away. “Get back here!”

You weren’t crying like he was expecting. Don’t women just bawl when they find their husband is being unfaithful? Don’t they make a huge fuss and scene?

You just continued walking away from him, ignoring him as if he were just a flu. A pest.

“You are my wife! You will-“ “Ex-wife.”

You turned with a smile. “Wish you and her the best of luck. Really, I do. She keep your man needs ‘satisfied’ right?”

For once Naoya was speechless. He could only watch as you walked away, away from the Zenin estate. You turned back and he could only wait- rather hope- you’d come running back to him and apologize for doing this to him, for saying such things to him. But you just stood, and stared, and chuckled at your own stupidity. Misogynists, am I right?

There are plenty of women who are submissive, Naoya told himself. Plenty who are willing to be pretty wives.

Yet there he stands, just hoping and wishing his dear wife would come back. His caring and loving one. That smile you gave him, that smile of pure pain yet amusement. You’d always smile when he brought you joy.

Now he just sees that sickening smile over and over. He tried to blame it on the woman he had an affair with, she came onto him! But at the end of the day, he was the one that gave in.

Hope I did good at the angst! My heart sure didn’t enjoy it except the Naoya part.

[battlestar-royco]

I think you’re totally right about the “women in their twenties showing more nudity” thing and it’s... kinda gross? Also i hear American boys—because of the lack of “older women breasts” in p*rn and tv shows, etc.,... get shocked?? Grossed out?? When they learn breasts start to sag?? Like?? Uhh ok thats YOUR problem you have to deal with i guess lol how ignorant are you where you don’t even know about basic aging/anatomy?

I’m trying to think of shows I’ve watched lately where young womens’ nudity wasn’t the case, but even in shows like The Americans—with many actors in their late thirties—it’s still... idk if they use body doubles or what—they all look pretty good. And no male frontal nudity. Of course. Mad Men doesn’t really have nudity from what I recall. Peaky Blinders and Narcos does, of course, have a lot of boobs. (Funny, how that happens with male-audience targeted shows)

Maybe?? Maybe Breaking Bad didn’t do the whole nudity thing? Only a few times but those were with strippers, etc., not main female characters. And Better Call Saul has NO nudity, and is very classy with the way its sex scenes are portrayed (plot and/or character relevant only, surprisingly female-focused)

Am not sure about romance shows like Outlander or Bridgerton because that’s par for the course: showing nudity, etc., but it seems to be getting better at balancing things.

It’s weird how fantasy/historical shows in particular (the witcher, the tudors, etc.) have become a hotspot for nude scenes with young women, maybe its to attract younger men?? Maybe they dont think people will watch history without showing sex and skin? Which is a depressing thought in itself, that history/fantasy is supposedly “boring” without boobs and/or sexualizing young women

glad the post resonated with you! i hate that nudity has become this thing that is so heavily associated with objectification, sexuality, and sexism because it's perfectly natural and can be neutral with the right director. it's just that it so often has to be gendered, racialized, ageist etc, especially because there's such a big taboo around it.

i've watched all the shows you mentioned except outlander, but several years ago. the americans tried too hard to be sexual, imo. mad men was super misogynistic. peaky blinders was a mixed bag of extremely tasteful and extremely distasteful sex scenes. i would get more specific but this is a long ask so maybe next time.

i think the presence and treatment of nudity is more of a network thing than a genre thing though. i see nudity in drama, crime, fantasy... all across the board. shows that want a more adult or edgy reputation typically land on hbo, starz, showtime etc, whereas freeform or cw don't allow it

[angelsodreamy-no2]

My Thoughts on Apple White :

since i was pretty young, i've always been obsessed and feel pity towards characters who are misunderstood or is usually everyone's least favourite. not the ones that are completely annoying or evil for no reason tho, which is why i've always been an apple white stan from the beginning. i understand the way she thinks and dislike raven because i was quite biased. as an apple stan, i see raven as just annoying, but on the other hand, a lot of people find apple as cruel and selfish when that is not the case.

in order to know about her more, we need to obviously learn more about her childhood. there isn't really a book about her background so the only information about her childhood that i can find is just based on predictions from The Dragon Games Special. from there we learn that apple has been groomed to be this picture perfect princess ever since she was incredibly young and has basically been thought (/brain washed) that she is the main character that will get her happy ending just like her mother, and that she must ensure that it will remain the same. born spoiled and controlled by her power hungry + strict mom, we find out that apple has only been able to succeed this much as a princess because of nepotism, royals status, and her destiny, all the way from her popularity (which is controlled by her mom as well), admirers, and even friends.

unlike raven who was born as an outcast meaning that she is woke about the whole unjustice system + wants to change her destiny, apple was born into a perfect life that everybody wants. including raven who in a way is jealous ofc which is why she encourages a large number of students who are outcasts as well to become rebels. it honestly makes perfect sense to me on why apple begged raven to stop it and to just follow her destiny, because hers is already perfect. raven envies apple's destiny and thinks its unfair that she has to be the villain while apple gets a lovely ending, which is true and makes totally perfect sense. so obviously it makes sense that apple wants to keep hers as well. they're both just two sides of the same coin wanting the exact same happily ever after, the difference is just that apple's will be handed over to her and all she needs to do at the moment is to just wait and prepare for it while raven is stuck playing the villain role.

a lot of people mention that they're reason of dislike towards apple is because she is selfish and privilleged, which is half true. yes she is born privilleged, but even tho she got it all through nepotism, she still needed to work hard in order to maintain the position that she was already given. unlike characters like ashlyn ella or briar beauty, apple takes full advantage of her popularity and works hard to maintain it. people will especially judge you a lot and will find mistakes in order to take you down because of it, so its important that apple herself to work hard in order to keep her position. i'm sorry but do you really think that being kind, sweet, and friendly 24/7 is easy? like even if she has a bad day she'll still have to put on a smile or people will judge her. other than that she's constantly pressured and is under observation by not only her mom, but her people and by other students as well. there's one thing in getting things easily, but keeping it is a whole different thing. i truely admire apple for always being able to put up a smile for everyone even when she's feeling sad and i honestly relate to her a lot. unlike raven, she can't just explode or get angry at someone. more than that, she can't really tell others how she truely feels since it's probably against her mother's teaching or smth. you can clearly tell that apple doesn't really like the way she got her position and is actually woke about the nepotism she receives because sometimes she feels like she doesn't deserve it, as i've mentioned before, apple's success (or at least the beginning of it) is all because of nepotism. the reason she is the most respected princess is because of her mom's legacy. which is why she tries so hard to be the best at everything, to prove to the people and her mom that she deserves to be in the position that she is rn and will do anything in order to keep it.

what's also sad is that while she's expected to be this perfect future ruler, people only expect certain things from her at the same time. like she's only expected to be this porcelain doll, to please men, be a good and fair ruler for her subjects, to be a role model for young girls, and to smile next to her prince (who she actually barely knows). thats it. people only praise her for her beauty and charm. the world of EAH is surprisingly set to be a not so misogynistic world. despite that, the few people who suffer from it (based from my observations) are cerise, darling, lizzie, and apple. if you pay attention, despite the many other accomplishments apple has, no one really praises her for her grades, work in other fields that doesn't involve charity, and her brilliance. she's usually only praised for her beauty and i feel like she gets sick of it at times as well. the only reason daring even stuck with her is because she's his supposed destiny and beauty, vice versa.

other than that, i also feel like apple's depressed and has anxiety at times but is just really good at hiding it since she was probably told to do so from a young age and i pity her for it. i feel so bad for her, and when raven didn't want to follow her destiny, imagine how she felt. her heart probably shattered because of it since it means that everything she has been given, dreamed, and worked hard for will all go to waste. which was why she tried so hard to get raven back to follow her destiny.

im happy that in the end she doesn't really push her too much tho since she sees raven as a true friend. it must honestly suck for her that raven is the only one who sees her as a regular person (even tho she sometimes raven explodes as well and thinks that apple doesn't have feelings of empathy). when apple said something like "no you're the one who's being selfish raven", i feel like its true. apple honestly doesn't only think of herself, but for others as well. in her story alone, everyone else will get their happy ending except for raven. it works like this in many other stories as well. it's said that if raven doesn't follow her destiny as the evil queen then everyone else in snow white's story (who are all set to receive a happy ending) will all 'cease to exist'. if she does that, many people who aren't happy about their ending will do the same as well, leaving a large percantage of people 'ceasing to exist' as well or at least won't get their happy ending. in my opinion, apple is just looking at the larger scale, and from a neutral side, apple's reason makes the most sense towards me. raven was selfish, but then she has her reasons so whatevs. my point of making this post is to stop apple white haters and for them to look at the bigger picture, or at least from my pov as an apple stan. that is all thank you <3

[werevulvi]

I wanted to write a bit about sex segregated spaces, in regards to people who pass as the opposite sex. This is not actually about trans people, as much as it is about the safety, integrity and general rights of male-passing biological women. I am not the only gender non-conforming woman who gets tossed out of female only spaces, based on the false presumption that we’re men. I do not care about validating trans women, or even trans men, for that matter. I care about real life practicality, risks and safety for ALL women, not just those who look conveniently clearly female, which starts with accepting that some women, whether they've medically transitioned or not, pass as male. And none of them should have to feminise themselves to access female only spaces. Whether that be to ensure safety from males, or to just take a leak.

The fact that I choose to keep my beard has almost nothing to do with that I'm male-passing. It may be my strongest "male" feature, but it's hardly the only one. I still pass as male with a clean shaven face, which makes shaving my beloved beard rather pointless, in my opinion. I would realistically need to go through more than just facial hair removal to pass as my own sex again. I'd probably even need facial feminisation surgery, hair transplant, voice feminisation and full body hair removal, at the very least, to even get close to passing as female again. But even then, I'd probably STILL be read as a trans woman, i.e. male. And even IF I did all that... WHY should I have to mutilate myself (a second time) by buying into harmful patriarchal beauty standards, which would worsen my dysphoria and reduce my comfort in my own skin significantly, to be allowed the safety of male-free spaces?

Does that sound feminist to you? Because to me, it's incredibly misogynistic, and strongly counterproductive. To uphold patriarchal gender roles for the safety of women... is the most insanely anti-feminist double standard I can possibly ever think of.

To lay out my argument on this topic, I'm going to use my own experiences as examples a lot. Mostly because I cannot with any conscience speak for anyone else than myself, at least not in such detail and with such harsh judgement. But I'm sure a lot of my experiences are applicable to other masculine women as well.

First off, I still consider myself gender critical, but my allegiance to radical feminism has been waning lately. This is mostly due to that although I agree with the base premise of radfem, I tend to disagree with the proposed solutions to almost all of the issues, because to me they come across as unfounded beliefs (yes, BELIEFS) that "it would just work" without much of any evidence to back up such a claim.

And when it comes to trans people, I've noticed a lot of... shall we say, willful ignorance, going on among many radfems, which does affect opinions on gender abolishion as well as sex segregated spaces to appear rather... intellectually dishonest, to be frank. Although this is not intended as a call out by any means, I merely want for people of all sides of the radfem/gender critical/pro-trans fence to stay critical and keep questioning everything, even one's own beloved ideology. Which I don't see a lot of. Instead I see almost religious defending of radfem as the ultimate/perfect ideology... oh, guess where I've seen that before? I've come to believe that "hivemindedness" is probably part of every possible ideology out there. Even radfem.

