File: 1550144360939.png (27.24 KB, 650x1050, cropped-woman-power_emblem.png)
This thread is for the discussion of Radical Feminism in contrast to Liberal Feminism.
Please direct gender critical discussion of transgender ideology to the Gender Critical thread >>>/ot/360163
What is radical feminism?
Radical Feminist theory analyses the structures of power which oppress the female sex. Its central tenet is that women as a biological class are globally oppressed by men as a biological class. We believe that male power is constructed and maintained through institutional and cultural practices that aim to bolster male superiority through the reinforcement of female inferiority. One such manifestation of the patriarchy is gender, which we believe to be a socially constructed hierarchy which functions to repress female autonomy and has no basis in biology. Radical Feminists also critique all religions and their institutions, and other practices that promote violence against women such as prostitution, pornography and FGM. The subjugation of women is a social process that has no basis in biology or any other pretext, and thus can and should be challenged and dismantled.
Radical Feminists see that our oppression as females is closely linked to and bound up in our roles as the bearers of new life and male hatred of our female reproductive power. Radical Feminists take an unequivocal stance on the right to female reproductive justice.
Radical Feminism increasingly recognises that females from different oppressed groups experience a combination of oppressions. Class, race and disability have systematic structural impacts on different women's lives in different toxic combinations.
Radical Feminists believe in an autonomous women's movement as the path to women's liberation. We believe in the importance of female only spaces where theory and action is developed from the lived reality of females who have been socialised into womanhood.http://www.radfemcollective.org
File: 1550145201537.jpg (137.78 KB, 800x800, sheila-jeffreys-quote-lbc2b4d.…)
File: 1550145650063.png (222.45 KB, 768x809, bingo-card-final3.png)
A liberal feminist is a feminist who believes the optimal route to equality and liberation for women is working within the system to reform it. They usually believe that gender identity is real and that choice feminism (the idea that anything can be feminist if a woman chooses it) is a good thing.
Radical feminists believe the optimal way to achieve equality and liberation is to do away with the current system, because it's been built on a foundation of misogyny and inequality that cannot be reformed. They believe that some choices are inherently either non-feminist or anti-feminist. When they say "gender" they are using its original academic meaning, which is gender roles and expectations rather than the more modern idea that you can have a female or male brain.
SJW stands for social justice warrior, and doesn't have a set meaning, but usually refers to the kind of extremist armchair activist you find on Tumblr. They're much more likely to be a libfem than a radfem.
File: 1550177273734.jpg (42.59 KB, 436x268, p74q9qCcjt1vm8cxp.jpg)
Good answer but I would change one thing>the optimal route to equality and liberation
Libfems don't care about liberation, they care about 'empowerment'. The lack of focus on liberation is the biggest problem with liberal feminism and the main thing that separates them from radfems. And I don't believe equality is a necessary tenet of radical feminism because we can't define our own liberation by how it relates to men. One quote I see a lot is 'people in prison are equal, but not free'.
Equality is a really poor, simplistic way to describe what we want and need imo. It's used to make feminism easy and palatable for people, like "you want men and women to have equal rights? You're already a feminist!", but it doesn't really make sense. Men immediately jump to shit like>then we should be able to hit women equally!>feminists don't care enough about men's problems, what about equality?>feminists just want special treatment, not equality
etc, it's just not a meaningful gauge of how liberated we are and it's an opportunity for obtuse morons to nitpick the aims of feminism.
>>373663>the more modern idea that you can have a female or male brain.
NTAYRT, but please tell me that isn't actually becoming an academically recognized thing? male/female brain?? Because that's just another slippery slope for society slide down, since nobody can crack open your skull and see your brain's alleged "gender" then it means any shitbag male can flip-flop their "brain gender" to be a lesbian transwomyn without any psychological or medical transition necessary. People don't need
a gender to define them down to every last detail. Do you wake up in the morning thinking, "I have to put on my female pants and shirt, brush my female teeth, comb my female hair…"? Nah. The more we obsess over the male/female gender identity bullshit, the worse it's gonna get because it's gonna keep splitting people into more and more subcategories like agender and third gender. Anyone who agonizes over their gender so much that they need to have gendered inanimate objects that have nothing to do with biological sex has an underlying issue with gender roles they need to address, and I feel like that goes for most of society these days. Everyone and their sister is trying to redefine gender nowadays to either escape their idea of opression or put on their idea of privilege when really, it's all subjective cosmetic bullshit unless you're having sex or trying to have a baby.
File: 1550190101215.jpg (189.92 KB, 1273x1280, F1.large.jpg)
Yet, scientist are able to consistently guess the sex of a person based on their MRI scan with about 80% confidence.
