Tumblr what

what is this

Imagine being this lifeless

just nothing to do in your life and with your Tumblr blog but be trasphobic

Anywayyyyyyy WONDER WOMAN SUPPORTS TRANS RIGHTS FUCK YOU IF YOU THINK OTHERWISE

gonna ratio a bunch of this blog's posts with a trans flag and the word gender bc that apparently scares radfems

sick of the radblr discourse like why is it half of my dash omg

randomly thinking about how the anti "transandrophobia truthers" people never think trans men ever face misogyny, especially if they're out of the closet and can pass as a man, and i'm here masculine as hell and would pass to THEM but yet my voice gets me misgendered all the time, to the point during phone calls people will refuse to believe I am who I say I am because of the masculine name not matching up with the voice and so they always automatically assume I am my own sister or mother, and my own urogynecologist fully sees me as a woman despite my FULL BEARD and my bear of a body

like yeah totally i completely have all the same exact experiences and privileges as a cis man! /s

Edit: actually lol to make the point further, I am still here with the full beard and masculine attire and so I'm probably what they'd call "cishet passing" and yet when I go out, I am misgendered ALL the time now because of the combination of my voice, my long hair, and wearing a mask that covers up a good bit of my face. I'm misgendered more than I'm gendered correctly, actually. Like really blows my mind bc I will see these ppl call ppl they dont even KNOW irl "cishet passing" based on seeing pictures of them when that doesn't = reality and also that's a fucking gross ass term.

Y’all ever hit block so fucking fast?

radical feminist of the day: phillipus

Can I just say that like.

Yes, obviously (or not obviously, based on some of y'alls behavior), the idea that "Women dating men is TORTURE for the woman we should pity women who date men!" is like. Radfem juice to the extreme and yet somehow the most basic level of radfem bullshit and it's stupid and just CRUEL to men.

But speaking as someone who spent most of my life as a cis woman (about 25 years solidly there and two years wondering) and who is sometimes still woman-ish in my gender and someone who is constantly read as being a woman by the world...

It's also REALLY fucking irritating that these radfem fucks come along like "Oh, you poor sad woman FORCED to date these men, FORCED by the patriarchy to be attracted to men, if only you could be FREE to be the lesbian we know you are!" and like...

Fuck you. I love men. I love how men love. I think men are hot and sexy and cute and desirable as all fuck. I love men's bodies. I do not think that a male or masculine body is "disgusting" or "unclean" because it belongs to a man. No one is fucking holding me at gunpoint and forcing me to like men- I just fucking like men.

And it's the same way I feel about the whole "Oh, you poor woman FORCED to partake in kink!" argument like. NO! I fucking like kink! I am kinky! I WANT to be kinky! I want to have that kind of sex with people- including with men.

Radfem rhetoric rests on two things (well it rests on a lot of things but IMO these two things are like the MAIN pillars, or some of the main pillars). The MAIN main thing is the idea of the man, the masculine, as the inherent oppressor, the evil, the All Bad Things in the World Come from Men. But the other thing it leans on, ironically?

Is the idea that women cannot possibly know what they really want. That women who are attracted to men, women who are kinky, women who aren't women and who are actually men- do not actually know what they want. They have all been TRICKED, you see, these poor, vulnerable, impressionable, prey-like women, and the radfems are here to SAVE THEM from all these things that they THINK they want, but oh no, no The Devil I MEAN the Patriarchy has just convinced you that you want these things, you don't REALLY want any of that, you don't KNOW better!

Do I NEED to fucking explain how infantilizing and gross and downright fucking SEXIST it is. To insist that women do not know what they want and must be steered in the right direction? The idea that women need to be guided because we (because I am a woman sometimes, although whether radfems see me as a weak-willed, easily swayed uwu woman or a traitor rapist man depends on the day, it seems) cannot POSSIBLY know what we REALLY want...

Come on. I mean we know they're in bed with sexist Conservatives but do radfems REALLY need to go so hard on driving that point home?

I'm a man, but I've been reading and following radical feminists for a few months now, and it's been pretty eye opening. I genuinely believe in the fundamentals presented in this philosophy. However, I have noticed a significant amount of radfems hinting that it's a womam-only philosophy, or that it's something that solely women can truly espouse. Or maybe it's just that so few men are really involved in the movement?

I was wondering what the general consensus was: can a man be a radical feminist?