So, anyway.

One thing I come across time and time again is the belief (yes, I dare say "belief") that people never pass as the opposite sex, although it's mostly directed at trans people, this very much applies to people who are just gnc as well. Let's not forget that. And this belief seem to often lead to that transitioned/gnc people can just use the space intended for their biological sex, no problem. However, this is not the case. There is a problem. Very many trans people, and some gnc people, pass well enough to at least blend in enough to not raise much of an eyebrow among the opposite sex, and to most definitely stand out as an outsider among people of the same sex. OR they pass barely enough as either sex, and thus stand out as an outsider among both the same sex and the opposite sex, which can cause similar problems with single sex spaces.

There's also the thing that it generally is easier to pass as the opposite sex among complete strangers, compared to people who know you/your background. They tend to read you differently, depending on that.

At least in my experience, complete strangers assume I'm male and don't even as much as raise an eyebrow about how male I come across as. They accept their false assumption at face value. And why wouldn't they? 99,97% of people who "look like me" are biologically men. Then people who know I'm transitioned, but didn't know me pre-transition, tend to see me as a female who looks very convincingly male, whether that makes me a masculine woman, trans man, or any other (female) label in their eyes. They claim to be able to "see" my female nature, yet they somehow had no idea before I told them about my true sex. Then people who know about my history and saw it happen from the time before my transition (now only really my family) never quite succeeded to see me as anything other than a gnc woman. To quote my dad: "You look like a woman who's trying to look like a man." Although I'm sure my mom and sister don't have quite as harsh views about me, lol. They still seem to see me the way they always have, regardless of what name or pronouns they use for me.

This matters, because although people who know I'm transitioned and may even have witnessed my transition from the beginning, struggle to see me as a man (which I respect entirely and I'm VERY careful to not push wanting to be seen/read as anything in particular, but also, people do not want to be rude, especially irl) that does not go for people who have never even seen me before the moment I walk into... say, a public bathroom. To them I cannot possibly be anything other than a man, and it's almost impossible to change their view of me as male once their brains have registered me as such. I need to conjure up pretty fucking compelling evidence to shatter that view they have of me.

This is important, because it means I cannot feasibly use female only spaces, unless someone else (who is also female) vouches for me and explains my situation for me. This is, most likely due to people being more likely to believe an unlikely explanation when it's told by someone else, because maybe I could be lying; and only someone of the same sex as me can accompany/escort me into female only spaces, obviously. But even then, there's a ton of tension around my presentation. An air of distrust, basically. The question that hangs in the air: "Is that a trans woman?" even after they've been given a thorough explanation of my situation. It's uncomfortable for everyone involved. Imagine how it goes then if I'd just show up unannounced, and without someone to vouch for me. I just get booted on sight.

Yes, I can whine about this all day, but that is NOT my point.

My point is that I'm either directly, or implicitly, unwelcome in female only spaces, despite being biologically female, because of my transitioned appearance... despite I'm not even on testosterone anymore since 2 years ago. Sure, most gnc women (whether transitioned or not) don't seem to have turned out quite as passable as me, but clearly, it happens. So let's stop pretending that it doesn't.

So with that in mind, I don't always have access to a gender neutral space. Like for example when I travel with the ferry that goes between my island and the mainland of my country, there is only men's bathrooms and women's bathrooms. No third option. That's a 3 hour boat ride, and with my coffee drinking habit, I will need to pee at some point or another while aboard that ship, alright. And no, peeing in the ocean is not an option, as squatting over the railing would be incredibly dangerous, and most likely not even remotely allowed. Granted, I don't take the ferry often, it's just the most clear example I can think of. Because it's my only means of transportation to/from the mainland, except from flying, which is incredibly expensive, less reliable and obviously an environmental hazard. So when I do have to use that ferry, I'm kinda stuck with my choices.

So then, am I better off going with the men's or women's bathroom? I am much more likely to be left alone to do my business in the men's, so even though that is not the space I want to be in, nor do I think it's "right" for me to be there, sometimes it's even a bit scary, other times even impractical if there's only urinals and no stall, and it's absolutely not validating at all - it's the only bathroom that I can realistically use, without too much trouble. And I don't want trouble. But I also hate having to put my own safety on the backburner for the perceived safety of other women, who are not actually at any higher safety risk when left alone with me.

So, onto the more general, political aspects of this issue:

Women in male only spaces may be less of an issue in regards to safety, at least for the majority of people (men) in that space, especially if the woman in question passes as male. No one gives a fuck, generally. But problem is then that she is at far greater risk than the majority of people (women) would be with a single male, in a female only space. As I think a group of women against one male is generally less risk towards the women, when compared to a group of men against a single female, which can be extremely dangerous for her. Although I've so far never been faced with any sort of violence in a male only space, let's not pretend that my presense in a male only space is somehow LESS dangerous for me, than how dangerous the presense of ONE male in a space with a whole group of women, would be for those women. Statistically and realistically, I'm at a far greater risk than they are, and no, I do not have any more choice in the matter than they do.

Thus, this kinda skewed idea of safety and choice, becomes a question of ethics, I think.

Furthermore, I'm a person of principles, and it wouldn't sit right with me that if males should never under any circumstances be allowed in female spaces, but females could be allowed in male spaces. I refuse to be a hypocrit on purpose! No, if males should never under any circumstances be allowed in female spaces, then females should also never under any circumstances be allowed in male spaces. OR, if females CAN under some special circumstances be allowed into male spaces, then males should be allowed the same in female spaces. Both of these solutions pose serious problems, which I keep seeing being brushed under the carpet a lot, and that annoys me.

But if we go with the first idea, of barring people from using opposite sex spaces altogether, then where the fuck do I pee? Should I utilise my "right" to use female spaces, despite making everyone uncomfortable and feeling threatened by my presense, as well as risking being kicked out and forced to use the equivalent male spaces anyway, which is exactly what that idea is meant to prevent - or should I completely avoid being in places which I know does not have a gender neutral bathroom, such as the ferry? Would that not be discrimination? Which is the most reasonable option here, what is the most practical, what's wrong and what's right? Do I even have a RIGHT to use female bathrooms, and if so, how do I prove it, considering my ID still says I'm male?

Trans men aren't gonna be nearly as willing to use female only spaces, and trans women definitely not eager to use male only spaces. But aside from that validation factor, I have the exact same struggle as trans people do on this particular point. Quite often they do toss and turn at which bloody bathroom to pick, not just out of validation, but because they genuinely struggle to figure out which one is the best option for them practically. Especially if they don't quite pass as either sex, and most and foremost just wanna do their business without unneccesary drama.

Also, to clarify: barring trans people from opposite sex spaces is NOT discrimination, as they never belonged there to begin with - but leaving them with no other option than to pee themselves, is. Which means that I think it's fucked up to barr them from those spaces BEFORE having solved the problem of "if they can't go there, then where?"

Perhaps I'm the only one around here who cares about males' integrity, safety and human rights. But even if so, I should not be the only one to care about gnc females' integrity, safety and rights. Male-passing females, whether transitioned or not, whether bearded or not, are still female, and if we don't want them in female only spaces, and not in male only spaces either; why? Because they "chose" to medically transition and/or dress in men's clothing?

Yeah, well, in most cases of transitioned females, they transitioned because of dysphoria, which no one chooses to have. It's a medical condition. Barring people from spaces they'd otherwise be welcomed into, due to the visual outcome of the treatment of their medical condition... is ableism. Barring a woman from a female only space she belongs in, solely because her unusual physical appearance freaks you out... is ableism. Also, simply being gnc and being viscerally uncomfortable with presenting femininely is also not a choice. And even if it was... shouldn't it be? That's why I cannot roll with that sorta solution. I dunno if it counts as a form of discrimination by definition, but it just smells a lot like it from where I sit. That it's no more right to toss me out of, or give me trouble, in a women's bathroom, than a masculine women who also passes as male but who has not medically transitioned.

That said, however, women's safety DOES matter a lot to me. Hence my reluctance to join their spaces, despite being a woman myself. I guess, what I'd want is complete sex segregation to work in my favour, but I can't promote a rule that would discriminate against me. I'm sorry, I just can't. I desire FUNCTIONAL sex segregated spaces, but realistically they cannot function. Truth is that the only womens spaces I've been allowed into since I began passing as male, are "trans inclusionary" ones that openly allow in trans women, ironically. I care about the safety of other women, and their right to have their own spaces... but not at the expense of my own rights, as a fellow woman. To say otherwise would be a crime against myself. I really wish this could be solved in some way that would work in practice, but honestly I don't think it can anytime soon. Not without some seriously tried and proven, practical and humane methods to check what sex people entering single sex spaces actually are.

That is the reality that people have to face. And personally I'd rather focus on women's rights than trans rights, but as a woman who's medically transitioning, I'd shoot my own foot no matter which one I'd choose. That's quite a dilemma.

So where my opinion stands on this right now, is basically this: I think female only spaces should only be for biological women, but I'm reluctantly okay-ish with males who pass as female utilising female only spaces, and vice versa for females in male only spaces. However, this does not feel ideal at all. It's a compromise. Ideally, I want such spaces to be entirely sex segregated, and for even people who pass as the opposite sex (like myself) to be allowed into spaces of their biological sex. My appeal here is both realistic practicality with the reality that some people really do pass as the opposite sex, as well as the safety, rights and integrity of male-passing women.

[lejacquelope]

On men and social retardation

Social retardation is by definition the failure of a man to read social cues and "read the room" for what is appropriate or inappropriate behavior, etc.

I would argue that almost no example of actual social retardation is legitimate, especially when it comes to dating.

A big part of men's social retardation is actually them knowing deep down what women are doing versus what they're saying, but they're being gaslit by the blue-pilled world telling them that what they are truly and accurately seeing is not true.

When a woman tells a man "you're a nice guy, BUT" he learns that being nice is not what a woman wants. Enter the gaslighters who tell him he's not actually nice but rather a potential murderous rapist cannibal that's about to go Elliot Rodger and eat the corpses of the women he kills with Favre and cianti beans. Then when they realize that story's not going to fly they pivot over to "being nice isn't good enough". Which is it now? Is he an imminent Elliot Hannbial Rodger Lecter or a guy who's just plain boringly nice? While the nice guy is trying to figure out why he's being falsely accused of being a misogynist war criminal he turns on the news and finds out that actual violent criminals out there are slaying it with four women at once. Everything this guy is being told is a lie. He doesn't know what the fuck to believe. Of course he's not going to develop social skills because if you're nice then you're boring and if you're a criminal you're repulsive oh wait he can clearly see that criminals are slaying it! Wait, what?

Another big part of the social retardation problem is men being told to watch for social cues from women. Yet when he does, shit goes insanely wrong.

