#rightwing misogyny | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

theradicalbuzzardofdiscourse · 2 years

Text

#misogyny #radfem #radical feminism #john gibbs #rightwing misogyny #rightwing bullshit #radfem safe #radfems please touch #republican bullshit #my post #original post #theradicalbuzzardofdiscourse #radfems do interact #kami yami #terfs do interact #terfs can interact #terfs please interact #terfs pls touch

116 notes · View notes

webntrmpt · 3 days

Text

#scotus #republican pandemonium #women’s rights #women’s health #rightwing misogyny

0 notes

wakewithgiggli · 2 years

Text

Have you seen this image?

That's pretty obviously racist. The only people this image could possibly appeal to are racists, because the answer everyone should have to the original question is, "Sure, I'll eat them. More! more!"

The person who created this meme is making their racism incredibly obvious.

The Original Analogy

What you might not know is this is a hijacking of a very sensible feminist analogy, which is often stated like this:

These images are very, very different. That second image is a simple description of the way things are if you're a woman. It's a response to the phrase, "Not All Men" and is pointing out how weak that statement is when almost every single woman you know has experienced unwanted sexual advances.

It's kind of like the No Good Cops analogy. It's exactly like that, in fact.

It's pointing out that you don't need "All Men" to be abusers - you only need a tiny proportion, but women cannot tell just from looking which are the decent men and which are the abusers. So they have to be vigilant all the time, and the phrase "Not All Men" is completely useless.

Imagine a roomful of people. Most of them are decent. A tiny handful are abusers and want to rape you. You are approached by someone in that room. Do you automatically trust them?

That is what this analogy is pointing out.

The Corruption

The above meme was popularised in response to Elliot Rogers, and the men's rights activists defending him.

The meme was posted - with mockery and contempt - to r/TumblrInAction, a gross, rightwing reddit sub that has been devoted for years to reactionary politics, and in particular misogyny and anti-LGBT activism.

Soon after, the Syrian Refugee version of the meme appeared and gained traction. Now if you google "Feminist Bowl of M&Ms", you'll find more racist links than feminist ones, and the occasional one where the mask slips:

It shouldn't be too hard to see that this is a right-wing propaganda effort to delegitimize feminism (and the left, in general). It's pretty blatant antifeminism, and the people who fall for it should really know better.

Then again, they are probably exactly the kind of people who say "Not All Men" and claim that gamergate was about ethics in game journalism.

#laughable hatemail #not all men #misogyny #propaganda #rightwing appropriation #gamergate

23 notes · View notes

nando161mando · 9 months

Text

"NEW from my team @mmfa: Inside the "tradwife" battle roiling right-wing media

Conservative influencers are fighting over the question: Exactly how misogynistic should they be?"

1 note · View note

thatheathen · 2 years

Video

sources: 1, 2

1 note · View note

detransraichu · 25 days

Text

so... let's talk about how to talk with trans people. i've noticed that when i say afab rights instead of female rights, trans people and trans activists think harder on it, and we have genuine conversations. transandrophobia as a term was mocked to hell and back from people who think transfems are wayyy more oppressed than afab folks, transmascs and bio women, will ever be. but it's still growing in popularity! that's transmasc ppl wanting recognition for their afab oppression! that's afab people (aka what you'd call female ppl) finally putting their foot down when faced with transfems' afabmisogyny! i think transmasc folks are getting closer to being open-minded about cis/bio women not being more privileged than transfems, and radfeminism as a whole (many transmascs are joining radblr!). but when we say female or male instead of afab/amab they immediately shut down. it's an instant trigger. it closes the conversation right down, you are labelled not just ignorant but a violence-inducing bigot. you aren't even worth a conversation, like someone calling someone else the r slur or using rightwing rhetoric. you're given up on. and that's NOT how we want radfem activism to go!!

we want to have serious, complex discussions with other afab people. we want to build afab solidarity. it would help SOOOO many people. and it already is making amab folks, transfems included, desperately panicked, and often angry. which is hilarious lmao. they know it would ruin their spot at the top of the oppression pyramid that they got so comfy in, it would hold them accountable too. we need to eradicate the belief in leftist spaces that bio women are less oppressed than trans women. we need to actively connect with transmasc ppl who need their voices heard and boost their stories with misogyny and misogynistic encounters with transfems. and if we are to actually make that happen we NEED to do this with terms that feel respectful to them, even if it makes you cringe, even if you don't believe in gender stuff and think pronouns that aren't sex-based are stupid bullshit and that all trans people are delusional etc etc. activism-wise that means nothing. you're just making them upset, you're not helping anybody. to be a real activist you need to not just make some noise, but also build bridges with the other side in a neutral language so that the war between bio women and trans ppl finally fucking ends so we can confront misogyny in trans spaces and then FINALLY focus on fighting rightwing bio men, the men who hold the most patriarchal power, not gnc folks or "terfy" bio women. THAT is how we will truly change things. it'll be annoying as hell for sure. but buckle up buttercup or go back to venting about ugly TIMs. i'm a live laugh love kinda girl and peace is my poison of choice <3

