Https://x.com/babybeginner/status/1899372312258081033

will never get over what happened to the women’s march. the largest single-day protest in the history of the WORLD. 82 countries and 7 million people. an incredible display of female solidarity, hope, strength, and resistance. reduced to “white women in pussy hats.” not by conservatives but by leftists!! who gleefully dismissed this enormous protest because “white women voted for trump.” never mind that the women who attended the march very obviously did not vote for trump. they were all vilified anyway, even though a huge percentage of the protestors and organizers weren’t even white. the whole protest somehow came to be seen as a cringey, frivolous display of white woman privilege. again, the women’s march was GLOBAL and unprecedented in WORLD history. yet it’s pretty much never talked about anymore, except to joke about pussy hats.

Feminism is just fun & games to these losers. They don't give a damn about women's rights, they just want to belittle JK Rowling. How can you see the horrors these women faced and how amazing it is they were able to be helped, and just brush it off with a stupid joke?

You know what’s funny?

In the early ‘10s there was this idea of ‘color blindness’ among white people- not actual color blindness but the sentiment, ‘I don’t see race’ as a solution to racism. We kind of realized that saying that doesn’t actually solve anything? It usually just makes you refuse to acknowledge racism exists both in you and the world around you ie ‘I can’t be racist, I don’t even see race. I just see people <3 The lack of black people in my employment is merely a coincidence and I’d totally hate white illegals immigrants just as much as their nonwhite counterparts it’s just about respecting the law.’ Acknowledging race to them was often, ‘being the real racist.’

We now have a situation where people are ‘sex blind’ they don’t even see female people they just see people <3. And what’s funny is race is significantly more ambiguous- there’s actually arguments one could make about not referring to race during discussions of police brutality. I’d disagree with those arguments but they’d at least have some vigor, meanwhile abortion bans exclusively impact people based on sex but we’re supposed to pretend it’s effect is on this general notion of ‘people’. ‘People affected by police brutality’ and ‘people with the capacity to become pregnant’ come from the same damn place.

Dear god, I thought shitty modern art would stop at "banana taped to a wall" but now it's escalated to "keep three piglets caged in an art gallery and make them slowly starve to death in front of audiences".

they've been doing that sort of thing for a while, there was one maybe ten years ago where someone displayed a bunch of individual goldfish in powered blenders that the audience could choose to turn on or not

the thing about this sort of stuff though is that the audience response and the audience response TO the audience response is also part of the art, so "me beating your ass in an art gallery for liquifying a fish in front of me" is now a commentary on the the place of individual choice in a larger society.

also someone broke in and stole those piglets, which is an even funnier response, because now this art piece is a commentary on general human decency and there's nothing the artist can do about it

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.

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”.

These kinds of things are always so blatant about what they think womanhood should be- not all of them- but listen to a lot of them for long enough and they’ll say ‘there is a right and wrong way to be a man or woman. It’s something you can be better or worse at based on beauty standards and it’s something possible to fail at.’ It’s so obviously conservative.

i think it should be illegal to not have paper menus. and it should be illegal to only accept digital payments and not accept cash

generally making anything accessible only with a phone sould be illegal. like genuinely regulated by the govt and forbidden. IMO

It is kind of funny that every time there’s a poll made on here about how Radfems actually voted it’s like 90 percent Harris, 5 percent not US. It’s almost like they’re predominantly leftists but disagree with you guys on one thing (as many leftists do.)