Let me go into examples. For instance every "socially adept man" knows how to interpret indicators of interest (IoI), right? Except, of course, when said IoIs turn out to not be IoIs. For instance if she knocks into you on the dance floor and by any rational observation it is unmistakeably intentional, she's giving you an indicator of interest. IoI rules say grab her hips and pull her to you. If you don't, you pathetic wimp, you lost the chance to make a connection. But whoops, if you do grab her, guess what, lo and behold she just stumbled into you. Now MeToo! jumps out and eats your face: a crowd of John Cena-wannabe male feminist superheroes are suddenly pounding you into pizza on the dance floor before the pig cops come to beat down what's left and haul you off to prison as a rapist.

Another example of IoI is prolonged eye contact. Again only a pussy wusses out on making his move on her, right? But alas! When you walk up to talk to her to talk, you find out either she was staring past you or she was warily keeping an eye on you and tracking a potential predator. These are some of many examples of a man believing what society tells him and finding out reality is often a whole different thing (case in point, IoIs aren't actually IoIs).

In the case of "Reading the room" plenty of men have mis-interpreted neutrality as hostility or reluctance. Who hasn't heard of a guy trying to talk to a woman and she's giving you fuck off signals and you walk away, only to find out it wasn't her being repulsed by you, it was her puppy that earlier got run over by a truck or something. Or better yet women fail this, too - there are the legions and legions of women who unapologetically and explicitly interpret shyness in men as being aloof and anti-social, or awkwardness as name-your-horror-here. A man can be judged as the devil himself just because he tells jokes that ain't funny. So he just decides to play it safe. And so he's called socially retarded.

Only a tiny sliver of social retardation is actually failing to read obvious cues or clues. This actual true form of social retardation is actually a direct consequence men learning by experience not to trust what they observe, or years of being bullied/mind-fucked by a culture of gaslighting into denying the reality before them.

[carlyraejepstein]

potentially upsetting topics: sui, gender dysphoria, abuse and parents, sex

Elliot Page’s coming out rescued an awful day. Its wording is unbelievably powerful, a comment I have made once before and will continue to do so. In it, he so strongly encompasses the fears, the sorrow, the rage, but most importantly the determination and the defiance of not only him but every trans person. I hesitate to use the word “community” because it implies a certain connection that might just not be there; I play a bit of Counter-Strike but I don’t consider myself part of the Counter-Strike community; yet when I read Elliot’s words I feel solidarity, I feel a pull to the trans community that I often don’t feel I pay my dues to, and it feels good, really good. Like I said on Twitter once, other trans people being, existing, living, is just rad. Inspiring, even, despite how that word has been worn out by cis people.

However, there’s a certain something that Elliot didn’t write, for Elliot never wrote “I am a man”; only his name, and pronouns, how he wishes to be referred to. Of course, we cannot possibly know what this omission means or does not mean to Elliot, but it’s something that concurred with a shift in how I perceive my own gender.

I remember first properly ruminating on gender in 2012 or 2013. My understanding was primitive, coming from Wikipedia. Once I knew what transgender or, given the time period, transsexual, the curiosity never really went away. I knew at this point about transition, and I knew about deed polls because of my resentment of my parents, I knew about HRT and I even knew about the GICs. I felt compelled to be an ally in that turbulent period in both my life and in the online culture I immersed myself in from around 2015 to 2017. At this time a friend was going through their own transition and seeing them gave me pause for thought; partly pride, partly worry but a small kernel of imagination, wondering if that could ever be me. It was when I went to sixth form, with its environment permitting greater yet still constrained self expression, that I felt gender dysphoria hit me with its full weight. Thinking, wondering, worrying about being transgender has been the central dialogue of my internal and external monologue ever since. Not a day passes where I don’t think about the dysphoria I feel over my continued closet-dwelling and the malignantly gendered properties of my body. On a January morning in 2019, at my very lowest point, motionless under the covers, I gave myself a choice between transition and death, and I chose transition.

It’s been a complex journey. When I was 13 I shortened my gender neutral name to make it more masc (which I have now happily embraced as my middle name). I leant into the deepening of my voice because I thought it gave me authority, conditioned through the harsh words of people from public Team Fortress 2 servers. I’ve done almost everything under the sun that gets people to say “I’d never have known!” when you come out to them; I worry that I still do and that nothing has changed. I’ve gone and cross-dressed when my parents were out, and I’ve been traumatised by Susan’s Place. I am autistic, no one who has met me can escape that fact; not that I would want to, and as a consequence I am so much more confident in my presence on the internet than I ever have been in the flesh, despite me still not knowing how to make friends; hence I’ve ended up trying to piece my transition together through 4chan (I know, bad) and Reddit and Twitter.

Perhaps the biggest reason I am not out is the time when I decided I would come out to my mother as trans. When we were in Munich we had walked past a pride parade, and when we got back to the apartment I revealed off hand that I was bi. My mother chided me for not telling them before hand since it was “polite” to do so, as if it were not my choice to make because, as I still believe to this day, it’s not a big deal and it’s none of their business. But I decided this time it was important, and that I could trust her. It turns out that just like every other time, trusting my mother is a bad idea that is guaranteed to cause me pain every time I make that mistake. She told me that because she “knows more about [me] than [I] do”, that she thought that I was just straight up wrong, couched it in rhetoric about how she thought that I was too weak to be trans, and quoted the shockingly offensive “autism is extreme male brain” theory to me. It was really devastating at the time and I think it still affects me to this day, especially as she constantly tries to worm her tendrils back into my life after I moved out.

But enough about my mother; she is a fucking flat out abuser. She has emotionally abused me, and undoubtedly my brother, all our lives. I was relieved that my dad chose not to react aggressively as she did, but with a modicum of respect and agreement not to make such a big deal out of it, something I would never expect my mother to match. In the middle of writing this piece I had to decide that I could not do it any longer, and I would never let her back into my life again.

Where that conversation in late 2018 relates to Elliot Page’s statement is my mother’s purported belief that “you don’t have to define yourself as a man or a woman”. Going past the fact that she is lying, since her tolerance for all trans people is thinner than the grey hairs on her head going on the basis that she couldn’t bring herself to say one positive thing to her own daughter that afternoon, it struck me recently that I can more eloquently describe my gender through elimination rather than a label. I am happy to call myself a woman, a trans woman, and I don’t feel as if I really am wavering in or around the binary. But what I can say for definite is that while I have been a boy for almost all my life, and am holding onto that, I am not, and never will be, a man.

Where that leaves me is that I am not a man, but must I be a woman? If I am perhaps not a woman, am I non-binary? No; it doesn’t feel right. However, if I attach just a convenience to the label woman, I can give myself that flexibility in how I feel and how I present myself, and perhaps the biggest example of that is how in recent months I have made peace with my voice. It is not really a femme voice; I hit vocal fry just speaking normally. But I know how to be expressive with it; it is my voice that I have honed over 19 years after all. One day I want to find someone who will help me upgrade my voice (and yes, upgrade) but keeping it means I fulfil one cool thing about being trans, and that is saying fuck you to the very existence of the gender binary. I keep this voice out of necessity, but I’m still trans femme, I am still a woman and I still want my facial hair zapped off.

As well, I reserve the right to say I used to be a boy. Not a man, but a boy. That’s why they call it boymoding, right? How else can I describe the first 17 years of my life? I can be a boy all the same now, although I may be pushing it aged 20, and at the point at which I am really stretching that concept which at this point I am adhering to solely for my safety and comfort, I shouldn’t need to use it anymore. Wishful thinking, of course.

I think we should consider why we use “man” and “woman” in the first place. From my perspective they are simply words to describe people with two different sets of primary and secondary sexual characteristics, convenient because, well, being cis is unavoidably common. But they are not discrete, as we so often have to reiterate using intersex people as an unwilling crutch, where one does not occur in the other they are so often analogous and often they overlap! Supposedly 60% of teenage boys develop further breast tissue, and 40% of women have some form of facial hair. Thinking that the two are discrete gives rise to the idea of “biological sex”, a concept developed by cis people either to misgender trans people in a way they think is philosophically rigorous, or to reconcile their tenuous support for trans people with a continuing belief in the gender binary. Personally I would like to smash the concept of biological sex to bits because it is not useful to us. At the very least it may describe one’s primary sexual characteristics but bottom surgery exists, and I don’t happen to think that it is “mutilation”. I don’t need to argue that “biological sex can be changed”; they are not discrete categories, and I don’t need to move between them, or seek validation for having moved between them. It is not a helpful generalisation for bodies, diverse as they are.

I must add that as a trans woman the fact that I may have a penis doesn’t mean that I use it in the same way as a man. I use mine to pee, primarily, and it’s definitely not going inside anyone except myself any time soon; a whole zine was written about how trans women fuck and use their bits to fuck, so I definitely don’t need to anyway.

Another bullshit concept is “biological destiny” or “biological reality”, although I will give less breath to this one because at it’s core it is fundamentally misogynistic, and it so often is divorced from any sensible definition of reality. It’s like if I had to have my arm amputated and then someone came up to me and said “you’ll always have two arms, you were born with them and you’ll die with them”.

I’ve heard and thought a lot about gender abolition but it seems to me that its proponents expect that like the state, gendered differences will just disappear over time. But I don’t want that to happen. If the binary is done away with I don’t want gender to disappear I want it to flourish! Because gender is beautiful, men are beautiful, women are beautiful, and everyone in between or outwith are beautiful. On the other hand, me and you don’t need to be men, or women, or call ourselves non-binary to be beautiful. Being trans is about cultivating your own beauty and your own identity. When cissiety demands that the only identity and presentation we’re allowed is one that corresponds to what they decided was between our legs when we were born, why give ourselves only one other choice?

I don’t really know how to end this piece because I wrote one half of it one day and the other half a couple of weeks later. At the very least I’m glad I can attribute my peace with not necessarily being a woman but a femme to Elliot Page, and not my rotten bastard mother.

[terf-gifs]

sis i don't understand your mentality.. how can you support women but not trans women?? they are STILL women! if you are born with male reproductive organs that just make you feel so confused and horrible and eventually feel so happy by identifying as female, how can you not accept them? *genuine question*

here's my honest answer.

my beliefs about trans women are only the incidental product of my beliefs about feminism. I fundamentally believe that women are oppressed for their sex, not for their femininity. I believe that the society that fosters this sex-based oppression uses compulsory femininity as a method of oppression. I believe that we need distinct terminology to discuss and try to heal the division between the sexes. As a result of this, I believe that efforts to facilitate confusion of these terms hurt and hinder the progress of feminism. If women are oppressed for their gender and not their sex, then no one except people who wanted to be oppressed would identify as women. I think the root of the reason terfs have the reputation they do is that we just refused to change the terminology, which TRAs took as a denial of their cause.

I want to ask you, what is womanhood? what is the common trait that all women have that identifies them as the ones men oppress? what does it mean for someone to "feel like a woman" cis or not? if sex has no bearing on gender, what causes the desire to transition sex? what is it about "feeling like a woman" causes people to want long hair and makeup?