#lay text #radfem #radblr

72 notes · View notes

redditreceipts · 5 months

Note

The trans movement at large doesn't give a single damn about TiF bodily (even transitional) or reproductive autonomy and no one's fucking saying it but it's true.

Rape is "just getting laid" and sometimes "hole is owed" for career maneuvers and for "having societal power over trans women." Nonconsensual and unaware detransitioning of TiFs during bdsm isn't considered rape or transphobia or misogyny and can't be discussed even when no information about the perpetrator is given at all beyond their action because it's supposedly "transmisogynistic" to even say that it happened (way to tell on yourselves, TiMs and transmisogynistic TiF white knights) and it's supposedly "transmisogynistic" to share cautious and preventative measures against being hormonally detransitioned without consent or awareness for "safer" bdsm.

Prostitution is great ✨ except when it's to "use" a cis man (mutualistically) for networking purposes.

I'm processing all of the shit they put me through and all of the exact opposite of support that the trans community has for survivors, transmen included, transandrophobia bloggers and baeddels and irl trans community are all the same, and feel like I'm bleeding out on the inside but no I have to go work an over ten hour shift for pennies.

I hate them. I hate them so much. Left libertarian and liberal "queers" are the same as the rightwing religious fanatics regarding females, only virtue signaling.

hey :)

first of all, sorry for the late answer, I am trying to give a thought-out answer to an ask and sometimes, that takes a bit

and secondly yes, they don't care about bodily autonomy in the sense that they don't care about addressing the root of the issue. Most genderists do say verbally that they support the right to an abortion, but the issue won't be resolved unless it it understood that the female body is seen as a factory for new workers and soldiers in a patriarchal capitalist state. Women, the only ones who have control over this process, actually have an immense leverage if given control over their own bodies because they are inseperable from the means of production and have to be convinced and consenting to give pleasure to a male or new workers to a capitalist. That's why female bodily autonomy is incredibly threatening for a capitalist and patriarchal state, and that is also the reason for taking away that very right, be it by making it extremely expensive or outlawing it completely.

But gender identity believers can't admit that the subjugation of the woman is because of her body, because that would invalidate trans identity.

Politics are about our bodies. Work is performed by our bodies, and we can't identify into or out of a female body just as a worker can't identify into a capitalist* or a Black person can identify into a white person.

But genderists will never solve this issue, because they are allergic to material reality and because of that, every talk about "bodily autonomy for women" is just some sad echo from the days when feminism was interested in women's liberation.

It's actually good that you're angry, and you have every right to be! I don't know your personal history, but being angry can be a reason to change the world for good :)

*Yes, a worker can become a capitalist because the mechanics of capitalist vs. worker are different from the mechanics of woman vs. man, but my point is that identity alone is not a relevant factor in material reality.

18 notes · View notes

littleeyesofpallas · 3 months

Text

Truly wild how there is just this bizarre digital underground of rightwing shit post porn bots that exist in this very specific overlap of straightup misogyny, weird "betamale" manosphere theory horseshit, toxic closeted homosexuality, and forcedfem ""sissy"" fetish, hypnotism fetishism???, plain old-fashioned bimbo fetish, but also explicit conservative transphobia, and sometimes even dip into racewar accelerationist cuckhold gibberish.

Like who or what are these things for?

They proliferate in numbers, both of blogs and posts, that are suggestive of bots. They do the EXACT same incoherent rightwing bait in comment sections that normal porn bots do. But unlike the usual porn bots they spam "original" content, even if that content consists of exclusively stolen porn from other sources overlaid with what honest could be totally randomized fetish text.

Is it supposed to be some idiot's idea of a false flag operation? Just trying to make queer people a kinksters look bad via sockpuppeting these strawmen accounts? Because it genuinely feels like the kind of incoherent parody of the right's favorite ""degenerate"" fetishes and kinks that you'd expect from a smear campaign, but then why continue to actively push the obvious rightwing talking points?