Not trying to be a white knight or beg for approval or anything, just genuinely interested in hearing your opinion.

men cannot be radical feminists. like how billionaires can't be unionists and white people can't be black liberationists. because of the way both you and me have been socialised, any man who enters any group will immediately subconsciously be either centred, or alter the atmosphere of the environment. you won't even realise when you're taking up more people's attention.

there was even an experiment done by a radfem on twitter, where she created a false male account and posted basic copy-pasted radfem quotes, and within DAYS this account had more followers than prominent radfem activists, book writers, and online bloggers who had been on there for years. you can't deprogram women from male fawning when there's men around.

men's role in radical feminism is to take the space in the world that they have as a man, and turn it into radfem friendly, or even just woman friendly, spaces. confront male misogyny, get other men thinking about their morals and values, and uplifting women around you. listen to women, believe women, be kind to women, understand women. the most radical thing you can do is not be misogynistic and shame other men who are. that sounds basic, but it's far harder than people on the mainstream left think, and is far more impactful than anything that can be said (aka virtue signaled) or twitter activisted.

hi! i was wondering your opinions on how hrt affects the body? i hold a lot of radfem beliefs but i am trans (taking testosterone). would being a woman to you have to be completely about chromosomes? for example, trans men years on T do not have the same genetic makeup as cis women. same with trans women on E, their genetic makeup would be very different to cis men, and would more correlate to cis women. does this factor in who you consider female/male or having experience as women?

Hi there, thanks for reaching out.

Firstly, I think you may be a bit confused. Taking exogenous hormones does not affect your genetic makeup. Your dna will stay the same unless you're exposed to something extreme like radiation - this is a good thing because dna mutation is bad for you and causes cancer! Your genetic sex is immutable, a person with XY chromosomes cannot have their dna altered to have XX chromosomes instead.

Hormones will affect the expression of your genes, for example turning on facial hair production in women who are taking testosterone. This is why those patterns of facial hair, even in women, differ from person to person. The genes for it were already there, but hormone replacement therapy uses the endocrine system to change what signals get sent to your genes to tell them what features to express.

Beyond chemically induced genetic expression, there are particular physical features in males that do not occur in males, and vice versa. This is a feature of the /ancient/ evolution of sexual reproduction. Despite the variety of metaphysical beliefs about identity and personhood, the truth is that humans evolved to reproduce between two sexes, and human beings cannot change sex. Every cell of your body has your sex encoded within it. This affects us physically in many ways. I and most feminists believe that this fact should be irrelevant to any person's ability to pursue their passion, be themselves, and love who they love. Even so, recognition of biological sex is something important. This is really critical in a medical context. For example: men who receive a blood transfusion from a pregnant or recently pregnant woman have an increased risk of death by transfusion-related lung injury. Another example: tracheostomy tubes differ in size depending on sex due to dimorphism in average tracheal diameter. A women who is reported as a male risks considerable injury by having a male sized tracheostomy tube forced into her windpipe. A considerable amount of medications differ in dose effectiveness and side effects based on biological sex. Something as straightforward as a heart attack has different symptoms depending on if the patient is female or male. Denial of biological sex is dangerous, and as it stands, medical science has not advanced enough to change the biological sex of an individual. If you are born male, you will stay male for your entire life. You say that a transwoman who has taken estrogen is more genetically similar to a woman, I'm sorry but that simply isn't true. A male person will always be more genetically similar to other males than to a female person.

Determination of sex is very simple, it's about the easiest genetic test to do. They have kits for high school classrooms to try out ffs. We need to leave the "meaningful sex change is possible through medical intervention" thing in the past, all we accomplish with that is giving people false hope and an unattainable goal to fixate on. Sex is real and immutable, I wish it didn't matter, but it does.

And why it matters is, maleness and femaleness have become inseparable from certain stereotypes and assigned qualities by societies in human history. Overwhelmingly, the male people subjugate the female people. Since men, male humans, discovered womens' ability to give birth could be taken advantage of, it was capitalized upon. And this is the foundation of patriarchal society. Religions were founded to justify this as the will of god. To deny that women have historically been persecuted due to their sex is, well, misogynistic. There is no "woman feeling" that makes us targets for child marriages, FGM, trafficking/prostitution, and other horrors from the minute we're born and even before. No, it's the sex we were born with that makes the world think it can decide our fate. In fact, the way that people treat male children differently from female children is so different so early, that we are genuinely unable to study human behaviour unaffected by gendered expectations. This is what feminists are talking about when they discuss "socialization". There is not a single man on the planet who knows exactly what it's like to see the world from a woman's eyes, no matter how feminine that man is. Womanhood isn't something you can achieve or acquire through effort: you were either born a woman or you weren't, just like you were either born with detached earlobes or not. It's so simple.