I didn't start off a terf. I was deeply involved in the TRA movement for a long time, genuinely believing your cause and wholeheartedly agreeing that trans women were women. i encourage you to think critically about what a woman is, about how your definition may be impacted by the sexist culture in which it was formed, about how to effectively protect or even discuss the rights of a group so ill-defined that there is no functional difference in definition between the oppressor class and the oppressed class. I encourage you to think critically about this, even if you don't admit it aloud.

I support biological females because we share an anatomical trait that has been exploited, abused, and cited as both cause and proof of our ‘inherent inferiority’ to males for millennia, and I believe there should be a designated movement just to support, defend, and liberate people affected by this. I believe that movement is called feminism and those people are called women. that is how I don't see the place for trans women in that movement. It is a movement for the protection of sex-based human rights for the human sex which has been oppressed for the sex of our bodies. And that’s without even getting into the issue of gender-based activism.

The idea of an inherent ‘woman-brain’ just reaffirms the idea that there is an ephemeral woman-essence that is innate and inborn and is what makes a woman; this is necessarily in conflict with the core tenets of feminism, which has been arguing for over a century now against the misogynistic doctrine of ‘women are just better at housework and nurturing and obsessing over beauty and their hormones make them baby-crazy the way their periods make them unsuitable for leadership,’ insisting that the social constructs and constraints of womanhood are not baked into our second X chromosome. “Feeling like a woman” is no different from feeling like a man. We are neutral fucking mammals. There is no one way women think, there is no one way men think, we are all individuals and the notion that one’s individuality needs to be labelled as a gender in relation to one’s sex just reinforces the ideas that:

(a) there is an expected gendered brain for your sex (i.e., ‘man-gender-brain’ for males, ‘woman-gender-brain’ for females) and that people are born with these gendered brains. (b) the majority of the population (i.e. the ‘cis’ demographic) does have an innate gender-brain corresponding to their sex; so, claiming the entire population of ‘cis’ women actually do have innate ‘woman-gender-brains’. (c) those who do not feel like their gender-brain matches up to what is expected of their sex are oppressed by the ‘cis,’ on the basis that having the expected gendered brain is a privilege; so, claiming that ‘cis’ women are privileged for their supposedly-innate ‘woman-gender-brains’ because that’s what corresponds to their female sex, while simultaneously claiming that female humans who realise they do not have innate ‘woman-gender-brains’ are not women AND that male humans (whose only notion of what a ‘woman-gender-brain’ feels like compared to a ‘man-gender-brain’ is based in conjecture) who feel that their brain is innately gendered ‘woman’ are women and that they are oppressed by ‘cis’ women because their bodies ‘don’t match’ their supposedly innate woman-gender-brain (again reinforcing the association between ‘innate woman-gender-brain’ and ‘female’ by having this demographic as the vocal exception). (d) that this gender-brain, not the sex with which it is forcibly and artificially associated, is what sexism/misogyny has been based on all along; so, claiming that that supposedly-innate woman-gender-brain (which we can’t detect or coherently define) is the trait for which women were/are paid less, objectified, denied the vote, forcibly married and indentured into housework, genitally mutilated, raped and trafficked and sold en masse, forced to give birth... I could go on.

Can you see now how this is reinforcing the same sexist ideas about gender it claims to be overturning? The very idea of innate gender is sexist. the idea that women either identify with the misogynistic societal notions of what womanhood is or they shed the title ‘woman’ is not progressive or feminist at all. There are three potential definitions of ‘woman’ at this point:

1. anyone who feels like a woman (tautological, meaningless, and functionally useless for feminism; indestinguishable from ‘man’ when likewise defined as ‘anyone who feels like a man’. How can one oppress the other and on what basis? for what trait? how can we legislate when we can’t define whom we’re protecting and from whom?) 2. anyone who identifies with the social associations with womanhood, (e.g., femininity, nurturing, or any of the ever-fluctuating social tropes or expectations of women, any conception of ‘womanhood’ which is opposed to parallel conceptions of ‘manhood’; a definition fundamentally based in misogyny for its assumption that these traits are not only innate, but innately tied to womanhood. it’s bioessentialism without the bio-; it’s just gender essentialism. it’s sexism.) 3. human of the female sex. (womanhood denotes nothing inherent other than sex; no inborn traits, no natural femininity, no innate woman-gender-brain. we are neutral humans the same as men, with the same internal range of individuality, and the only inherent difference between us is our physical sex. useful for activism because it includes everyone oppressed for their sex by--again--simply denoting our sex.)

None of this means I hate/oppose/wish violence on males who engage in "feminine" behaviour or dress. I honestly don’t care what people wear. Some have argued that they are helping to break down the gender barriers assigned to the sexes by engaging in activities that men consider "womanly" and simultaneously "weak" (which, to be clear, are considered weak not because of men’s hatred of femininity, but because of a disdain for the roles they’ve forced us into to uphold the charade of their superiority). however, engaging in activities that men historically limited women to does not make you a woman. The men who claim that enjoying or being intrigued by femininity makes them women are misogynists. The insinuation that being drawn to ‘girly’ ‘feminine’ behaviours/things (the products of a culture bent on keeping girls pretty and vacant) makes them women is misogynistic in itself.

[thatfeministchickofficial]

Crypto-POENiSs insincerely identifying as Non-Binary as though Non-Binary genders = gender criticism.

When those who think of themselves as “crypto-terfs” take on nonbinary identities, insincerely, which harms not only women who are trans, but actual nonbinary people as well, (some of whom are trans women too, some of who are not, and are even trans-masc), It is because they are “gender critical,” and therefore see no real harm/difference. Remember that *Different kinds* of “TWERF/TERF” (More properly referred to as POENiSs) exist, and be aware. This is one type. (They *LOVE* trying to play off an insincere “misunderstanding” that somehow we lump every kind of them in as though they all had the same roots for their transmisogyny, let’s make it clear that we can see that there are different species, and have studied them all...) When a “gender critical” POENiS claims to be nonbinary, they do so because they are trying to act like gender isn’t real, and so the label doesn’t matter. They don’t get that being nonbinary is a collection of genders, and think they can just use it to say “OH, I broke your system, what now???” They are not actual nonbinary people. Actual nonbinary people are not intentionally POENiSy, or at least apologize for it when they are made to see that they’ve been transmisogynist. Actual people who are nonbinary actually identify as NOT BEING WOMEN. Some have dicks, some have vaginas. POENiSs taking on the identity insincerely do so because they feel as though they can infiltrate the system, and try to act like nonbinary people think gender is a lie. Actual nonbinary people aren’t “gender critical,” POENiSs are. They believe gender exists, not as a construct for self-identification, but to impose a strict set of rules for vagina-owners in exclusion, and that men live in a gender-free world, and that this is somehow where they’ll find liberation from the shackles that the patriarchy has thrown on those who gender as women by simultaneously being like “I’m not a woman!” and “I’m a woman!”... I understand that every now and then, some of us (women) like to switch back and forth to get like a “which is it?” out of the world of men, like, HELLO, I’m a woman, this is one of the most useful attitudes in some situation for getting what you want from men, like the truth when they think they can play, this isn’t one of those situations... And like, it’s freaking annoying when POENiSs try to use tactics women developed for dealing with men for dealing with other women, like every time it happens, this is the face we make back at you: :|... That deadpan, mouth flat, eyes so wide they could roll out of their sockets, ready to roll back with a *HUGE* sigh as soon as the disbelief that you’d actually think this would work fades enough for the “OH BOY!!!” to come out of our mouths, like...this is one of those times... They think it’ll let them sneak in... They think it’ll prove a point somehow... It’s not genuine, and don’t be fooled. They especially like to try to convince other nonbinary people that they are genuine, and then use that foot in the door to start getting them attacking women who are trans for calling POENiS bullshit out., trying to make them think when we are talking about “Crypto-Terfs” (like this) that we are lumping in actual nonbinary people, when we are not, or that we are referring only to AFAB nonbinary people when we refer to nonbinary people... I don’t get how this has become such a seemingly universal piece of POENiS rhetoric, all the same, the assumption that we are talking exclusively about AFAB NB people when we (women who are trans) say NB... Probably about half of NB people were AMAB, and legit, sometimes it feels like we (women who are trans) are the only ones who get that... Is it possibly because many women who are trans are nonbinary ourselves? (Technically *ALL* trans people are nonbinary according to... *SHOCK* the binary itself...) POENiS rhetoric though, focuses on attempting to frame dysphoria as though it meant that women who are trans actually somehow secretly define womanhood as owning a vagina ourselves, and that when we talk about “Women and Afab people” basically to mean “People who don’t identify as men,” we somehow are trying to say “People who have, or want vaginas...” No, about half of nonbinary folks have or were born with what society arbitrarily calls “penises,” probably about half of nonbinary people want to have “penises” (regardless of being AMAB or AFAB), and women who are trans who have “penises” are great, and women! Women who want to keep their “penises” are great! Women who have no dysphoria at all about their penises are great, and valid! It’s a clit. It’s a fucking clit, everyone has one! What woman wouldn’t want to keep her clit? This is turning into a side note, and that note is that I’m even sick of the “keep your penis/don’t” language, like, if the surgeon is doing it right, we *ALL* “keep” our girl-penises anyway and just get a vagina, like... unless a woman asks to *NOT* have her clit, like... I don’t see why, that seems like self-harm, ok, tho... I don’t even feel like that ever happens, so, let’s change the language... And since I was talking about NB people with dicks (Like this girl), Let’s get back to that... Oh, what? You want me to talk about NB people with pussies? Cool. I’m not gonna do that right now, specifically because it’s what you want, and for me, a huge part of how my femininity expresses itself is in not doing anything just because some dude wants me to. (Dude is gender neutral right? I mean, I don’t agree with that all the time, I feel like it can be pretty loaded the way POENISs use it just in anger to basically say “I’m catching you ‘acting like a man’ and trying to go ‘bad dog!’ in order to push you back to ‘acting like a woman,’ (<-WTF do either of these even mean, like... if you’re gonna use “dude” like that, you gotta explain these two things to me. Explain it like I’m 5, please...) Anyway, be leary of any person claiming to be “nonbinary,” and “gender critical” at the same time. Actual nonbinary people aren’t “gender critical,” because *SHOCK* all of them who aren’t agender... HAVE GENDER! Frequently these “crypto-terfs,” and really POENiSs in general, act as though they believe “non-binary” is in and of itself a gender, and not a broad collection of a spectrum of countess genders, as it is, and for all I know, it’s cause they actually don’t know better... This is *ACTUALLY* kind of useful as a red-flag... They act like “nonbinary” means “I have ‘liberated’ myself from gender!” and not “I FOUND MY GENDER AND IT’S NOT ON THIS EITHER/OR BULLSHIT, THAT DOESN’T FIT MY LIFE, AND I’M ELATED!!!” Gender isn’t oppressive, *shouldn’t *be*, or *feel** oppressive. Gender is LIBERATING, *SHOULD *BE* *AND* *FEEL** liberating... LIke, this is the whole idea of being trans... We felt (and were *BEING*) oppressed by being *FORCED* into identifying and expressing ourselves with a gender we *DON’T* identify with, we feel *LIBERATED* being finally *FREE* to identify and express ourselves as the gender we actually experience and identify with and wish to express, like... OMG, this is not a difficult concept, and if you actually *WERE* nonbinary, you would get that. You would have found your freedom in the honest identification, and stopped feeling like you gotta fuck with us. Or *ARE* you actually nonbinary? I know I’m making a “woman trap” right now, it’s intentional that I didn’t back away from it, cause it’s being myself, and I won’t apologize for it, I *WILL* call attention to it, because doing so is my prerogative, and because POENiSs are so confused and full of misogyny that like, they’d try to say it’s misogynist that I (as a woman) admit (and am proud) that women know how to do this thing (Men don’t... you just don’t, not sorry...), and at the same time, not even realize that acting like women setting “traps” is a “bad” thing, and not legit just how we’ve learned to survive a confusing, gaslighty world of men *IS ITSELF MISOGYNY.* Like, yo, if you’re nonbinary, then stop trying to frame your life as a woman’s, or your experiences as “woman’s experiences.” Did I say “Only women can set ‘traps’, or did I just say “Men can’t.”...? Dude, give it up. And yes, I call other chicks dude too. I call men, women, and nonbinary people dude... The difference is that I do my best to ask if women are okay with it, or wait for them to do it first. I usually reserve it for stoner chicks and lesbians, cause we seem to throw it around more in a gender neutral-*INTENDED* way, and generally not care as much, except that trans women have a *REASON* to care when AFAB people do it, cause we’re *USED* to it being loaded. You can’t act like you can just pretend away the intentions of your word by being like “It’s gender neutral...” OK... that’s true till you put an *INTENT* to use the word *SPECIFICALLY TO GENDER* someone on it... Like I can laugh and call you “ass” with the intention of a friend to make you laugh when I see you being silly and we’re friends and know it’s all innocent and no harm intended, *OR* I can yell “ass” at a stranger with the intention of calling a stranger out on being harmful and full of shit, like... the word itself is pretty neutral between something you can casually throw at a friend and not harm them if they’re cool with the way you’re using it, and a word which can be used to actively and intentionally “bite at” (Read: HARM) someone. And like, a favorite tactic of this brand of POENiS is to act like if they see you calling out *ANOTHER* “crypto-terf” to suddenly try to get your attention and be like “I see you were talking about me, cause I too am “a nonbinary with a vagina,” yes indeed!” and like, No. Just no. No, dude.  (ABSOLUTELY read this like I'm dog/cat shaming. I am.) We were talking about Crypto-POENiS(s) who *INSINCERELY* label themselves as nonbinary, without meaning it (Fuck, a lot probably are nonbinary and even trans-masc, or men and in denial... some legit probably are women...) And when you hop in, all a *WOMAN* like *ME* sees is one of those many things in life which *IMMEDIATELY* makes us realize “Methinks thou dost protest too much.” Like... If you want to know how to talk to a woman, you gotta be able to learn to avoid triggering that, cause when we think “Methinks thou dost protest too much,” not always, and yet still, a pretty fair percentage of the time, we are fuckin’ right. Just like, stop trying to play word games with women, or do you worst... either way, it’s not gonna work XD.

