#token feminism

[strawberrycakelove]

Honestly, and this is a very unpopular opinion, even though I'm a woman and I'm sympathetic to feminism (I'm not going to say feminist because I'm not an active activist, I'm not politically active or anything like that), I think it's silly to want EVERY FEMALE character to be involved with the main cast HAS TO GAIN RELEVANCE AND BE SIGNIFICANT, it NEEDS to be EXPLORED AND DEVELOPED.

Because feminism, female empowerment and so on, being less macho and sexist etc, because everything is always aimed at men, only they get the best etc….

But honestly, I PREFER (this is a personal preference) to look for a work where the author REALLY was inspired to create a character who feels like this, who corresponds to this model, where he REALLY WANTED to create a character from this perspective than to expect that an author unwilling and WITHOUT WILL AND INSPIRATION does so.

And I speak because of entertainment, and only because of that. (And because I am not obliged to consume something with taste of political and social activism, because yes, there is a difference, and it is terribly noticeable)

Ah!, but male characters are not exempt from this and so on and so on, they are also constructed by cultural models and values ​​etc. and so on… (and all these arguments that EVERYONE KNOWS)

I know this very well, but what's the problem with me wanting an empowered female character who doesn't have TASTE of political and social activism? just like the male characters (macho and sexist, very stereotyped) are? What's wrong with me wanting a character who at least feels more natural and relatable? more authentic? Instead of her looking like a walking feminist primer?

I watch entertainment to embark on a fantasy world! It's to escape the real world! Not to remind me that the world is a mess and that is a product! I know that this is a product at the end of the day. But I don't want to consume entertainment whose product tastes like a product, I don't watch entertainment because of the design of its plastic packaging, I'm there for the content!

I don't want an empowered female character perfectly aligned with the ideals of empowerment and so "aligned and perfect" that it becomes caricatured and ridiculously artificial and inhuman (it's better to create a robot character right away that looks like it came with a program feminist training built into your system).

At worst, this is the most atrocious way to dehumanize feminism in entertainment and ridicule it.

Here is totally my personal opinion! I think that female empowerment loses a lot when an author, WHO HAS NO WILL, is forced to create a female character along these lines just to meet a demand, because unfortunately, this character will end up sounding, having that tone, CREATED ON DEMAND .

And there is nothing more discouraging than consuming media with a bland, poorly made, uninspired, dull "empowered female character", because it is terribly explicit that he is only there to meet a demand.

Between that and looking for authors who really write good and truly inspired female characters, I prefer the second, rather than wanting and hoping that work X, Y or Z fits my demand, because if the author doesn't have that profile, it will be a poor adaptation.

And this is to expect that authors of works, already consecrated and established, that we can adore but do not cover these aspects, that adapt (sometimes clearly against their will, as the poor and lazy result makes it obvious), would do this, that and that other to adapt, I think (and this is just my opinion) that this takes away the opportunity for other authors to stand out and shine, as it makes the range of options restricted and without space for new authors, new styles, forms of concepts etc., because the only ones, in one way or another, who continue to be "allowed" to shine, are those who have already established themselves and remove potential spaces, and at the same time I think it leaves them in a very comfortable position to deliver adaptations bad and poorly made of these demands.

And that to me is the same as holding on to the plastic packaging, the "brand", the label, and forgetting about the contents.

It's literally judging a book by its cover.

Because it won't matter how bad the result is, because nobody wants to know about authors other than them, nobody wants to look elsewhere, for others who can do it better and more interesting with quality entertainment, in a more authentic way, and they, " "They are allowed" to do bad things, because some fans never get tired of begging for crumbs.

And there is no reason to serve a banquet, for those looking for crumbs.

That's why I'd rather look for my banquet than beg for crumbs.

This is my personal opinion only.

[spiderfreedom]

Not a female separatist but I'm forever grateful to them for introducing the idea of just centring women in our lives. Focusing on women artists, scientists, writers, showrunners, businessowners... and where we don't see women in those positions, asking why, and what can we do to help. Focusing on female friends and female family. Building relations and community among women to help women. Spending your $$ money $$ on women. You don't need to be a full separatist to incorporate this into your life, and imagine what women could accomplish if we just decided to focus on uplifting women as a class.