>Consider, for example, a division of humans into two clusters or types on the basis of the number of “female-end” and “male-end” characteristics – one type, characterized by more “male-end” than “female-end” characteristics, would contain 99% of the males and 14% of the females in Carothers and Reis’ sample, whereas the other type, characterized by more (or the same) number of “female-end” than “male-end” characteristics, would contain 86% of the females and 1% of the males. Thus, a person’s sex category can be used to quite accurately predict whether s/he will have more “female-end” or more “male-end” characteristics.>Moreover, although it is possible to use one’s brain architecture to predict whether this person is female or male with accuracy of ∼80%, one’s sex category provides very little information on the likelihood that one’s brain architecture is similar to or different from someone else’s brain architecture.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2018.00399/full
Male and female brains are not indistinguishable. Just like male and female heights are not indistinguishable. You can say with very high confidence that people over 6'0" are male, even if there are females this tall or taller. And vice versa for below 5'2" being female. There's naturally the 5'2" to 6'0" in-between area, but you can guess that the ones closer to the shorter end being female, and ones closer to the taller end being male.
It just doesn't work the other way, both for brains and height. You cannot take "male" and say "they are over 6'0"" and "they have such and such brain".
Also pic related.https://www.pnas.org/content/112/50/15468
Figure F: there were consistently no women with 6 or more "male-end" characteristics at the same time having 0 "female-end" ones.
Figure E: "Females" in the left column are consistently more classified as female brains, and vice versa for "Males" on the right being classified as male brains.
If there were no male/female leaning brains, all the figures would be equally uniform and indistinguishable.
File: 1550194075165.jpg (91.26 KB, 598x685, 41598_2017_17352_Fig1_HTML.jpg)
Quoting a recent post on r/GC:https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/apgf0r/a_brief_lesson_in_gender_and_brain_difference_and/
The MRI studies from a few years ago that showed transwomen had feminised brains used TIMs who been insisting they were trans from a very young age. These are virtually all gay as adults. So those scans were of gay adults.
Other MRI work has shown gay males have feminised brains.
So in 2017, another study was done because it was realised that the older MRI studies were comparing GAY trans brains to hetero non-trans brains and was likely only picking up their homosexuality. It turns out the differences observed were almost entirely down to their homosexuality.
It also turns out the hetero TIM's weren't showing up as any different to a normal male. Which is probably why transbians register as totally unfeminine.
The paper and relevant snippets from it.https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-17352-8
>After controlling for sexual orientation, the transgender groups showed sex-typical FA-values. The only exception was the right inferior fronto-occipital tract, connecting parietal and frontal brain areas that mediate own body perception
Basically only one very small area was different between the gay TIMs and gay men. So if gay TIMs are women, so are all gay men. If anyone is interested in the one difference, I'll dig out what I've got.
>Thus, in contrast to the highly significant sex difference between heterosexual men and women, the homosexual groups differed barely from each other.
>Of the eight brain regions that distinguished male from female brains, the heterosexual transsexual sample differed from the male controls on none.
This last quote: it means hetero TIM's do not have any feminised parts to their brains. Whatever is going on there is not a mismatch between prenatal gender hardwiring and body. This is considered to be good evidence for the autogynephilia theory of hetero TIMs.
I know someone has posted this here before but I don't think the importance of it as a trans debunker has really been appreciated.
So the next time someone posts something claiming to show TIMs have female brains point out that it didn't correct for sexual orientation, and its not true for hetero TIMs at all.
where's the part of the brain responsible for the obsession with catgirls and weird clothes?>>373762
personally skeptical about the socialist leanings associated with it.
I guess the only thing i disagree with is the black and white feminist/not feminist issue. Caring about her appearance or doing sex work does not make a woman a non-feminist in my opinion. Excluding women and shaming the "empowering" stuff will not destroy the patriarchy, it will just divide us further.
I'll also call trannies their pronouns if that makes them hate themself less
>>373856>Caring about her appearance or doing sex work does not make a woman a non-feminist in my opinion.
That is the same opinion as any sensible radfem…? Those are not feminist ACTS, but someone doesn't get kicked out of the radfem club for doing things that aren't feminist. I wear makeup even though I know it's not feminist, we don't have to be feminist 24/7 when we're all just trying to get by.
Of course, if those women refuse to acknowledge that those acts are not feminist, then they don't have radfem beliefs and aren't radfems. They're empowered choice feminists who are sticking their heads in the sand. Pretty simple.
itayrt, i really don't want to start any debate over it bc no one will change my mind, but i heavily disagree with radfems who are against women doing makeup/shaving/etc. it is my choice to look the way i want to, if i am happy this way, love doing my makeup, and uncomfortable with body hair, let me do it without being judged. i'm an adult and i can choose to look the way i want. i am against all forms of sex "work" though and am very wary of the male gender in general- i avoid persuing relationships (i have a made-up "boyfriend" for this, lol) and i have issues having sex with men even though i'm attracted to them. so even though some of my opinions make me not feel "radfem enough", i still feel strongly feminist for living the way i want to without relying on men, and never giving into the idea that i would be happier if i wasn't single/"i need a man to be happy", y'know shit society tries to groom you into believing.
How is it a choice when you feel disgusted by your own natural body and you've been groomed by society at large to participate in femininity?
See how much of a choice it is when you see how you're treated when you DON'T wear makeup and shave lol
Femininity is harmful and you are perpetuating hurt against other women because they fail to conform like you.
So women aren't allowed to criticize each other now?