[migleefulmoments]

The CC fandom is basically just one giant neverending fan tantrum about not getting their own way. Collectively, they have written hundreds of thousands of pathetic words pointing out all the ways Darren isn't fulfilling their predictions and Mia being the cause of that, but too ensconced in their lies to stop and realize the very fact they have to keep churning out these word vomit posts revising reality means they are chronically wrong about EVERYTHING. That's the only 'sham mockery' here.

YES YES YES YES YES! 

Darren continues to disappoint Abby and everyone else has no idea who to think so they just word vomit whatever it is Abby is pissed about. Today is a perfect example -Abby is seething in a rage because Darren dared to look HOT AF in a disheveled look but Abs loves Blarren and she COULD. NOT. SEE. Blarren last night...anywhere.  She’s consoling herself by pointing out he isn’t happy in any photo (of course she’s wrong, he’s just giving a neutral face).

It’s a shit show over there as they are also being full misogynists. They are blaming Ashley for Darren’s look which Abby hates (hence they all do) and even criticizing Mia because she looks great (“best ever” according to Abby) but since Darren looks frumpy, Mia missed the memo and so it’s her fault. For anyone not aware of how stylists work- they pull together outfits for the celebrity to try on but in the end, it is the celebrity who chooses the final look. If you hate Darren’s outfit, you have to blame Darren. 

They are soothing their anger by reassuring themselves that Darren’s “contract” with Balmain is about to end (according to them he first wore Balmain a year ago???)  Newsflash- there is no contract- Darren was never announced as a brand ambassador or part of an advertising campaign. He just likes Balmain and Olivier likes him. The Balmain jackets will be around for a long time and I love them so fuck off Abby. 

Nothing is funnier to me than reading a fashion takedown by Abby seeing as how she’s sooooo fashion-forward. Darren should fire Ashley and hire Abby.  

BTW-notice her use the wrong initials- she’s been doing that lately.

**********************

“She has had 10 years to get to know what D looks good in, there is no excuse for that outfit last night. Even if I put aside that i think it is ugly, outdated, and the t-shirt is lazy, it is all wrong for a guy of average height who has a tiny frame”

************************

Anonymous asked: I like that we are criticizing D's outfit ,( like it deserves) and someone is even doing it in an harsh way this should show to all those ready to call us mysoginists or antifeminists that they say bs, bc we criticize the outfits EVEN FOR D, when he does it wrong, like this time

Fact, D is an actor. Fact, M is a beard. Fact, both get paid to be on the RC (Neither one is paid to be on the red carpet are fucking kidding me?!?! Who do you imagine is paying them and more importantly, how do you manage they recoup those expenses and make money on a red carept? Red Carpets are for fans to feel connected to the show and therefore to watch the show. Imagine an Oscars night that was only the dry show. Fewer people would be interested hence fewer ad dollars. It’s the spectacle of the event that gets people watching. Mia is photographed mostly for Darren and Mia. The gaggle of photos takes a pic and we end up seeing 2 or 3.  They do get picked up by celeb gossip mags occasionally, but most of the time they pic the photos of Darren alone) . Fact, celebrities and others that willingly chose to be on the RC, as part of their job, open themselves up to criticism and that is true of men, women, and those who are gender fluid. Part of the job description. If you don’t want us to talk, well then, there are other jobs out there.(It doesn’t give you the right to be a looney bitch) 

D looked awful and I have called them out before (and they haven’t listened to you? I’m dumbfounded), but to me last night was the low point. There may have been worse outfits, but it is ill fighting and he looks un-kept (awww, you couldn’t find Blarren anywhere).  And it makes no sense with the projects he is promoting.(He literally is not promoting any projects yet. It’s too early.  You don’t understand promotion at all for all the shit you claim to know. When you see him making the talk show rounds that is when he is promoting. Until then he is just living his life. Just becuase you, a super fan knows what is coming up doesn’t mean he is “promoting” anything.  He went to the party becuase he goes every year.  )

******************

 Once again, they don’t match, sure they both had on black, but no one told her that for this occasion, looking like a hot mess on the RC was the way to match D. Poor Swiller, she just can’t get it right.  99% of the time, she is the hot mess but this time, she kind of got it right and his was so wrong in so many ways.

*************************

Not sure i agree with your logic and it is not that he is not smiling, he looks down right miserable.  But I don’t blame him btwn the beard on his arm and that horrific excuse of an outfit, I would guess it was not his best night out.

*************************

The good news nonnie, I hope, D first wore B/ailman at the VF party on Feb 24, 2019. Soon after he was whisked off to Qatar for the fashion show, wore it to the Met, went to Paris for the fashion concert, wore them at iHeart, and now last night.  Like a bookend to a year contract. At least i hope, because that was absolutely hideous.  It was so ill fitting, it was awful on his body, it was not flattering, the jacket is just ugly.  And while I know he did shower, he looks like he threw on clothes after a raging party and the sunglasses are to hide his bloodshot eyes. This is not the look of a man with serious projects to sell.

I am utterly disappointed in AF (what did Ashley Fink do to you?), to the point that I think she should be fired (this is fucking HILARIOUS as Darren is on the best-dressed list most of the time-so are her other clients Chadwick and Finn. Firing her because one frumpy, bitchy fan doesn’t like an outfit seems a tad shortsighted). This is utterly inexcusable at a crucial time in his career at an incredibly important event (It was a party- it’s a fun event that everyone goes to but it’s literally a party where people drink and have fun) I understand he maybe has to wear the designer (he doesn’t)  but she needs to work with the designer to create a flattering look for her client whose star is rising and who has important, big projects to promote (Big HUGE A-list celebs were fashion fails all of the time. It doesn’t ruin their careers, calm the fuck down)    He is not a rock star that hangs out with groupies all night before snorting coke to go to the next event (He is Darren and part of Darren is the rockstar look. Stop trying to make him someone he isn’t).  He is on the verge of the A list (no he isn’t) with a classic, serious dramatic play in 6 weeks (Nobody cares except the 2000 people who will see the show) with 2 well renowned, A list, award winning, serous stars (She’s an idiot)  and a series where he is selling classic HW, defined by gorgeous, well groomed, stunning male stars (Oh, honey, your wank bank is full over this isn’t?  I get why you are so sure Raymond is gay. You need them all to be gorgeous, well-groomed queer men). And is how they choose to represent him? As a man that could not be bothered to shave who looks like a wanna be rock star (Since he wore that look to his wedding I have to believe that both Darren and Mia love that look on him)?  Nope.(YEP)

[mattandsaraproductions]

Hey @riteofashkente sometime during the last ice age, you asked me to expand on my comments about CS Lewis and the Problem of Susan. Going through my drafts, I found a mostly written post, so here it (finally) is:

So, first, the sexism; and second, the dilemma resulting from Lewis’s careless writing.

First: The whole nylons, lipsticks, and parties thing. Now, it’s true that the text doesn’t say Susan is going to hell for this. But that’s hardly the criticism, though it’s a response you hear from people who think that’s the criticism. Lewis’s defenders always say something along the lines of “The issue isn’t stockings and lipsticks, it’s that Susan is shallow.” My reply to this is quite simple: Yes, Lewis assuredly did mean to write that Susan’s flaw is shallowness, in contrast to her siblings’ praying to Aslan or whatever. But that’s one hell of a backhanded compliment to him. The problem is that Lewis’s shorthand for being shallow is “things coded as feminine.” This is the man who treated women’s tan lines as a moral failing, so I think this matter is pretty well settled. Lewis’s intent means precisely jack when what we’re criticizing is his sexist attitudes. 

We also have the defense “He wasn't a misogynist” as if what we’re criticizing him for were misogyny rather than sexism. Not only is something like “The Shoddy Lands” (the aforementioned “eww tan lines, women’s bodies are gross when they aren't for men”) obviously misogynistic, in the case of Susan it’s sexism (as beliefs about women) rather than misogyny (as moralizing or policing the social order) that’s at issue. While, depending on how we interpret what’s going on, Susan’s fate might also be argued to be an instance of Lewis’s misogyny, it’s primarily the sexism that’s the issue. Lewis’s beliefs about women - in particular, their inferiority to men, the proper place of women in society, etc. - are what explains why his shorthand for “this character is shallow” is that she likes lipstick rather than, for example, literally any other thing someone might be obsessed with. After all, what Lewis needs is merely that Susan have some interest that takes precedence over Aslan. What he says is that she’s interested in stereotypically feminine things like makeup and parties, because to Lewis those things are inherently shallow (being that they’re feminine). CS Lewis was a right dick, is what I’m saying.

