Based Take

Imagine if male genitals were treated like female genitals? Like testicles weren’t even referred to as testicles and some men didn’t even know what they were actually called and the general area was just called “penis”.

Can they please go one day without making everything about themselves

a female director creating a sledgehammer-blunt story about the absurd horror of the beauty standards of hollywood and the visceral self-loathing and mental health issues it inspires in women? no. its secretly about transitioning. omfg how obnoxious can u get

"Your rights as women are inextricably tied with the rights of other minority groups, which means your liberation is too" Sure, makes sense, but why is it that I literally never see anyone saying this about other minority groups' liberation movements without getting (rightfully) smacked down for trying to All Lives Matter a minority-specific issue? This literally only happens with feminism. Bffr.

See the thing here is I kind of wish there were numbers on this. If there were numbers that said, “If given the option non trans people would chose to stay their sex regardless of oppression” than there’d actually be something here. But instead it’s just a weird anecdote that even within itself acknowledges that people say ‘yes’ but denies that that yes is anything but a lie. Followed by a failure to acknowledge that some female and LG (no B here because they’d face oppression on the basis of same sex attraction either direction) people might not ‘just chose to transition out of their oppression’ because without a surgery that won’t actually magically change your sex and will fuck up your body, everyone will be able to tell anyway.

I kind of don’t think Man Identified Females should be in female sports. They are still females, but they’re females who’re on steroids that in any other context would be considered doping.

I’m thinking about a stray post that I saw a while back that went something like, ‘You don’t think of ‘privilege’ when you think of gay males’ in the context of male privilege. And it kind of makes me think about… How privilege is talked about at all. I’d say a major element of privilege is blindness towards the ways it benefits you. It’s not just that you’re able bodied, it’s that you don’t have to have to worry about any kind of accommodations being made for you to exist in public because the world was already made with your needs as a central focus as an example. In that sense, it’s easier to look at the ways a person knows they are disadvantaged. So Gay Males are noticeably discriminated against on the basis of their homosexuality, and that’s the first thing a person will think about when they hear Gay Male. What NO ONE thinks is, ‘that’s a gay male, he’ll never have to worry about being forced to give birth. That’s a gay man, he lives in a world where seat belts were made with his safety in mind.’ And that’s usually fine, the ways that gay males benefit from manhood isn’t something that always needs to be brought up- the same way that a white woman’s whiteness is not always relevant to the conversation.

HOWEVER, it becomes a problem when we’re talking about misogyny and people start pretending oppression exists as one scale instead of multiple axes. Admittedly this is VERY Intersectionalism 101 (and people understand this concept weirdly well when we’re talking about rich white women) but it still feels like it needs to be stated on this site.

It’s funny (evil) because what they just said is, ‘Conversion therapy works. If you try hard enough, have enough faith, REALLY want to you can desire the opposite sex.’ Anon would rather believe that’s true than that ‘reformed lesbians and gays’ who chose to be in opposite sex relationships instead of being celibate in a situation where that is an option… Are actually just bisexuals

Funny that you should mentioned homophobic Christian lesbians because one of the ways they suppress their sexuality is by fucking and dating men

Y’all are so funny

They’re not lesbians if they date men you dummy. I meant lesbians that just never date again.

White people like it so we just gotta keep rewriting history like they invented it, right? I’ve also heard people say conversations about hummus and bubble tea are “the whitest conversations ever.” Are y’all serious? 

SNAPS FOR KRISTA SUH!!!

The way Trans Posts will switch rapidly from ‘if you’re not with us, you’re with the fascists’ (implying that you don’t actually have to believe in any of their bullshit you just have to hate the alt right more to count as on their side. Which. I repeat most Rads voted for Harris.) To ‘if you even toe the party line you’re against us’ (Which turns away any potential allies for perceived moral purity within the movement. It means anyone who doesn’t think twaw is turned away from the movement). It’s almost dizzying.

Huh, I hadn't thought of that the first time I read it but there is a pint there- Victor begins thinking that he'll create something beautiful and wonderful but after actually seeing Creature he experiences a massive depression event and abandons it. As much as he insists that he'd make a decent parent; that insistence comes from a place of arrogance and lack of foresight.

He brings Creature into a world that despises him. Creature is a brilliant mind, well read, he shows compassion towards the family he watches over, and helps without being asked, but the world offers Victor's child nothing but physical abuse and abandonment until he grows painfully resentful. There's the idea there that if Creature had any positive relationships, maybe everything here could have been avoided. On the anti-natalist end though, bringing Creature into this world is in and of itself an act of arrogant cruelty. How could he know what people are like and choose to create a child anyway.

Frankenstein feels like a very anti-natalist work. From the modern perspective of course. With the original context, the themes about the progression of science and the nature of humanity still stand