[whats-in-a-sentence]

The famous anti-slavery token made by the Wedgewood pottery in 1787 entitled 'Am I not a Man and a Brother?' was popular among abolitionists in England. But it would be 1838 before a coin was struck for enslaved women's rights – 'Am I not a Woman and a Sister?' – and then it was made for the American Anti-Slavery Society and popular in America.

English elite women did not feel a sisterhood with women of a lower class or another race. Elite women called for political rights for their own class, not for anyone else. They even used the example of slavery to support their campaign – comparing their inequality to slavery.

"Normal Women: 900 Years of Making History" - Philippa Gregory

[padawan-historian]

When Auntie Zora said "not all my skinfolks are kinfolks," this is your reminder that some skinfolks would rather be pokemon tokens and extraordinary negroes than abandon their neoliberal privileges that destroy our people and planet. Also being LGBTQ+ doesn't equate to being antiracist (which this neoliberal flamingo clearly isn't).

Also, all those people continuing to go into the venue rather than standing in solidarity with these profiled MENA women and saying that they won't attend unless they are rightfully allowed to enter (if the Biden-Harris team is so concerned about bad press from kicking out folks calling for a ceasefire and end to genocide . . . then why not . . . y'know . . . call for a ceasefire?)

-----

🇵🇸 @thisiskayem This occurred on Saturday's "Get The Vote Out" event in Las Vegas for @kamalaharris @vp.

The two visibly Muslim women RSVP'd for the event, were given wristbands upon checking in, and were standing in line when the Harris campaign officials denied them entry.

They provided screenshots of the the invite, photos wearing the wristbands, and an email of arrival instructions on Twitter.

The masks are coming all the way off.

[helgliti]

(via "The Great Man drinks alcohol" Cap by Selling for the best ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐)

[haggishlyhagging]

Another side effect of feminine complicity is, of course, feminine antifeminism. This, unlike masculine antifeminism, rarely takes the form of physical violence. The part of the antifeminist woman that identifies with the power structure looks upon a woman who threatens that structure as a threat to herself. She expresses disapproval and hostility. This divisiveness among women is an extension of the duality existing within the female self. It lashes out at unexpected moments and from unexpected sources. Often it happens that the woman who has achieved outstanding success in a "masculine" field openly discourages other women from following her example. Having accepted her role as token in the higher echelons of the professional establishment, she adopts the attitudes of her male colleagues toward women who would aspire to follow the same road. Her words of discouragement and her lack of supportive sisterhood confuse and present a kind of "double bind" situation to women who look to her for encouragement. On the one hand, they see in her the authentic self—acting, speaking, creating. On the other hand, they see that this self is acting, speaking, and creating on behalf of "the system" and in opposition to their own aspirations. Only a minority of women are able to see that such behavior is self-contradictory and that the successful token who behaves in this way is acting as patriarchy's puppet, giving out the message she has been programmed to give out: "Listen, even I, your would-be self, say you shouldn't try." Perhaps it isn't too surprising that most women follow the line of least resistance and listen to the words rather than the actions of such successful women, whose achievement is thus prostituted. Just as overcoming the paralysis of the divided self begins with perception carried out into concrete action, so triumph over feminine antifeminism will begin through conscious efforts at "bonding" supportively with other women and affirming collectively as well as individually the will to liberation. Ultimately only women can eradicate the psychological violence done by and through women to members of our own sex, by giving support and by making each other conscious of what is in large measure an unconscious duplicity.

-Mary Daly, Beyond God the Father: Toward a Philosophy of Women’s Liberation

[vitrines]

i have such severe beef with the "all these male characters are women actually so it's #feminism and yuri" crowd because like. why are you making them women. what is it about these characters that makes you see them as women, as opposed to actual female characters. do you headcanon female characters as trans men? do you headcanon female characters as trans women? are you headcanoning these male characters as trans women, or are you just she/her-ing them?

if you have to make jokes about how male-centric your series is and you spend more time doing that than you do thinking critically about why that is, keep the word yuri out of your mouth. keep the term "final girl" out of your mouth. go find some female characters. go find some transfem characters. i promise you the representation is out there. there are a million webcomics and novels.