Now, part of the problem is that this all happens off-page. And since Lewis was never overly interested in the inner psychological life of his characters (more on that below), it jars with readers’ idea of who Susan is that now – in contrast to the character we read, and with none of this development happening on the page – Susan has become this shallow, flighty character. That’s bad writing.

In the absence of any A to B character-building that shows us how Susan has changed, all we have is this quick “She’s become silly and conceited.” It’s telling rather than showing, which is something the books are full of (again: Lewis is a bad fiction writer. His characters are chess pieces for his Platonism apologia (Lewis was a Platonist who mistook himself for a Christian), rather than being people in a story, and his hostility to consent in no way helps this. But those are several other topics). The problem, again, is not Lewis’s intent to write that Susan is shallow. It’s that Lewis, needing to get the point across quickly, reaches for things that are not gender-neutral. Done and dusted, as far as he’s concerned, because femininity is evidence of shallowness to him. That’s the problem.

But... I don’t think it’s the full problem. The above is the issues with Lewis’s sexist writing, but there’s another thing, which is less commented on, that I take to be the real Problem of Susan. It’s a dilemma, and it goes like this:

Either the Pevensie children remember everything that happened to them in Narnia, or they don’t. If they don’t (as in the beginning of Prince Caspian when they don't remember Narnia except as a kind of dream), then Susan cannot be faulted (as her siblings think) for treating Narnia as a game they played to amuse themselves during the Blitz. On this horn of the dilemma, if the Pevensies do not remember Narnia with the waking clarity of memory, Susan cannot be blamed for not remembering.

And if they do remember? If Susan does remember Narnia? Then the matter is so much worse. For remember, they all grew up in Narnia. Susan is a queen, with a court and official duties and suitors. She is an adult, thrust back into the body of a teenager, at an age and time when she will not be listened to. That’s horrifying. Nylons, and lipsticks, and parties, then, are not evidence of shallowness, but a way Susan can regain some measure of standing in a society that treats her as unimportant because of her age and gender (an analysis of femininity that Lewis would surely have hated, since he hated “New Women” for denying innate femininity (see, for example, the woman who’s head of Eustace and Jill’s school). That is, for Lewis, lipstick and nylons are bad because of women’s independence, not because sex. It’s not that sex bothered him; it’s that he didn’t like that women weren’t seeking men’s approval (Susan doesn't want your approval. She is a Queen of Narnia, after all). On this horn of the dilemma, Susan isn’t shallow, rather, she’s trying to regain what was lost in a world which is not her own anymore.

So if Susan can remember Narnia, then her siblings are being judgy, sexist assholes (and since this is Narnia, where characters have opinions by authorial fiat, Lewis is being a judgy, sexist asshole too). But suppose Susan cannot remember Narnia. I don’t see why we should blame Susan for liking nylons and lipstick and parties on this account either, unless you think no one who likes those things can be anything but vain and shallow. Time and again, in Narnia and other writings, Lewis judged his characters for not doing what he wanted and for not liking the same things he liked. Vegetarians (CS Lewis was against soy boys before it was cool), people of color, modernity, insufficiently masculine men (see: vegetarians), female clergy, outspoken women, butch women, young women, old women.

Luckily for all of us, modern children’s fantasy is a big place, and we can leave behind Christian apologetics masquerading as mediocre literature.

[brandonxdylan]

steve, brenda, donna

I don’t think I’ve ever done one of these types of things for anyone other than Brandon or Dylan before (not that I have an issue with that at ALL), but I appreciate the fun challenge, anon.

Steve:

general opinion: fall in a hole and die | don’t like them | eh | they’re fine I guess | like them! | love them | actual love of my life

hotness level: get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically hot but not my type | pretty hot | gorgeous! | 10/10 would bang

hogwarts house: gryffindor | slytherin (although it’s a bit of a weird toss-up between that and hufflepuff) | ravenclaw | hufflepuff

best quality: He prioritizes having a good time. Sometimes to a fault, but honestly I have a lot of respect for people who can party with zero inhibitions.

worst quality: Steve kind of has some misogynistic leanings that are hard to overlook, and also has some bullshit macho hangups.

ship them with: Brandon. Jk (not really), but in canon, I’ll say Carly.

brotp them with: Andrea (again, Andrea was ridiculously underutilized as a friend to anyone other than Brandon. She had great chemistry with Steve).

needs to stay away from: Valerie. Girl would eat him alive and enjoy it.

misc. thoughts: I like Ian Ziering as Steve more than I like Steve as a character. He has a decent arc over the course of the series though, and I appreciate that.

Brenda:

general opinion: fall in a hole and die | don’t like them | eh |  they’re fine I guess | like them! | love them | actual love of my life

hotness level: get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically hot but not my type | pretty hot | gorgeous! | 10/10 would bang

hogwarts house: gryffindor (girl speaks her mind and takes no shit) | slytherin | ravenclaw | hufflepuff

best quality: Brenda didn’t take SHIT and I fucking loved her for that. I don’t even care that it resulted in her becoming a pariah in season 4 because she was way too good for everyone. Even when she’s being a fucking dumbass (which is fairly often), she’s so damn committed to it. I love it. Brenda is a queen.

worst quality: In spite of my love for her bitchiness, the temper tantrums became a little grating at times, and only undercut the more positive aspects of her character. Like if you’re going to flip your shit about literally everything, of course no one’s going to take you seriously when it matters.

ship them with: Dylan, baby.

brotp them with: Donna.

needs to stay away from: Kelly. Don’t even bother.

misc. thoughts: The show died when Brenda left. The final six seasons are just the ghost of the first four.

Donna:

general opinion: fall in a hole and die | don’t like them | eh |  they’re fine I guess | like them! | love them | actual love of my life

hotness level: get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically hot but not my type | pretty hot | gorgeous! | 10/10 would bang

hogwarts house: gryffindor | slytherin | ravenclaw | hufflepuff (a textbook example)

best quality: Similar with Steve/Ian Ziering, I think I like Tori Spelling as Donna more than I like Donna. I know she’s gotten a lot of flack for her attempts at humour, but tbph, I actually find her pretty charming, and when I do find the show genuinely, intentionally funny, it’s usually because of Donna/Tori.

worst quality: Donna ending up with David is fucking ridiculous. Her giving up her virginity to him because he “waited” is ridiculous. Donna continually calling David out on his shit - in full justification - and then continue to take it, is ridiculous. I buy her ending up with David because she clearly needs/expects to be the caregiver to a whiny man-child, but watching it play out over ten goddamn seasons is just too much.

ship them with: I don’t even know. Every guy Donna was ever with tried to exert some weird type of ownership over her. Joe, Ray, Noah, David - I ship Donna with DONNA. Pull a season 5 Kelly and choose yourself, girl.

brotp them with: Brenda and Clare.

needs to stay away from: See all of the men listed above.

misc. thoughts: Donna deserves better than she ever gets. Except the insta-success in her fashion career. She didn’t really deserve that.

[miss-musings]

“THE BLACKLIST” & WHY PEOPLE HATE LIZ SO MUCH

I’ve discussed on here several times how much I’ve been annoyed with the way TPTB have written Liz’s character over the course of the show. But, I tried to keep my frustration and annoyance directed more so at the writers/showrunners and less on the character herself or the actress Megan Boone.

However, after watching 6x10 “The Cryptobanker,” I think I may have finally hit the point where I really started to hate Liz in and of herself. So, I started writing this post, which I’ve added to and edited over the past few weeks, but I still stand by my original point.

Now, I follow the Blacklist on Facebook, and almost every single time there’s a new post, the top-voted comments are always praising Spader/Red and hating on Liz. I’ve seen people say she’s annoying, that they didn’t like this S6 plotline with her and her sister, that they hoped the show kills her off for real soon, etc.

I always thought that most of the comments were somewhat valid but maybe a little overblown (especially the ones about wanting her off the show). But, it really made me wonder why so many people hate -- and I mean HATE -- Liz so much.

While I admit that her character is starting to really get on my nerves, I’m going to try to put my personal feelings aside and tackle this objectively. I want to really look at what reasons within the show, its writing, its format, etc., Liz receives so much more hate -- vastly more than any other character on this show. As I said, Red/Spader is always highly praised along with Dembe, and I rarely if ever see comments complaining about Samar, Aram, Cooper and Ressler. I would guestimate that 95 percent of complaints about any one character are directed at Liz.

A THEORETICAL POSSIBILITY

Now, I will theorize -- and keep in mind that this is only a theory -- that part of the reason for this hatred toward Liz has to do with some male fans being misogynistic/sexist and some female fans’ annoyance at what a crappy avatar Liz makes for. (I’m talking about straight viewers, FYI.)

With regard to male fans, I think they look at Liz -- who at times has been terse, mean-spirited and vindictive -- and see her as a giant bitch. After all, that was the whole idea that Liz herself sets up in the pilot. She is not who her male colleagues expect her to be. She doesn’t play into the traditional feminine role of simpering, smiling and content to sit on the sidelines and let the men sort things out. (And, I’m really generalizing here.) So, I think it’s a fair assumption that some male fans have the same sentiments about Liz that her colleagues canonically have too.

As for the female fans, I think Liz might come off as a poor avatar. When you’re plunged into a fictional universe, usually there’s a character who’s plunged into the story along with you, and you learn as they do, to the point where you start to project yourself onto them. Think Neo in “The Matrix” or Harry Potter or Luke Skywalker. It’s every person’s fantasy to discover some great power within, harness it to defeat the bad guy and win the heart of the beautiful woman/handsome man in the process.

Liz was clearly meant to be our avatar into this universe. We were brought into the world along with her, saw her learn about Red, begin the Task Force, and plunge into this world of the FBI and the Blacklist.

Now, I imagine that for older women, especially, the fantasy is to be the kind of gal that a guy like James Spader would absolutely devote himself to. And that’s exactly how Red treats Liz -- like a woman he would do anything for. However, unlike many viewers, Liz is ungrateful for Red’s devotion and continual sacrifices for her benefit. Instead of seeing him as a savior and white knight, she often sees him as a nuisance and a terror in her life. I personally think she’s often justified in that, but I’d guess that 80 percent of the current audience is watching it simply for Spader’s performance alone. So, when the favorite actor’s character is not appreciated and is continually hated on by his co-lead character, it makes for uncompelling television from a “I want to project myself onto this character” kind of way.

But, with the theoretical discussion out of the way, let’s examine some more concrete reasons as to why people hate Liz.

LIZ IS OFTEN WISHY-WASHY (ie, has little conviction) WHEN IT COMES TO HER FEELINGS AND DESIRES.

This is what I’ve often described as the “Liz loves Red, Liz hates Red, Liz forgives Red” song-and-dance routine. But, there’s much more to it than simply Liz’s relationship with Red.