Like it feels so broadly, obviously, and thoroughly Fake but in a sensory overload kind of way where it all just washes out into white noise and I can't tell wtf I'm looking at. An obvious lie is one thing, but even that lie serves a purpose. This is just feels patentedly Fake but to no functional end.

4 notes · View notes

wehavecomeforyourprivateschools · 1 year

Text

“It is possibly something that will mark the beginning of the end of the monarchy, and that is what we should discuss. It is important, given the lack of trust in the state at the moment and an upsurge in rightwing politics. Members of the royal family have become our proxies for anger about racism, misogyny and wealth. This is, after all, an institution that stands for inequality, so there are huge things at stake.”

Not so much proxies but legit targets. Our royals are the great survivors. A lot of European monarchies bit the dust around the late 19th century / early 20th, but ours survived with a lot of power intact (head of church, army, state).

If these decadent oppressive shitblokes were to be turfed out in the 2020s - a decade of rampant inequality, suffering, unfairness and climate disaster - then it should come as no surprise even to the most right wing royal "expert" whose head is firmly up the arse of these royal parasites

But also at the same time as the royals are under massive pressure, there's a line of thought in the media that we should be run by monarchy not a state. They talk about the consistency, reliability etc during wild unpredictable times. I've seen liberals go down this route too when the working class vote for the "wrong one."

It could go either way. Or they could just go back under the radar and continue in their decadence and subtle power as they have done for decades.

27 notes · View notes

awesomesweett · 2 months

Text

I hate this dark romance shit

I hate strangling kinks

I hate religious misogyny

I hate traditional gender role BS

I hate nasty useless beauty products that they keep inventing for imaginary problems

I hate how FB recommends dumb ass rightwing pages

I hate how men try to shame Taylor swift and other women for being unmarried and child free

I hate that some girls think it's cute to be dumb

I hate how people make jokes how they want a lobotomy

I hate how feminism is blamed for anything bad

I hate anti feminism so much

-

#feminism

2 notes · View notes

mack-anthology-mp3 · 7 months

Note

Dress could be interpreted to be about feeling the pressure to be a stereotypically girly girl and trying to navigate social situations where it's expected you have a boyfriend

sorry but this is not "Gender nonconforming behaviour" this is female behaviour. literally 100% of female children experience this, because this is a cornerstone of misogyny - enforcing male-invented social stereotypes of how a girl should behave (aka "femininity"). please read some feminist theory instead of saying basic female experiences are queer gender experiences! this is why we have a million white afab they/thems who think not liking pink and having a personality means they aren't really a girl and that the evil cis dykes are oppressing them by saying gender is a rightwing social construct that no one actually has.

warning for transphobia towards non binary people, please keep scrolling and don't read the ask if this will upset you

nice to know i found a terf! please kindly unfollow me now if you haven't already thanks :)

i'm pretty sure i say at least twice in that post that what PJ is singing about is totally normal experience for cishet girls, and that there are lots of cishet readings of her music that make sense, just that i personally find them interesting to view through a queer lens.

yes, i'm sure a lot of cishet girls also experience discomfort with having to wear a dress and find a boyfriend! i never said they didn't! but to an audience that is sapphic *and* is gender non conforming, the song is more likely to really resonate with them. which i say about two paragraphs down, if you'd have read the rest of the post -

'[...] but failing to do so because it's just not you. feeling uncomfortable in a dress, trying and failing to have normal interactions with guys - which of course cishet girls can feel as well, but hits particularly hard as a queer, gender non conforming, girl adjacent person'

i don't think i need to read feminist theory to post my *completely subjective media analysis* about pj harvey on the internet, these things are just theories after all! this is how *i personally* interpret some songs. in any case, whatever you have going on is clearly not as feminist as you might like to think, as feminism last time i checked was about trying to get equality and fairness for *all* genders, not annoying teenagers on tumblr for daring to think about gender on their own.

also 'the evil cis dykes are oppressing them by saying gender is a rightwing social construct that no one actually has.' i'm really sorry that you think that way but literally no one thinks this. i have never seen one single thing ever saying that someone thinks cis lesbians are oppressing them. they think terfs are harassing them. which now you are too! the world isn't seeing some major downfall in gender because there are now 'a million white afab they/thems', it's because on the last few years, some parts of the world at least have had a massive shift towards accepting non-binary people as a thing that exists, and more visibility, which had led to more people, especially young people, having more tools and language with which to understand their own gender. even just five years ago i probably wouldn't have been able to think of a non-binary character, now i could list you dozens. non-binary people were always there, there just weren't always conducive environments, or the words, for people to realise that that is what they were feeling. also by implication you're saying that liking pink and not having a personality are parts of being a girl? i don't think that what you meant to say but that *really* isn't feminist. in case it's not clear enough

