Mind, I’m Bi, But Mono-sexuality Isn’t This Mystical Impossible To Understand Thing Unless You Insist

Hmm

Okay so there are a lot of posts like *Marginalized females stop allying yourself with marginalized males they will be sexist like every other male!’ And it’s true- and I get it- but it also reminds me of our intersection problem. Like, okay, gay males are going to be sexist towards us anyway. Straight females will be homophobic. Black males will be sexist; white women will be racist. So if your alliances are entirely based on ‘who won’t enact violence on me for an unchangeable trait’ you’re kind of shit out of luck unless you’re already in a position of only one kind of marginalization. So you’ve gotta walk this line or ‘calling out inter community bigotry’ and ‘not getting labeled as the person causing problems by bringing up other groups. Even though you’re still part of those groups.

This is a post on "Ethical pornography" I made in 2022. People love to use "ethical" and "choice" arguments, however these do not hold up against any scrutiny. And after seeing that pornhubs trending searches are often of war refugees or media that has been proven to be non-consential (Lana Rhodes), you could not make me believe for a second that the end viewer cares at all about the ethics involved.

Oh shit they want to be a part of the ‘weird spiritual belief but go off king’ group?

That’s so cool, because no one’s legally required to recognize Therians as their chosen species or Kin people as their chosen fictional characters. It’d be considered kind of fucked up if a Witch came into Congress (lol) and a meeting was put to a stop because one member refused to acknowledge the existence of Nyx. If a Therian insisted on being in a dog pageant (because see, they legally changed their identity to dog. Because the government gave in to that belief because a small collection of them underwent surgery to more heavily resemble a dog to help their species dysphoria and the human government decided that it was more convenient to just say they’re dogs) and won because they can do dog tasks more easily, the reaction would be, ‘this is the dumbest thing imaginable.’

You guys don’t want spiritual weirdo comparisons, because the only thing spiritual weirdos get is vague acknowledgment and the ability to believe in whatever bullshit.

maladaptive daydreaming is more real than gender identity, and it’s a-okay to tell people to kill themselves

honestly - TERF arguments are entirely horseshit. they don’t care about science, they don’t really care about women’s safety. it’s a regressive alt right movement in the garb of a feminist

I’m not the one who compared Trans People to shifters, you opened up the idea that your ideas of the world are ridiculous enough that they should by default ally with you because weirdos got to stick together. Both you and most Radfems believe trans people’s existence should be treated more sincerely than that, the comparisons were calling that bluff.

It’s worth noting here that you’re making a transmedicalist argument and I wonder if you actually are one of the ones left or it’s one of those cases where it’s more convenient to say it’s what you believe. If you believe that the definition of transgender should be related to actually physically engaging in the medical activity of transitioning to gain traits related to the opposite sex instead of just saying, ‘this is the thing that I am’ than you’re correct that the therian argument is not applicable. I think it’s useful to have a name for the class of people who were and are oppressed on the basis of possessing a body with a layout to produce large gametes, that is a group of people who exist and are at risk for further violence on the basis of this reproductive role. As this role is called ‘female’ in every other mammalian context, I think Female Human is a fine term for them. If transmedicalists want to keep woman to mean ‘Anyone with secondary sex characteristics that resembles the other sex’, they can do that but all things considered in 2025, I doubt the value in denying the existence of primary sex characteristics entirely. I also don’t see the value in separating prisons based on secondary sex characteristics.

maladaptive daydreaming is more real than gender identity, and it’s a-okay to tell people to kill themselves

honestly - TERF arguments are entirely horseshit. they don’t care about science, they don’t really care about women’s safety. it’s a regressive alt right movement in the garb of a feminist

the true reason “not all men” sounds absurd to me (aside from the ignorance of statistics) is that it fundamentally misunderstands misogyny. “not all men” assumes that male supremacy is not an ideology like Nazism or fundamentalism might be. additionally, it assumes that male supremacy is disconnected from male violence. if a white supremacist killed a black innocent, you would not disconnect his ideology from the crime. but male violence must be psychological, not ideological. he beats a woman because he himself was beaten as a child, etcetera.

