Huh, I Hadn't Thought Of That The First Time I Read It But There Is A Pint There- Victor Begins Thinking

mom, dad, i found grandma’s terf sideblog immortalized on the wayback machine. why is there 5 hours worth of entries agonizing over the word ‘fish.’

People who are say 'everyone knows black women are universally more masculine' but in a woke way, also in the same breath sexualize black women's bodies and we're known as the big titty'd fat ass baddies who invented every modern beauty trend. So which is it? People all see us as men (non women) or are we all baddies who Kardashians/Ariana/Iggy are appropriating from. We can't possibly be viewed as women by society, so we're compared to men, and desperately need femininity, 'feminine representation', yet when a celebrity becomes a hyper feminine baddie (surgeries, makeup, nails, extensions) you know exactly what group of women she's mimicking.

one of my biggest gripes currently is the amount of people who will get super mad if u point out something that sexualises women and especially things that sexualise girls. like "ew why would u even think a 10 yr old in a crop top or a 4 year old in a bikini is sexual youre such a creep for even thinking that" like ok put ur fucking son in a crop top then. send him out in public wearing tiny little panties that have his ass sticking out. why are girls clothes so much smaller and tighter and more revealing than boys clothes?

I love tone policing the anger of marginalized groups for the comfort of their oppressors. What if the upper class stopped wanting to help the poor (something they wanted to do in the first place, for sure) because we keep making Guillotine memes and threatening them :( what if white people don’t like it when they’re called cracker and have to think about how they benefit from prison and slave labor :(( how can you blame someone for wanting gay people dead if they’re doing it because we keep making ‘are the straights okay?’ Jokes and they heard someone call them a breeder a few times. It’s honestly their fault if people want them dead because they were soooooo meaaaaaaaaaaaaaan :((((((

Alright this is gonna be tough for alot of ya'll to hear but leftist and progressive spaces need to be more welcoming to men especially cis het white men. The more we speak bad about men the more men will go down the alt right pipeline. And obviously that's a bad thing. If we want men to be on our side we should create a space where they can also feel included because if we don't more men will go down the alt right and alpha male pipeline

based take

I mean. 150 years is a long time from now- everyone on this site would be dead for sure. The average human lifespan is about 70 so it’d be I guess another 3 generations? 3 generations where women who were silenced by the Taliban can speak, where no one is forced to give birth and every child is wanted, where significantly less people are raped (as rape is seen akin to torture), where no girls undergo genitalia mutilation, no girls are forced into marriage, women around the world are free to pursue education and no assumption is made about their competence. The death of the Quiverfull movement and no girl ever again told she exists to be a helpmeet, nor that she is the cause of the world’s ills or that her body tempts males who do not have the ability to control themselves.

And that’s the shit I’m thinking of now- the shit that matters to me personally. The world could end in 3 lifetimes anyway at least this apocalyptic scenario makes less people suffer before the end.

if you could automatically delete all misogyny in the world: like it never existed in the first place, from all cultures and across all aspects of life, but at the cost of human life existing only for the next 150 years, would you? You get rid of no more issues, capitalism and racism still exist, but misogyny doesn't, from the most violent to the most banal, but in 150 years humanity will cease to exist, not painfully or violently, just cease to exist, would you do it?

-🐌

White People

Flexin That

White Privilege

male civility is a facade.

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.

Susan Sontag, The Third World of Women