NON BINARY PEOPLE ARE VALID YOUR GENDER OR LACK THEREOF IS REAL

TERFS GO AWAY

#i'm sure there are more coherent ways of saying this but #i didn't really want to write any more #like seriously do you really think annoying teenagers about their media analysis on the internet is going to make them less genderqueer?#i'm quite happy with the pj harvey and queerness post actually and i'm not letting a terf on anon ruin it #tw transphobia #tw enbyphobia #tw terf

6 notes · View notes

ms-hells-bells · 1 year

Note

Hey can I ask your opinion on this take ( it's from that imevrywomen420 user that blocked u , sorry for the long post)

" When u spend more time criticizing liberalism sex positivity casual sex choice feminism whatever you call it than anything else remember there is no country where women are legally required to wear stripper heels and fake eyelashes and there are multiple countries that require women to cover up. Do not be stupid on this post. yall forgot its the Madonna Whore complex…. A lot of yall give the impression that you think all women are le madonna and that patriarchys worst problem is that women are compelled to be whores. And the worst thing is a lot of yall think “whores” are the CAUSE of misogyny. To the point where you hate women that are on your side bc they wear revealing clothes or sleep with men. But you’ll rub shoulders with misogynistic tradwives because at least theyre not whores. Its soooooo strange and stinky "

For the 1st half of the post I think it's very disingenuous and that they would imply that feminists criticizing hypersexualized feminimity are essentially not focusing on " real issues" just because there's aren't laws saying women should wear heals. Both modesty and hyperfeminimity are coerced via different means. And I think it's ironic that they proceed to talk about the Madonna-Whore complex when it's probably the reason why men use laws to force women to cover up ( because private property/ wife, should be modest) whilst these very same men make movies/art,watch porn and visit prostitutes in which women are dressed for their sexual consumption ( because they are public property/" whores", should be hypersexualized). It would literally be impossible for men to implement these two requirements by law so they opt out for enforcing the "Madonna" via law, and it doesn't make the other side of the coin less coercive, it's just not overt imo. Also since hyperfeminimity is not enforced by law but is the reason so many women are insecure with their bodies in the first place, I think it highlights a bigger reason on why we can't just dismiss it as a bunch of feminists being petty and no fun for criticizing it.

As for the 2nd part, do you think radfems are harsher on some women then others?

i do actually somewhat agree that often radfems are far more willing ot give leniency and contextual understanding and kindness to trad/rightwing women (constantly recommending the dworkin book) than to libfems, they seem to be particularly bitter and angry towards libfems, i think partially because they feel like 'they were so close, and they fucked it up' and the fact that they name themselves feminists. but we should be equally as critical and understanding towards both liberal and conservative women, they are two sides of the same coin.

the way she writes her shit is super unnecessarily incendiary and picking a fight though. we can just bring up criticisms and have disagreements without going full twitter battle mode. not surprising though, she says dumb shit constantly. ys, the first part is rather strawman, considering that radfems DO constantly criticise conservative culture. but i do think she has a legitimate point, and i have thought about the double standards a bunch of times. the solution isn't to 'go just as easy' or live and let live or whatever, it's to balance between criticism and pointing out harms caused by other women, with the nuanced understanding of why they do what they do.

14 notes · View notes

lgbtlunaverse · 2 years

Text

I think "man positivity" posts are rlly nice and kind and that people who get mad at them just because women have it worse under misogyny are lame

But I need y'all to understand. I absolutely need you all to understand. Those harmful male stereotypes? That men are sex-crazed violent beasts who are incapable of having empathy for women? That's not a feminism thing. These ideas weren't spread by "mean man-hating feminists". They are longstanding patriarchal ideas.

The idea that men cannot control themselves or respect consent and are just biologically wiered to rape? Misogynists will literally describe men as "dogs with a pound of meat dangling in front of their face." Even hundreds of years ago across different patriarchal cultures it was considered necessary to keep unmarried women away from men they were not related to as much as possible because their "innocence" might be taken. Who decided only men were fit to fight wars? Who decided women were frail dainty things incapable of ever posing any serious threat to a man? Who decided men were so biologically seperate from women that they could not form a fullfilling platonic bond without am an secretly wanting to fuck the woman?