Liz was first introduced to us as a woman who wanted to start a family, and yet she thought about giving up her baby for adoption and then later gave Agnes away to her mother-in-law so she could spend more time on her revenge plans. The entire pilot goes out of its way to show Liz struggling with the demands of being an FBI agent and a prospective parent, and drives home the whole “Mommy Liz” vibe with the admiral’s daughter.

Yet, when she finds out she’s pregnant, she hesitates and thinks about giving it up for adoption. Then, when she has Agnes, she agrees to Kaplan’s plan to fake her death so she and Tom and Agnes can be happy and safe away from his world. And, later when Agnes gets kidnapped, she frets and worries about her constantly.

But, the minute she wakes up after being in a coma, she’s totally cool with pawning Agnes off to someone she’s never really met. Cool.

I realize there are mitigating circumstances, but this is a woman who made all her loved ones -- Red, Cooper, Ressler, Samar, Aram, any family members she had left (except Tom) -- believe she was dead so she could live with her daughter in a safe location!!!

The idea that Liz wouldn’t just drop everything and give up the Task Force indefinitely to heal and spend time with her daughter after losing 10 months of time with her is absurd, IMO.

But, no, revenge is far more important.

It’s also really annoying that after finding out Tom had betrayed her, she was able to give him a second chance and continued to love him despite all sorts of stuff in Seasons 2-5, but the minute Red does anything, she wants to drop him like heavy airline luggage.

So, in case you forgot: in S1, she found out that Tom had been lying to her, manipulating her, and abusing her. So, after shooting him in the S1 finale, she chains him up on a boat for several months in an effort to make him useful to the Task Force. However, the minute that she hits the “hates Red” part of her “love Red, hate Red, forgive Red” cycle, she runs right back to Tom and very quickly forgives him. And, while her positive feelings for Tom continue from late S2b until his death in 5x08, her feelings about Red are all over the place, as mentioned.

Now, in her defense, her feelings about him seem to waver whenever a crucial piece of information about his involvement in her life is discovered. When Tom’s fake passports were traced back to Red in 1x06, she blamed him and said she didn’t want to work with him anymore. But, then the very next episode, when he offers to leave the Task Force completely, she doesn’t tell him to do so.

And, when Red admitted to killing Sam toward the end of S1, she was again ready to let him leave. But then at the end of the episode, she stops him.

In S2, when Liz believes that Red was only interested in her for the Fulcrum, and never really cared about her, she gives him the cold shoulder. And then when he admits that he did hire Tom to be in her life, her coldness toward him again grows.

While they’re on the run together in S3, their relationship is at its best, arguably. Until she finds out she’s pregnant and he tells her that the fight is not over, and she doesn’t want her child to be in Red’s world. (Which is understandable)

And on and on it goes through S4 and S5 and now S6. The minute Liz realizes  that he stole her father’s identity, she’s ready to burn him to the ground. But then only a few episodes later, she’s teary-eyed and regretting that she turned him into the authorities.

AS OPPOSED TO RED’S ... 

But, what really makes this all so annoying is the fact that while Liz’s feelings toward Red are cyclical, his feelings for her are constant, enduring, and never wavering. I mean, he’s basically Garth Brooks’ “Shameless” in human form. He is completely devoted to her, would give his life for hers without hesitation, and has loved her (in some form or another) far longer and far deeper than she has seemingly ever loved him.

If both of them liked each other, or if both of them disliked each other initially but then grew closer over time, the show would be much better. For instance, ABC’s Castle -- while it definitely has its flaws -- started off with the two leads liking each other from the start. Yeah, maybe they’re trying to get used to each because he’s a goofball and she’s kind of a hard ass, but it seems like by the end of the pilot, they both generally like each other as acquaintances.

Or NBC’s “The Enemy Within” -- which is eerily similar to TBL and I’ll have to do a whole post on their similarities some other time -- which starts off with the two leads being tenuous with each other. He hates her, and she is kind of neutral toward him, but the two of them need to cooperate to accomplish a shared goal.

This was never the case with Liz and Red on TBL. In the pilot, Liz is very wary of Red, as she should be. However, he -- according to Zamani -- is obsessed with her, and it’s clear that he cares about her far more than he should. To our knowledge, Red has never met adult Liz. He’s seen her from afar and kept tabs on her, of course, but this was the first time he’d met her (presumably) since The Night of the Fire. And from that meeting, his love has only grown, while hers -- as discussed -- has been all over the place.

THE TWO ARE NOT EQUAL

As I’ve said in previous posts, while the show wants Red and Liz to be partners, they are really so unequal on multiple levels. The same could be said of the two leads on “The Enemy Within, but their inadequacies tend balance each other out. She has all the know-how, but he has the freedom and jurisdiction to do things, and he is the one who ultimately makes the decision on what his team should tackle and how. She has some of the power in their dynamic, and he has some as well. Thus, their advantages tend to cancel each other out.

This is not the case with Red and Liz. All this time, Red has withheld crucial pieces of information from her, which he gives to her in piecemeal and only when she demands them. I won’t judge whether that’s the right or wrong thing to do, but it puts her at a disadvantage as far as their dynamic goes. And while Liz should be given some advantage of her own, she really doesn’t have one. Red has an immunity agreement and gets to do pretty much whatever he wants, unlike on “The Enemy Within” where the male FBI agent has some say over what privileges the female CI has because she’s still in custody.

I guess the one advantage that Liz has over Red is that he’s told her he will never lie to her. And she has confronted him and asked him direct questions before because she knows he *has* to tell her to truth if she does. But, that doesn’t stop him from stalling, changing the subject, or trying to do a verbal workaround.

And then, when the show was promoting S6, they made it seem like the power was finally in Liz’s hands -- she knows he’s an impostor and he doesn’t know that she knows.

But, while the show tried to give Liz a bit of an edge over Red, it ultimately fizzled out. She knows he’s an impostor, but she no longer has an interest in pursuing it. Which goes back to my previous point about her not having conviction. She wanted to destroy Red, and betrayed him to ensure that he wouldn’t get in the way of her and Jennifer’s quest to find out his true identity. But then, she drops it.

Again, I realize there was a lot going on -- Jennifer was kidnapped; Red was almost executed. And while I think the fact that, right now, she’s fine with not having all the answers is a sign a maturity, it’s also incredibly frustrating to see how she went from 0 to 100 in such a short span of time.

Anyway... moving on to my next major point:

LIZ DOESN’T FEEL LIKE A REAL PERSON

Relative to the screentime she’s received, Liz does not feel like a real person, but merely a plot device or a vehicle for Red’s schemes and/or the Task Force’s missions.

Very rarely do we get to see her on her own, doing her own things, outside of Red/the Task Force -- going to the store, doing chores at home, hanging out with her kid, etc. The only times we do are when it’s relevant to the overall plot. Like when she gets beat up in the parking lot in 3x11 or when she brings that Lady Ambrosia kid over to her house, tries to cook him something, and then the fire alarm goes off.

She seems solely to exist within Red’s/the Task Force’s orbit.

I feel like the fact that Liz doesn’t have any friends or family outside of the Task Force, Red and Tom (when he was alive), really speaks to how she seems to exist more as a character, not as a person within a fictional universe.

She doesn’t seem to have any hobbies, and outside of her mentioning the Wizard of Oz and a few other things, she doesn’t really seem to have any interests in anything.

By comparison, we have lots of scenes with Red and Dembe, doing puzzles, playing cards and board games. We know Red enjoys art and food/alcohol and traveling, and he has a penchant for some types of drugs -- his favorite being sex.

And even Aram enjoys Doctor Who, biking and cooking.

I’m not saying that Liz needs to start chatting with Ressler about Monday Night Football or playing pool at some local dive bar, but something! Just a line about how she Skyped with Agnes last night, or her talking to Samar or Aram about her trying to decide whether she should download Tinder and try to get back into the dating scene, or a scene of her running around a park but she’s disturbed by memories from her past. Just something. Something to make her feel like a real person, who does things outside of the Task Force.

Again, I always hate the fact that Liz was supposed to have all these friends in S1 (the house party at the end of 1x03 and the vow renewal later in S1), and yet, they seemed to have vanished. I hate the fact that Liz doesn’t have any support system outside of Red and the Task Force. The girl needs friends! Hobbies! Interests! Something!!!

LIZ TRIES TOO HARD TO PROVE HERSELF, GETS IN TROUBLE, AND OFTEN NEEDS TO BE RESCUED BY RED AND/OR THE TASK FORCE AS A RESULT

This gets into a personal pet peeve of mine where Liz reassures people that she can do things. In the most recent case, she told her sister that she was definitely capable of deceiving Red and keeping him from finding out that she knows.

But then within the episode or two, Red definitely knows that Liz is up to something because she has been acting weird around him. And, before she begs Dembe not to tell Red that she was the one who betrayed him, Red was pretty certain that she was the one who did. I would suggest that the minute he was arrested, he had a good suspicion it was her. Hence why he said that what he would do to his betrayer would depend on who they were. He was hedging his bets, in case it was Liz.

Liz and Jennifer kept going back and forth on trying to convince the other that they could pull off this “Find Red’s true identity” side-plot, but ultimately, Jennifer got kidnapped, Liz killed a dude, and ended up having to recruit Ressler and Red to help her find Jennifer and confront the people who took her.

This type of situation happens A LOT on the show. Liz will try to do her own thing (finding Red’s true identity, etc.) and it ultimately gets her into trouble. It seemed to happen more often in S1-3. One example I can think of was when she didn’t kill Tom, but instead captured and imprisoned him, and then he killed the Harbormaster and forced Liz to face charges for murder. Red and the Task Force and even Tom had to come to her rescue to make sure she didn’t face the consequences of her choices. Yes, Tom did kill the Harbormaster, but Liz was the one who had decided to chain him up on the boat in the first place. The murder is on him, but the imprisoning is on her.

Liz also killed the Attorney General, and Red and the Task Force (and Tom, once again) were ultimately responsible for saving her from the Director’s plot while she was trapped in The Box, bringing the Cabal’s actions to light, using the Director as the scapegoat for Hitchen and then getting Liz out of the murder charges by bringing in Karakurt. And then, later, Red was responsible for leveraging the President into pardoning her so that she could become an agent again.

Now, there have been a few occasions where Liz was kidnapped simply because she was an FBI agent, not because of her connection to Red or anything else. For instance, in 1x04 “The Stewmaker,” she’s kidnapped and almost killed because she had her own personal history with that Lorca guy.

But, again, too many times Liz is put in the “damsel in distress” position where either she’s in trouble or her life is threatened and others have to be the ones to save her, either by saving her life or by saving her from legal repercussions, etc.

In a way, this whole S6a has been the consequence of Liz’s actions, which she regretted and then was looking for any and all help to make sure Red wasn’t executed after she’d turned him in. Yes, Red was the one who insisted on the death penalty, but he never would’ve been in that situation if she hadn’t betrayed him. And ultimately, it was Cooper who came through and pressured the President into staying Red’s execution.

