Feminism Is Just Fun & Games To These Losers. They Don't Give A Damn About Women's Rights, They Just

L

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

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

Social Construct Masterpost

I was inspired to make this post because of the mass confusion on tumblr about what social constructs are and how they function. I will start with a simple example:

This is a one dollar bill. It is an excellent example of a social construct. This piece of paper represents a specific amount of spending power in the society that it exists in (the USA). An individual person could decide personally that it represents 1000$ worth of spending power, but it would not matter because like all social constructs, the collective agreement between individuals in society is what determines the meaning of the construct. There are laws on the books about currency but it doesn’t stop society from changing the meaning of a dollar; after all, in times of scarcity a dollar is a much more valuable asset than in times of plenty. The exact value of a dollar is something that fluctuates in tune with other factors, including things like consumer confidence- meaning, how consumers feel about the economy. Social constructs can change based on changes of opinion in the population. 

One way to test if something is a social construct is to remove it from its native society and see if it retains the same functionality. The US dollar is accepted in some foreign countries, but in other places, it is just a piece of paper. 

Another way to test if something is a social construct is to remove people from the picture entirely and see if it retains its functionality. Without people to give a dollar meaning it simply becomes paper. 

Contrast the attributes of a dollar with say, biological sex.

Male humans produce sperm and much higher levels of testosterone than females. Females produce ova and offspring if their eggs are fertilized and implanted. Individuals who are sterile still have either male or female anatomy which serves sexual functions for the individual. Virtually everyone on earth qualifies as one sex or the other, with or without malfunctioning or variations. Is this binary a social construct?

Does the collective agreement of society give male and female organs their functionality? Absolutely not. Humans did not always have an understanding of how pregnancy happened, and yet it happened anyway. Individuals who don’t know about or understand reproduction can and do get pregnant via sex. No matter how many people got together and decided that females inseminate males there would be no change in the function of testes or ovaries. 

The functionality of human reproductive organs is also impervious to cultural or geographical differences. All over the world people get pregnant and have babies by mixing sperm from males with ova from females. There is no exception. 

Removing humans from the equation also has no effect on the biological reality of mammalian reproduction. Male mammals are male, female mammals are female, and only one of the two can give birth. 

Biological sex is not and never has been a social construct.

Another example is gender. Femininity is the easiest example to discuss. Lets look at different examples of femininity from around the world:

As you can see, what it means to be feminine or girly is very different depending upon the society. None of these is the “correct” femininity, just different versions from different cultures. There is no objective way to determine what makes someone feminine in any given culture- you have to ask people. 

The nature of femininity is totally subjective and relies on the collective agreement of society. If you move one of these women into a different society their defining feminine characteristics instead become physical characteristics with no gender designation at all. In fact, what would make you gender conforming in one culture would make you gender non conforming in another. Gender also changes in individual societies over time, so the meaning of being feminine in America in the 1800s would differ markedly from what it means to be feminine in America right now. How people feel about the construct changes its meaning.Thus we can easily say that gender is a social construct. 

ProPublica

Texas Banned Abortion. Then Sepsis Rates Soared.

ProPublica’s first-of-its-kind analysis is the most detailed look yet into a rise in life-threatening complications for women experiencing p

Pregnancy became far more dangerous in Texas after the state banned abortion in 2021, ProPublica found in a first-of-its-kind data analysis.

The rate of sepsis shot up more than 50% for women hospitalized when they lost their pregnancies in the second trimester, ProPublica found.

The surge in this life-threatening condition, caused by infection, was most pronounced for patients whose fetus may still have had a heartbeat when they arrived at the hospital.

ProPublica previously reported on two such cases in which miscarrying women in Texas died of sepsis after doctors delayed evacuating their uteruses. Doing so would have been considered an abortion.

Hey, as a black female I’m pretty sure you’re just using people like me as a prop but if you want a real answer, feel free to respond with a ‘sure’!

me: hey so uhhhh if being a woman must be experienced one certain way then how do you factor in women of colour or women from other countries into that?

radfem i have the displeasure of speaking to: shut up i'm not even going to reply to that go read a feminist book

I don’t care if a woman is amongst the worst human beings to walk this earth, if you believe that writing or imagining rape and sexually violent fantasies is an acceptable response to their actions you should stay far away from women. I don’t care if they’re transgender-exclusive, I don’t care if they’re conservative, I don’t care if they’re a criminal. Your fantasies reflect what you’re capable of thinking about all women.

… Tbh it feels weird to judge any female celebrity for being mediocre while males get to be as boring as they want and make millions from it (and get to be the ones in charge of the industry at large)