[033h]

being rly real but I have never felt like femininity was sacred or magical to me, the only part that ever resonated with me was the feminization of the pursuit of beauty and ability to use beauty as social leverage as a woman. and honestly that just felt like making the best of the hand I was dealt

[favoredbyvenus]

🩷Hi, lovely to meet you🩷✨In search of mutuals✨

About me:

24

She/her

Cat mom 🐈🐈‍⬛

Queer 🏳️‍🌈

Hobbies & interests:

Art/Crafts 🎨

Anime 👾

Traveling ✈️

House plants 🪴

Gardening 🌱

Photography📷

Reading📖

Astrology♊️

Poetry🥀

Music🎶

Media—Movies&TV 🎥

Makeup💄

Fashion 💃🏼

Specific and niche interests in the tags🫶🏻

✨ If you are into any of these things follow me so I can follow you back! I want to share our creations and inspire one another ✨

[perpetuallyyearning]

I'm just gonna drop this off here. Enjoy :3

OH I AM MOST DEFINITELY ENJOYING THIS OFFERING THANK YOU MY LOVE

🎥: fallforii | x

O2 Arena || 12/03/2024

And gifs for uhhh... Science purposes 👀

[boysenberrymelody]

[half-milk-equation]

why do i have to hear about the mandatory hiring protocols and workforce diversity? i am the workplace diversity

[mk-wizard]

I am happy to see that more and more actors are speaking out against tokenism and bad quality. I'm all for Blade having a badass heiress, but not like this. I want her to honour her father and recognize that he was great. Not treat him like a piece of technology or fashion trend that just casually gets replaced and forgotten. That’s not feminism. That’s disrespectful and cruel.

[needle-thread-thimble-spear]

I think that comparing the TERF and TMRA movements on this website often misses something important. While these two ideologies are both centered in reactionary transmisogyny, the underlying goal is quite different. Trans exclusive radical feminism is an ideology of extermination, ultimately, or failing that elimination. When TERFs take control of some institution or community, their express goal is always to cast the transfeminine out (be that through "official" means such as firing someone under false pretenses or unofficial means such as harassing someone until they leave). In contrast, TMR activists as a rule seem quite interested in having transfems around. Trans Mens Rights Activism, while it may appear to be just a reactionary discomfort with the idea of possibly having power over someone else, is very much centered on exploiting transfems.

It is not so very unusual, I think, to experience some discomfort when you realize that other people may be afraid or uncomfortable around you because you have some social power over them. Most people do not like to think of themselves as exploiters, taskmasters, or bigots. Its easy to slip into a defensive stance when a trans woman says something like "i dont feel safe around men" or even "i dont feel safe around trans men". But once one gets over that initial defensiveness, and looks at the other persons position, why she might feel that way, usually one can get over that reaction. However, if one stands to gain from the exploitation of trans women, its not nearly so easy! If your transfem friend is always the one to clean up after hanging out, if you're using your trans girlfriend for sex and validation without any concern for her, if you are so extremely enamored with the transgressive potential of transfemininity that you feel compelled to keep a trophy or two around as tokens, all of a sudden you are confronted not just with the idea you might have power, but that you might want power. And very few people conciously want to be a chaser or a tokenizer or an abuser!* So it must be that the transfem made a mistake and you should explain to her why that is. Maybe you should remind her that trans men and trans women should be having crazy t4t sex actually (nevermind if shes a lesbian, or that this is corrective sexual harrasment). Perhaps she is delusional and these problems are entirely in her hysterical head, or maybe she is in fact a bigot, and so can be safely ignored/harassed/discarded. The stubborn transfem who wont back down remains disposable, and is at risk of being run out of town- but this is just a means to an end. The true goal is to keep the other transfems in line. Submissive, but not so much she loses that transgressive edge. Obediant, but not cloying. Not too clocky but she shouldnt be trying too hard to pass either. Follows each and every order but in a way that makes you completely unaware that you are, in fact, giving her orders. Or maybe she isn't even there, but the idea she could be is very important. Patriarchy, reproduced in the places it supposedly cannot exist.

These movements bleed into one another sometimes but i think this distinction is important because the way it impacts transfem people is distinct. It should also be noted that this process of exploitation (just like the process of elimination) does not in any way require some Official Ideological Movement. These are just natural courses for transmisogyny to take based on whether one can stomach their own discomforts with us.

*This pattern reproduces itself along other axes of oppression- what's outlined here may be particular to tranmisogyny, but similar patterns certainly occur with racism and ableism to name a few.

