That Wasn’t The Original Argument. Op Didn’t Say, ‘JK Rowling Does A Lot For Women But Her Posts

This is something i’ve been kinda stressing about lately as a lesbian woman. dunno if you could give your opinion?

i’m quite short. 5’3. Not ultra short, but shorter than average where I’m from (not american).

I’ve noticed I tend to find women of similar height and even slightly shorter attractive. It’s not that I haven’t ever found tall women attractive, I do, but I do seem to be more drawn toward the shorter ones.

Is this creepy? I don’t like it when the woman’s looks are juvenile looking. But I just seem to like the idea of my partner being either my size or maybe a bit smaller than me. Not like 4’10 or anything, but just a tad smaller. But now i’m worrying, because while I don’t think it’s the same as those 6’5 men who wanna date 5’0 women, maybe other women will see me as the same, especially radfems?:c

Again, it’s not like my future partner or my attraction in general has a height limit, I just, like some tend to prefer curly or straight hair, or like some lesbians hype up taller women, seem to like short women. In general though, big size differences have never appealed to me, neither in media or irl, so maybe it has something to do with it? Since i’m not overly tall myself, perhaps my preference just falls into line.

Sorry i’m rambling. Please be honest!

I'll be 100% honest anon, you are not saying anything that I would even remotely consider creepy or objectifying.

No one is obligated to a specific preference - men or womyn. I personally prefer a womyn who is my height or maybe just two inches taller. I also prefer fuller womyn, whether that is fat or muscle. This would only be an issue if right after you said that was your preference, you started rambling about how taller womyn are actually pieces of shit and that if a womyn has wavy hair then she's ugly lmao. That's only ever been the problem with men saying they don't like to date big womyn. They follow it up shitting on said big womyn instead of leaving it at, "I just prefer thin womyn."

You are not obligated to be attracted to anyone. You're just another gal with preferences.

Female people should be more ‘shallow’ tbh.

Males are allowed ‘shallowness’ all the time, you ask a male about his preferences and they’re rarely like, ‘I care about people’s hearts and souls UwU.’ No! He’ll say the most shallow shit imaginable! And no one will rush out to hate on them or find some way to ‘correct’ them for saying they like a woman with a fat ass. Female people are socialized and pressured out of admitting any hint of what they’re actually attracted to, female people are denied enthusiastic desire and lust and just. Let yourself be shallow and choosy and picky. Males don’t worry about being considered shallow when they call females over 160 ‘whales’. This isn’t even a call to be as cruel as they are about taste, just hoping to help some people move past their shame and guilt.

I want a wife by Judy Brady really is a summary of why the patriarchy continues to exist. If your capable of never thinking of what the other person might want, if you’re able to dehumanize them enough to never consider that they exist in their own right… Who wouldn’t want a sex mommy who does everything for you and is always pleasant. That’s fundamentally why I don’t think males can escape the patriarchy merely by embracing their own femininity. If the choice is between ‘sometimes people make fun of you if you act a certain way… But you get the (often unhappy but never unpleasant) sex mommy I mentioned earlier’ or ‘You can cry or wear a purse, be as feminine as you want but female people have rights and most of them won’t want to be your sex mommy and will might even require you to help them while they work.’ The only reason to pick the latter is if you actually see female people as human and her wants and needs as equal value to your own (or if you’re not attracted to females, that can build a bridge of empathy but well. Sometimes it’s just a continued expectation of labor except without the sex. Sometimes they still believe in male supremacy but see us as lacking value altogether.) So much of regressive politics around female people are built around this deal it’s kind of ridiculous when people act like it doesn’t exist.

The appeal to tradition is so funny- the amount of people who the past was good for is so small. "It's been around for ages" a lot of terrible shit has! Slavery wasn't a new invention, it existed for ages. Marital rape existed for ages. Dictatorships and monarchies existed for ages. The past is filled with hot garbage.

(op turned off rbs but there’s a lot of things wrong with this)

a woman IS more than reproductive organs, women can be anything, do anything, dress any way, act any way, so on and so forth. HOWEVER the only requirement is that she be of the female sex, ie have female reproductive organs.

this does not mean ALL a woman is is her female sex, only that to be a woman she MUST be the female sex

If you ever see me writing something like this, know my body has been snatched.

in case anyone was forgetting what the church was all about

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

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.

Yea, next question.