All that to get to my final point: Yes, I believe the definition of womanhood comes down to biology, because anything beyond that is a meaningless stereotype. Women can do anything, be anyone, look any way they want, go through any experience they do. The one thing they have in common is that they are female adult human beings. There is not way to fail at being a woman or do it wrong, you just are. Womanhood is the experience of having been a female person in this world, and nothing else. There are certain things only female human beings need, like abortion and female contraceptive rights, access to spaces where we can be safe from our subjugators (male human beings), and the ability to define ourselves and fight for our collective rights.

(At this point you may object and point out that male people who identify as trans women are also subject to violence and scorn from men: unfortunately that is often the case, but this does not make male people who identify as women, well, female. We need solutions for them that do not involve requiring women to sacrifice our comfort and safety for the sake of a particular subset of men, because of the inherent risks involved and the fact that women do not owe men anything even when those men have it bad.)

One last thing: my opinion is that prescribing exogenous cross-sex hormones is unethical (so are all elective cosmetic medical procedures but that's a post for a different day). I understand the distress that gender dysphoria inflicts on people, however the ill effects of hrt are too numerous to condone. The huge increase in risk of stroke with estrogen, heart disease and uterine atrophy with testosterone, and the way that trans medicine studies are notorious for losing followup with patients after a year or less... it's short sighted and frankly, financially motivated. The amount of trans patients who are prescribed hormones without access to an endocrinologist, it's honestly infuriating. People deserve the best care possible, not lab rat bullshit where they cut you loose when it's not working out. I won't judge anyone for what they do to themselves to cope with distress, but I want everyone, especially girls, to be aware of the lifetime effects medical decisions may have, and that you also can find happiness within yourself without hurting your body.

Thanks again for your question, be well ✌️

So some fuck ass mom posted on tiktok about her 14 y.o CHILD getting a Brazilian wax/waxing on her body bc it’s “hygienic” (she obv didn’t post the it actually getting done but I digress).The woman who re-posted the video onto twt is having to argue with brain dead women who say “ITS HER CHOICE” and saying she’s a weirdo for being concerned and that they don’t have a problem with a child getting waxed more so than the mom posting the video to begin with, as if we can’t fucking multitask. I think I’m officially black pilled I’m so serious.

No wonder why women fall for the dumb shit men do bc y’all are working with room temp IQs and ZERO critical thinking. The funniest part is when the consequences of not being critical end up happening the feminist who’ve been telling y’all to think more than two seconds will be blamed/“why aren’t so called radfems talking about this!!” And then it fades bc no one wants to read anything or make actual change, I don’t even think a toddler getting lip filler will make y’all use your fucking brain for once.

Y’all are on your own I can’t deal with this shit anymore. The fact that women are fine with the bar being in hell and are allowing these men to get them pregnant when roe v wade has been overturned tells me everything I need to know. We can argue internalized misogyny till the cows come home but the bottom line is that there’s a fuck ton of y’all that don’t wanna be saved and frankly speaking, I don’t wanna save your annoying asses either.

Women should be outraged, should be disgusted and repulsed by the way we’re being stripped of our rights and sense of self not just in legislation but personhood via these traps they’re setting for girls. Robbing them of their youth and innocence bc of the porn addicted moid goblins they go to school with and societies penchant for pedophilia towards girls.

But nah, instead yall break your backs to say “LETS NOT DEMONIZE ALL MEN” after hearing about a horrific tragedy inflicted upon a woman after someone’s comments “I fucking hate men.”Like I’ve said before men don’t have to lift a finger to keep patriarchy alive and running when women get on their knees for free lmao.

Me when I refuse to acknowledge that there's been 50 years of Feminism since the 70's and that the Second Wave is in fact not the end-all-be-all of Feminism.

We are in fact currently in the Fourth Wave of Feminism.