[everything-is-crab]

I have watched the video and read about the later interview with CNN and not once did she say that "well I was the only woman in the park" ever. During the incident, however, she did say was being attacked by a man and her life was in danger to the police. But she would have never been taken seriously if she had never added that he was an African American man. Without the term "African American" the police wouldn't gaf. Cops literally shoot kids and poc while they're doing the most basic daily activities in their lives but will refuse to take a stalker seriously because "he hasn't done anything yet".

Might as well bring up a case of false accusers to portray your anti-feminist point. There are few women who exploit feminist talking points for their individual benefit (regardless of whether it was racist or bigoted in any way).

There are people who will always exploit the points of a civil rights movement for their individual benefit or other motive.

Conservatives use the "protect women and/or kids" rhetoric a lot for their own propaganda don't they? Does that mean that they actually care about women and kids or does that mean now talking about protecting women and/or kids should now be considered a taboo because people manipulate things all the time?

Amazing how you threw white "cis" women under the bus (as if white trans women could never perpetrate racism the same way). What about women of color? Especially queer women of color? Are their words going to lead to the death of men of color or trans people too? Is me saying "kill all men" as an Indian girl going to kill a man living in the USA? Okay.

It's really funny how this shit is always directed at women btw (but add the words of "white" and "cis" to dismiss it), but never about men.

There are no discussions on here about how white gay men exploit the bodies of woc in the global south under the disguise of "gay rights".

There are no discussions on here about how black men are against black women getting into interracial relationships or they are "betraying their race".

And whenever people talk about white people feigning fear to threaten black or Latino people it is always always the "white woman and black man" example.

There are multiple incidences you can find online where white men are doing the same shit with black men or even black women. Yk what's the difference I saw in the reaction of both cases from white leftists? They sympathized with the black men whereas the black women "deserved" it because she was being "aggressive" (not misogynoir at all).

And idk how to tell you but a woman saying or getting away after saying "kill all men" does not happen irl. Ever. Do you think a society that hates outspoken and confident women in general will tolerate that sentence from them? Lmaooo

This is an online phenomenon where women say this after they see a man (who is WHITE most of the time) being misogynistic.

They say that because whether you like hearing it or not a minority of men are actually respectful towards women. Yes women are allowed to express anger about this situation the way they want. Even if you don't approve of it her words aren't leading to fucking violence irl.

sorry im listening to a recording of that woman who threatened to call the cops on a black man because he told her to put her dog on a leash. and she literally said "well I was a woman alone in a park" as her excuse for verbally out loud on camera telling him that she would call the cops and tell them a black man was threatening her life. this is what i mean when i say fear isn't apolitical or neutral white & cis women actively use their fear, whether its put-on or genuine, to kill men of color and trans people. "its okay to say kill all men because im a woman im just coping with my trauma!" cool could you find a way to cope that doesn't lead to murder because a white cis woman felt like her life was in danger because a black/trans person existed near her.

[madphantom]

Huge fan of the token cishet guy in my friend group because he's a literal walking neon green flag, we had a situation where a creepy guy tried to get into the group and he

sat between the fem presenting people and the creep even though he himself was uncomfortable, but decided that his discomfort as a cis man is not as intense as ours as female read persons

was included in our strategy discussion on the situation and brought up himself that his best friend in the group was agreeing with too many of the creep's talking points

pulled his best friend aside and told him that he was hitting a sore spot in the conversation and it was making some girls uncomfortable

told us afterwards that he finds it completely unacceptable that we have to strategically plan a fun evening with friends. Immediately offered to take matters into his own hands if we wanted him to.

at some point during the discussion the next day he was so disturbed that he had to step aside and take a couple deep breaths, and by doing so he walked into the camera frame of the movie we were shooting and ruined a take. It was hilarious

texted the creep and told him that his behaviour is unacceptable and he has to leave. Discussed all his talking points with us thoroughly, then kicked the creep out of the group chat.

sent the text to another girl we know who's been trying to get the creep kicked out from her organisation for five years because he won't stop being touchy and trying to date below twenty year olds.

when I mentioned that I kind of feel guilty and like I overreacted he sent a long text that started with "discomfort is real. fear is real." and only got better and more supportive from there.

afterwards he went with us to a film screening showing a documentary about intersectional feminism and wrote into the group chat that the film offered a really interesting POV and he learned a lot from it

he's most likely coming with us to the feminist battle day protest on Friday even though he's nervous about going to protests

In conclusion: Neon fucking green flag, folks.