Going back to the “Red and Liz aren’t equals” thing, very rarely is Red the one who needs saving. And, even when he is, it isn’t always Liz who’s rescuing him. Again, Cooper was the one who saved Red from execution. Liz has saved him a few times that I can recall -- she stopped that guy from shooting him in 2x14 and she leveraged the Director into calling off the hit in 2x19.

But, again, Liz seems to be in trouble far more often than Red is, and she very rarely is able to save herself (with the solo-Liz episode being one of the few times she does). Meanwhile, Red is able to get out of jams on his own much more often, such as when he escapes Anslo in 1x10. And, he and the Task Force save her far more often than Liz and the Task Force save him. And, even then, sometimes Red saves her single-handedly (like in the S2 Super Bowl episode) while she usually has to work with others to save him.

Once again, I realize there are a lot of mitigating circumstances. Red has a vast criminal empire and more knowledge and resources than Liz does, most of the time. But, I do wish that 1) Liz wouldn’t be kidnapped or have her life/livelihood threatened so often and 2) that Red’s would be a tiny bit more frequently, so that *she* can save *him.*

It also doesn’t help that she was sidelined in S3b partly because she was a felon who was no longer able to be an agent on the Task Force and because both Liz the character and Megan Boone the actress were pregnant. And then she was sidelined again in S4a because of the whole felon thing / trying to get Agnes back.

TL;DR

I believe the reasons why people hate Liz  are similar to why people hate Sakura from the “Naruto” Universe (as YouTube channel SwagKage describes in this video):

Liz doesn’t get the character development she should relative to her screentime; and any development she does get seems to be cyclical and inconsistent. (ie, she acts however the writers need her to for the given arc/episode)

Liz often tries to do her own thing, despite warnings not to; and while she’s by no means useless to Red or the Task Force, she often has to be rescued (either directly or indirectly) far more than she does the rescuing.

Liz often acts demanding, ungrateful, and selfish -- or at least relative to how the audience might want her to act, especially with regard to Red. And, jumping off the second point, also has a bit of an ego and can be proud and willful, which as I theorized, might be a turn-off for some male viewers.

Also, the Lizzington shipper in me could point out the parallels between Sakura liking Sasuke (who was a giant dick to her) and hating Naruto (who was constantly helping her out) and Liz’s dynamics with Tom and Red, respectively, but I’ll leave you all to watch the video for yourself.

Overall, I think some of the reasons for hating Liz are valid, but as I said, I *try* not to direct my annoyance toward the character of Liz herself or Megan Boone, the actress, but rather the writers, who I feel need to take responsibility for what they’ve done and continue to do with this character.

Don’t take this to say that I hate the writers, but rather that I want them to do better. I want to see this show succeed and I want to see Megan have some amazing material to work with the same way that James seems to with Red.

I’ll say it again: I don’t hate this show; I merely want to offer up my criticisms and objective-ish insights into why I think people hate Liz so much. In that way, we fans can have a discussion and perhaps maybe the writers will take some of our points to heart.

For my next major TBL post, I’ll try to tackle the similarities between TBL and The Enemy Within. :D

[vee-angel]

The Sodom Virus Chronicles (Introduction)

Hey, everyone! It’s been a while since I’ve posted anything but I’ve felt extra motivated to write lately, so hopefully I’ll be putting out content more often. This is part of a project I’ve had in mind for quite a while. This introduction is part of the basic premise of a series of stories that will have an exciting amount of possibilities. And don’t worry, I’m still definitely going to be continuing work on the Pervert Pentet series (after all, you’ve only met Piper and Nancy so far; there’s still Teira, Sherry, and Bailee). So enjoy this introduction to the world of The Sodom Virus Chronicles! And remember, this is all just for fun and fantasy.

***

In the late 1970’s a strange new ailment appeared in the world.

The illness only seemed to affect females, and its effects were devastating; at first it presented with diminished motor control and cognitive function, a loss of hair, nails, teeth; eventually leading to death a few months later. By the early 1980’s the illness had spread so widely as to become an epidemic, with several countries declaring a state of emergency. Scientists scrambled to figure out the cause in the hope that they could come up with a vaccine, a treatment, hopefully even a cure. Eventually statistical information revealed a surprising fact: Women who stayed chaste deteriorated far faster than those with a male partner. More surprising still, the most promiscuous women deteriorated slowest of all.

A series of experiments were carried out, each with progressively better results. The result that finally showed a complete stop to the progression of the illness was the group engaging in unprotected anal sex at least four times each day. It was eventually hypothesized that the so called “Sodom Virus” was a form of genetic deterioration that, for reasons unknown, was neutralized by the presence of a Y chromosome. Doctors believed that the incomplete genetic material in male sperm was most easily broken down into usable material when administered to the female body This would be consistent with the experimental results; anal absorption was more efficient than vaginal, and much of the material was destroyed by stomach acids when swallowed. Therefore, while anal application was most efficient (with four average sized ejaculations per day being sufficient to stop the progression of the virus), similar effects could be achieved through higher amounts of sperm being administered to the vagina (seven times per day) or mouth (ten times per day).

When the news broke across the world, it was met with mixed reactions. Some were skeptical, claiming it was some misogynistic hoax, others hoped that it could be adapted with some kind of synthetic replacement, even though doctors said that was unlikely to become reality anytime in the near future. Men around the world stepped up, though. Nearly every hospital or medical office adapted large sections to be able to collect and administer sperm. Females who weren’t able to have sex due to age, communicable disease, or other factors were given priority. Women who were healthy and attractive were turned away from such facilities, sometimes harshly. After all, the supply was limited, and no one was willing to let the most vulnerable of the population suffer a slow and unpleasant death because some college lesbian thought “men are gross” or “anal is uncomfortable.” For the first time in history, young women were shamed for chastity.

Practically overnight, pornographers became captains of industry. What was once seen as a shameful luxury became a necessity, as humanity’s survival became dependent upon the near perpetual arousal of men. Donating sperm and fucking women became a civic duty. While it would take time for laws to be amended, nearly the entire world decided to no longer to prosecute rape or sexual assault except in the most extreme of cases.

The cosmetic surgery industry boomed as well, as did gym membership, beauty treatments, cosmetics, and nearly anything that could help make women more attractive. It was an uncomfortable conversation for most of the world to have, but it was a sad truth that a woman’s life expectancy was now correlated to how sexually attractive she was.

A few years after the cure was found, the world had stabilized, knowing they had managed to narrowly avoid species-wide extinction, yet the world was still frantic to adapt to this new society. Supplies of semen were slowly increasing, as drugs to improve sperm production and decrease refractory period became more commonplace, but it still wasn’t enough. Most civilized societies decided to prioritize their young, concentrating the treatment into a daily injection given to all underage girls until they come of age. After that, their health and life would depend on their ability to attract men willing to fuck them.

By the early part of the twenty-first century, the world looked very different than anyone would have imagined. It had been a few generations since the Sodom Virus emerged, and the effect on the demographics of the world was substantial. Even in such a short time, unattractive or prudish women had practically become extinct, and the men with the highest sex drives passed on that trait to the next generation.

The ubiquitousness of pornography resulted in progressively greater extremes, with the average woman expected to be the personal porn-star of whatever man happened to be using her. The now outrageously influential porn-company CEO’s could practically write their own legislation, often making laws that seemed more to serve their own amusement rather than any practical function. While many female politicians had tried to stand firm against society’s hard turn toward misogyny, it had been difficult to take them seriously when they had to beg someone to fuck them in the ass every few hours.

While the vast majority of women under forty were now safe from the degenerative effects of the Sodom Virus, they were still competitive. Partially due to a combination of a genetic predisposition to hyper-sexuality, cultural conditioning, and a general fear of not getting enough sperm to ensure the Virus stayed dormant.

In the most powerful country in the world, feminism was outlawed. Even the barest hint of a belief in women’s equality was punishable by a fate many considered worse than death. Throughout most towns and cities were Repositories where feminists were stored; in truth they were often little more than an outdoor metal post where a small cluster of feminists were chained until such a time that someone borrowed them for some purpose considered beneath even a woman. In a mockery of the their desire for independence, they were unable to be owned. As a result, they lost the only thing that put restrictions on their use. While all women were generally open for sex, heavier use and permanent modifications were at the discretion of their owners. But without owners, feminists were open to any use by anyone of any sex or status. They were often rented out free to perform hard or dangerous labor. Cosmetic surgeons and some of the more extreme sadists practiced and experimented on them to determine if their techniques were survivable and resulted in the desired effect. Some female athletes even used feminists like punching dummies to train for the increasingly popular All-Female sport of competitive rape.

Body modification, plastic surgery, and beauty treatments had become far more commonplace; and given that attractiveness was a necessity to women’s health, government subsidies made it universally affordable. Even girls who grew up in families living below the poverty line were easily able to get beach-ball sized breast implants and regular anal bleaching. In fact, some states even imposed mandatory minimum breast sizes, fearing that some errant flat-chested feminist may attempt to pose as a man as part of some deviant scheme.

The women who thrived in this society were the ones who considered themselves lucky to live in such a world. They read about the dark ages of feminism and prudishness as a backwards time of female oppression. They were finally free from the horrendous burdens of yesteryear; expectations of chastity, dignity, autonomy. Mainstream society agreed that such things were a regrettable mistake to force on women, a relic from a less progressive society. Women needed attention, affection, direction. The modern female couldn’t imagine the evils of a society in which she wasn’t perpetually exposed and stared at, touched, or told what to do. It was generally agreed upon that the Sodom Virus was a miracle of nature that came about to correct an unnatural error of mankind.

Women’s self-expression became unrestricted as well. Now that comfort was secondary to sex-appeal, women of all kinds were able to express who they were on the inside. Fashion became more daring, appealing to the extremes of every male sex-fantasy. Bimbos, punk-sluts, cow-girls, sporty dykes, and a rainbow of other looks and styles became commonplace. On an average day, one could walk down the street and expect to see anything from tattoo-clad goth girls in lolita style french maid outfits to busty Southern belle’s in sun-dresses that weren’t quite long enough to cover their cunt. And of course there were the women who had put so much work into their bodies that they saw no point in hiding any part of it from view with clothing.

The world of entertainment changed as well. While the privacy of female celebrities had never really been respected, the public now felt a sense of entitlement to see their most private or shameful acts. Not only were pictures and videos of every part of famous women’s bodies available at the cost of a few swipes of a touchpad, but they perpetually ran the risk of public outrage if any desirable content wasn’t available. If a female was part of a famous family, for example, it could be seen as an offense to her fans if she didn’t make videos of her 69ing with her sister, licking her mother’s asshole, or pissing in her own mouth. Younger celebrities often had to make frequent apologies for such failings, and hope that it would be understood that the busy job of constantly accommodating the sexual generosity of her fans might cause delays in filming or releasing such videos.

While the number of female politicians dropped swiftly after the rise of the Sodom Virus, there had recently been a resurgence of women in positions of political influence. Many were aging porn-stars, who were looked up to as progressive icons who had led the fight against the perversions of female dignity and modesty even before the Virus. Others were younger girls with even more forward-thinking viewpoints. They believed that the older politicians had become complacent in fighting against the evils of feminism.

All in all, the world had changed drastically from anything it had ever been before.