I wonder what Feminist theories began popping up in the late 70's-early 80's that Radfems really don't want young Feminists to expose themselves to? I wonder if it might have to do with the fact that Black and Decolonialist Feminist theory exist, in part, as direct critiques of Radical Feminism? Womanism is a good place to start learning about early modern Black Feminism, but even Womanism exists as critique of Radical Feminist thought.

If your knowledge of Black Feminism begins and ends with Womanism from the Second Wave, you have failed Feminist studies.

I also wonder what Feminist theories have begun popping up from the 90's to present that Radfems really don't want young Feminists to expose themselves to? I wonder if it might have to do with the fact that Intersectional Feminist theory has been growing and expanding in the decades since? Maybe it has something to do with the fact that most Intersectional Feminist theory exists in direct opposition to the Radical Feminist idea that womanhood is the most oppressed class in society and that Patriarchy is the main force of oppression in the world?

It's always amazing to me when Radfems claim to be anti-White Supremacist and even acknowledge that White Supremacy and Patriarchy work in tandem, while simultaneously enforcing the idea that addressing White Supremacy is only important in the context of womanhood.

There Is No Hierarchy of Oppressions - Audre Lorde, 1 page PDF, seriously, it's only one - 1 - page, please read it.

radical feminist of the day: etta candy

I actually have a radfem topic I am split on myself so I’d be interested in discussion on this too —

I have seen and agreed with critiques of the trans movement taking key slogans from other groups and making them trans focused instead. Not just once or twice but over and over where almost all their slogans are reworked slogans from racial justice, feminist, intersex/DSD activist, disability justice and other such groups. This is implied to be disrespectful, to come from a place of over-focus on trans issues at the expense of the rest, and sometimes done in cases where people who coined the original specifically said “no don’t riff on this”

While I think some examples didn’t really fit (like cases where the original inventors of the idea clearly WANTED it to be copied into other movements) overall I thought it was a legitimate criticism for the trans movement having a tendency toward disrespect for any other cause having importance without being connected back to trans issues too. And to excuse themselves for everything instead of ever owning up to overstepping.

At the same time I am someone who likes to say “male supremacy” and “male supremacist” to really hit home what patriarchy is, especially for women who are jaded into seeing feminist issues as petty, boring or “already basically fixed”. The type of woman raised on cartoons with “eee the patriarchy!!!” screeched by a straw-feminist villain character. It’s sad and I don’t abandon the word patriarchy but sometimes I need other, less common terms to cut through the bias.

So I say male supremacist violence and talk about systems of male supremacy. Which all more or less mean patriarchy.

But it is 100% true I took this pattern from people of color discussing white supremacy. Whatever the history of these terms (like if actually “male supremacist” did get said first long ago, by someone) it’s clear at this point, in this language, that white supremacy is the established term, and male supremacy is the riffing on it, to make a parallel.

I hope it’s different mainly because we (feminists) don’t make SUCH a habit of it, have more original terms too, and have (I think?) a healthier relationship to intersectionality (mostly due to many centuries of efforts by multiple-times-over marginalized women)

But I do wonder about when it may be disrespectful. I also favor “male supremacists” because unfortunately I have had some women hear me say “male supremacy” and assume at first that I’m an antifeminist literally saying that male people are superior, supreme or am advocating for it. That’s just sad though. That that seems more likely to be what it means, to anyone.

So - thoughts?

Options:

- TRA slogan/term behavior is wrong beyond just disagreeing with their movement, and this is wrong too — slogans/terms should never be 1:1 from another group first

- I do think the TRA slogan/term behavior is wrong beyond just disagreeing with their movement, but the “male supremacist” term is different and ok

- I don’t know about the TRA side but the “male supremacist” term is ok

- riffing on slogans/terms from other movements is always ok UNLESS asked not to, I apply this fairly to myself AND movements I don’t like

- riffing on slogans/terms from other movements is always ok EVEN when asked not to, I apply this fairly to myself AND movements I don’t like

- it’s ok when TRAs do it (eg, trans lives matter, cis supremacy, trans rights are human rights) but “male supremacists” is a bad term (TRA button???)

- bald/nuanced/I have some other opinions and will write them out longform

- vanilla extract/no thoughts head empty/see results

please read the ask before voting, as I won't be able to fit the options properly in the poll!

Thanks for the suggestion! And thanks for making me laugh with the "vanilla extract/no thoughts head empty" part ^^