All of these are age-old patriarchal ideas. They weren't just not invented by feminism they PREDATE the feminist movement by decades or centuries.

Like, even when we talk about it sepcifically in the context of "radfem idealogy" (usually meaning terf and seperstist idealogy) and how they use bio-essentialism to paint men as naturally predatory and violent I need you to understand radfems didn't invent that. That's just an idea they kept from the patriarchy. (Which still makes it bad feminism. Just like the terfs reacting to violence against women afghanistan by saying "well, the taliban know what a woman is!" If you agree with misogynists on gender that is usually a bad thing)

The problems men have under the patriarchy deserve attention and compassion and any feminist movement copy-pasting bio-essentialism from the patriarchy isn't doing good feminism but feminism has not CAUSED these issues. And that is really important for y'all to realize because "Feminism has gone too far!!" Is a major rightwing talking point and recruiting tactic for the alt-right pipeline and you CANNOT let it permeate progressive spaces. Feminism hasn't gone too far it hasn't gone nearly far enough. And right now a bunch of fucking losers are trying to make it go BACKWARDS by pretending that gender essentialist bullshit is feminism and the real enemy instead of the patriarchy is trans people. Do not fucking let them. Fascists are trying to redefine what feminist means and I cannot fucking stress this enough you CANNOT let them.

#feminism #intersectional feminism #like seriously i see people on here genuinely admit they no longer feel comfortable with calling themselves feminist because terfs exists #ARE YOU PEOPLE SERIOUS???#A century-spanning movement fighting for marginalized people's rights #WHICH WE STILL NEED #and you're just gonna HAND IT TO BIGOTS?? JUST GIVE UP ON IT??#do you know WHY it was so necessary for black women and lesbian women to fight to not be excluded from feminism?#because it was fucking NECESSARY they needed it and excluding them kept them in danger #AND YOU'RE JUST GONNA LET THAT HAPPEN AGAIN?#ah fuck a bunch of transphobes said they own feminism now guess we gotta disown it SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!#do NOT let them have it #y'all know that nazi bar story?#y'all saw a dude with an iron cross walk in and instead of kicking him thenfuck out you kicked YOURSELF out to let him have the place #'i guess this is a nazi bar now' WHY ARE YOU GIVING HIM WHAT HE WANTS!?

23 notes · View notes

ingek73 · 9 months

Text

I’m an immigration lawyer, and now the target of a Braverman smear campaign. It will backfire

Jacqueline McKenzie

The government has set the rightwing press on me because I have represented someone being deported to Rwanda - but I know people can see through their deception

Tue 8 Aug 2023 17.00 BST

The Bibby Stockholm barge seen from high ground above Portland in Dorset.

My Saturday morning was unusual by any standard. I was followed on social media by journalists from the Sun and the Daily Mail within minutes of each other, then soon after had a call from the Telegraph and an email from the Express. All advised that they were writing a story about me and wanted to give me a right to reply. I immediately thought this to be a government-inspired hit job because of my work supporting victims of the Windrush scandal. I didn’t imagine it could be anything else. Two of the journalists explained that they’d been sent a dossier about me from Conservative party HQ, which had either deliberately or inadvertently been attached to an email.

I thought back to examples of this kind of thing in history, such as the horrors of McCarthyism, or the practices of eastern European intelligence units in the Soviet era. It was hard to fathom that someone like me – who lives for work, and who climbed mountains to become a lawyer, including giving birth on the day of an exam – could attract such ire. To my surprise, there was no mention of my Windrush cases at all – these have accounted for 90% of my work in the past five years. Windrush was a scandal created by the Conservative government, but one that it has profusely apologised for, and has promised to make amends for via a compensation scheme and other measures.

During my time representing Windrush victims, I was invited to be on the then home secretary Priti Patel’s Windrush working group, attended numerous meetings with the Home Office and sat on the Windrush lessons learned review, set up by Sajid Javid when he was home secretary. It was initially surprising that their deep dive could have missed this – until I realised that the hit job on me wasn’t about Windrush per se, but actually an attack on Labour.

So what was in the dossier on me? Someone had drawn a diagram linking Keir Starmer to anyone who challenged the Conservatives’ Rwanda plan. There was mention of a case in which I represented a Jamaican man who had lived in the UK from the age of nine and was facing deportation. It said that I was a hired adviser on race to Starmer, when in fact I am an unpaid volunteer on a working group set up by Labour to look at race disparities across a number of indicators, just as the Conservatives did with the Sewell report.