misogyny, loosely described is the dehumanization (not mere dislike) of women. thus it takes many forms: objectification, pedestalization, decontextualization, caricaturization (or stereotyping), etc. BUT FUNDAMENTALLY, the ideology of male supremacy centers around one core tenet: men are entitled to women for anything at any time. misogyny will, given time, result in male violence and exploitation. but it begins with entitlement. misogyny is a man feeling entitled to a woman’s body. to a girlfriend, wife, prostituted woman. but it doesn’t have to be solely sexual. he can be entitled to a woman’s subordination. he can be entitled to her kindness or attention. he can be entitled to her time and effort. he can be entitled to her support and loyalty. he can be entitled to her service and ideas. he can be entitled to her career and finances. there is no limit to the expression of male entitlement toward women. and that is what makes a man a patriarch. any person a misogynist. that a woman or girl, by virtue of being female, must be an endless fount of whatever one wishes.

misogyny is uncritically expecting your girlfriends to support all your decisions. misogyny is a man expecting his mother to cook and wash after him. misogyny is a boy getting angry that a girl has genuine, logical counter arguments to his ideas. misogyny is a boyfriend expecting his girlfriend to be 100% available to him whenever he wants attention or feels needy. without returning even half that energy. misogyny is stripping nuance from prominent female figures whether historical, fictional or celebrity. it is the denial of a woman’s interiority and needs. misogyny is a pastor that expects women to defer to him on spiritual matters. it has so many flavors and languages and it has no limits. male entitlement toward female people knows no limits. it’s TRA’s demanding access to women’s female spaces and calling any woman or girl that expresses discomfort or argues for her rights “inconsiderate bigot cunts.” entitlement to a woman’s agreement. it’s the government banning a woman’s right to terminating pregnancy or self-defense against sexual violence because governments are entitled to workers and soldiers.

and so, “not all men” is absurd because there’s virtually no man that does not have some level of this entitlement and expect it of at least one woman or girl in his life. especially because even women do not escape misogyny. men’s entitlement to controlling or overpowering a woman in some way (as the prime hallmark of the identity of a man) is omnipresent, whether or not it escalates into male supremacist violence. but again, once the ideology takes root, that women naturally owe men themselves or some capacity of themselves, violence (or neglect in the face of it) is almost always certain to follow. in which case the question for a woman doesn’t become a matter of “if” but “when.”

all men are entitled to women and girls and believe, as a result of being male supremacists, that they are owed our labor, bodies and minds. this alone makes all men (and boys) weaponized.

dangerous.

like i really hope you understand those people really really REALLY believe WHOLEHEARTEDLY that you can escape misogyny and oppression if you try hard enough. and if you can't, that's because of your lack of effort. it is your fault, your individual fault you're oppressed. don't ever think about reaching out to other women and helping each and fight against sexism together. do NOT gain class consciousness, only think about yourself. you're NOT like those weak women, they deserve the oppression but not you!!!!!!

You know what’s funny about that “‘masculinity is universally praised’ erm have you ever spoken to a butch woman?” Post? I don’t think a Radfem’s said that kind of shit- because it is stupid and does ignore the lived experience of gender nonconforming females to focus on theory. You know what did say that though? Whipping girl the Trans feminism book because it’s focus is on liberating femininity and most of it reads as terminally online despite being written in 2007

In the spring of 2023, several news outlets reported the heart-warming story of a fourteen-year-old autistic boy who made a poster and presented it to a female classmate, asking her to be his valentine. The girl said no, whereupon the boy's mother took to social media, recounting the tale and emphasising just how 'shy and socially awkward' her son was. The story got national attention and 'the next day at school, a number of [the boy's] classmates approached him with kind words and offers to be his valentine'. One girl 'presented him with a poster like the one he had made to ask the girl the day before'. He became a high-status victim, at least for a day; the girl he had initially asked out, a heartless bully. Yet what exactly had had she been supposed to do? Say yes when she didn't want to in order to spare him humiliation?

The story illustrates many of the problems with 'just' being kind. In the eyes of some, the boy's autism elevated him above the other boys who pressure girls to do things they do not want. His shyness and social awkwardness were problems the original girl could have solved simply by saying yes. Maybe she judged boys like him just because they were different. Her rejection became, not a simple expression of her desires – just as his choice to ask her, rather than another girl, had been – but a judgment on his worth as a human being, one which the rest of the world set about correcting. To some, the boy had a right to kindness and validation which the girl was withholding. But what of her right to have her needs respected? There's a suggestion that while all girls have the right to say no, it would make life a lot easier if they could train themselves not to, coupled with the old message that girls are better than boys at manipulating their desires – see how many of them were willing to approach the boy the next day! There's so much prejudice in the world, but if girls agreed to offer themselves to the boys who felt most left out, we'd have begun the work of removing it. Taken to its logical conclusion, this is incel thinking.

– Victoria Smith (2025) (Un)kind: How 'Be Kind' Entrenches Sexism, pp. 105-6.