It also “outed” me as a trustee of Detention Action, a well-respected NGO supporting people in immigration detention centres, presumably because the organisation challenged the Rwanda scheme in the courts. The dossier did not mention that I had become a trustee after that challenge. I did represent a man who was one of seven shackled on the tarmac waiting to be flown to Rwanda before the flight was grounded by the courts. I feel no shame: a doctor in the immigration detention centre confirmed that my client displayed signs of being a victim of torture.

There is no doubt this story was timed to accompany the moving of asylum seekers, many traumatised, on to the Bibby Stockholm. The government attacks vulnerable people and those like myself, who represent them in order to distract from issues that the electorate prioritise: the cost-of-living crisis, the environment and the NHS.

The hit job on me was vile and self-serving, and put me and those close to me at considerable risk of physical harm. I’m having to take security advice and precautions, such is the seriousness I place on ominous emails I have received.

This flagrant attack on me and my work, built on misinformation and mischaracterisation and underpinned by racism and misogyny, is a dark day for our political sphere. It represents a serious slur on the integrity and independence of thousands of hardworking and upstanding lawyers. The positive, however, is that millions of people in the UK see the behaviour of this arm of the ruling party as unacceptable. Judging by the vast amount of support I’ve received, not only from friends and colleagues, but from many strangers too, this government hit job has spectacularly backfired.

Jacqueline McKenzie is a partner and head of immigration and asylum law at Leigh Day

-

Two of the journalists explained that they’d been sent a dossier about me from Conservative party HQ, which had either deliberately or inadvertently been attached to an email

Fuck the tories, fuck the tabloids

Both vile scum

#jacqueline mckenzie #the guardian #immigration #immigration lawyer #tory scum #uk tabloids #smear campaign

3 notes · View notes

hadeantaiga · 2 years

Text

The terf take that "young women are vulnerable and impressionable and must be protected from being seduced and groomed by the trans cult" is literally just misogyny.

Like.

fucking please think before you speak. Protecting the "purity and innocence" of "young women" is literally Christian purity culture. It's rightwing dogma, and you're spouting it like it's feminism.

#trans rights #terf #transphobia #misogyny #trans

8 notes · View notes

nerdby · 10 days

Text

To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee

3/5⭐

So I read To Kill A Mockingbird -- AKA the most infamous white savior story ever written -- and it's a good book, but I personally feel like it is extremely overrated. People who love this book talk about it like it's the progressive, life changing, piece of Civil Rights literature ever written and I'm sorry but like.....What the fuck? Because it's just not -- like unless you're from like the 1930s-60s -- like I can see how it would have been considered groundbreaking back then. By extremely sheltered white people and probably no one else.

Because the main message of To Kill A Mockingbird is just.....Live and let live. Forgive and forget. Turn the other cheek. Which is Christofascist ideology used to guilt and shame minorities into putting up with Christians without saying a damn word about it. No complaints -- just shut the fuck up and take it up the ass.

And there are literally no good people in this book. Likeable, yes, but they are not good. Like Atticus Finch falls squarely into the Likeable Asshole archetype because in a town full of racists he seems to be the least racist. Like it clearly bothers him that his white friends and neighbors are assholes to Black people. Does he stand up to the racists, though? No, not really. Not unless he has to and even then he will go to his deathbed saying, "I was just doing my job."

Because at the end of the day the Finch family reputation is more important than his morals and his happiness and his children's happiness which is evidenced by Scout's entire character arc. Like so much of the story revolves around how Scout MUST learn to be a lady at all costs. FOR THE FAMILY. No one gives a shit about whether or not that's what Scout wants.

And they actually say that throughout the book.

The worst part is this book is semi-autobiographical. So some parts of it were inspired by Harper Lee's own life, and part of me wants to feel sorry for her. Until I remember how everyone says Go Set A Watchman -- the sequel to To Kill A Mockingbird -- ruins Mockingbird. Which to me translates to Watchman is possibly/probably even more of a rightwing shit rag than Mockingbird is so....Yeah.

To Kill A Mockingbird gets three out of five stars from me because despite its many, many flaws its still a charming story with some valuable life lessons. I would say this book is suitable for readers ages twelve and up, but heavily advise parents to supervise their children while they read it and actually discuss the topics of the book because there are some heavy topics in there such as racism, misogyny, ableism, and poverty. Although really you should be doing that shit in the first place, regardless of what your kid is reading.

Happy reading.

#reading #books and reading #books #books books books #classic literature #banned books #bookworm #book nerd #bibliophile #book review #to kill a mockingbird #harper lee

1 note · View note