Funny how I'm supposed to sugar coat every opinion I have because another woman might get upset by what I say. That DOES make you a child.
It is objectively harmful to women because it perpetuates toxic femininity and what women are expected to look like you dunce. That's not even getting into the actual PHYSICAL effects that wearing makeup/shaving/promoting vanity does.
Are you going to start defending women that get plastic surgery and lip fillers now? Because well, they just like it! It's their choice to do it! Leave them alone you big meanie!
For gods sake take some personal responsibility into your life and try doing something that is meaningful and challenging.
Don't think it's harder for women that don't perform femininity? You probably literally only get critized by radfems on lolcow but the rest of the world supports your choice so just give it a rest already.
>>373897>"perpetuating hurt against other women"
Is that a lie though? I'll perform femininity as much as I want but I still know that at the end of the day, we'd all be better off if we collectively stopped wearing makeup and shaving because then that unfair standard would no longer be enforceable. I know that I'm not helping women by doing this, I know it's not a real choice because we're punished when we don't make choices that appease men, but I'm not going to stop doing what makes me feel comfortable in everyday life.
People who have a cry about this shit really need to grow thicker skin. You're not a perfect feminist, big deal. Admit your flaws and move on.
File: 1550205175993.png (217.65 KB, 768x1119, slut-walk-2.png)
Dress however you choose. Just don't refer to choices that reinforce femininity as feminist.
The main issue with choice feminism is that it attempts to rebrand EVERY choice a woman makes as a feminist act simply because a woman chose it, and it thereby stifles discussion and analysis about what societal influences could be at play. Yeah, some anons needs to accept that you may not agree with what other people do but you can't control everything.
Get over it. Same with women who get pissy when feminists criticize something that they like. Other people have the right to engage critically with these subjects, to claim otherwise is anti-intellectual. If you're an adult you should be able to stick to your guns in situations like these. People criticize a lot of things that I like, doesn't stop me from not giving a fuck.
This so hard but what other things do you consider not feminist?
I like makeup but I don't wear it most days but I feel hypocritical because I feel negatively about sex work.
File: 1550216011696.jpg (80.74 KB, 1280x720, maxresdefault.jpg)
I think discussion about whether wearing makeup or not is a feminist act or not depends on what the makeup looks like. You can definitely wear beautiful, well applied makeup that is nonetheless considered in poor taste or unprofessional. And of course so many men claim to hate makeup and wish women wouldn't wear it, so it isn't clear cut.
Given there is so much makeup that repels men or at least only invites indifference I'd say it is definitely possible to wear makeup in ways that are only pleasing to one's self and other women.
It's still generating a profit for all the men behind the beauty industry that does, primarily, exist to make women more attractive to men.
I don't think anyone should beat themselves up over wearing makeup though, personally it's not one of the battles I pick.
Yes, agreed. So many men seem to think we are shape-changing aliens and we are "tricking" them when they discover our eyelids are not naturally glittery, eyeliner doesn't come stamped on at birth, sometimes faces have different colors and blemishes. The worst kind of men hate makeup as I think it gives women freedom to express themselves and change perceptions about ourselves, which society restricts men from enjoying.
The man who wants a "natural beauty" but wants to chain you to the kitchen sink. Makeup can be a very positive interest and I think most women in the makeup community (fans, not influencers) are good people. It's a thing we have which men don't, something we can enjoy without (much) judgement.
I realized the rebuttal as soon as I hit New Reply, this is a good point of course. There are more female owned brands now that women could support so thankfully the market provides option.>>373989
I'm at the point where I think a portion of men really do have limited perceptive capabilities. Men are more likely to be color blind but they also seem to have issues more distinguishing makeup, shoop, traps etc. I wonder if more men suffer from prosopagnosia (face blindness) or something like it. Obviously there have been talented male artists, but this is a subset of men. 8% of men are color blind maybe comparable levels of men have their perceptive capabilities hampered in some way.
Agreed…They're usually not very nice people either*, thinking specifically of the famous male Youtubers who do makeup. I support the gender non-conforming aspect of it and men wearing makeup in general however, so I can't really complain, which is the general consensus on it. But as usual men get an easy time of it.
>>373997>Even in make up women aren’t allowed to be better.
It's the same in countless other areas as well:
Hair dressers? The normal, ridiculously underpaid ones are all female, yet the rare super successful ones are men.
Fashion? Historically it were always women having to do the sewing , knitting etc. (find me a nomal dude who can even sew on a button), yet all the rich and famous brands are owned by male designers.
And lastly, the biggest one: cooking.
It's always been and probably will always be women who have to do the cooking, yet nearly all famous chefs are men! My father has only cooked for us children once in my whole life, it's always my mother who has to do it, yet once a man even so much as tries, he's immediately guaranteed success.
Makeup takes just the cake because it's a thing girls and women get made fun for even today. On the one hand we're shallow for using it, but on the other hand we're ugly if we don't.
It also angers me, that the supporters of all these gay makeup gurus are solely girls - it's as if we as women push them to fame, in this case there really are no men involved, it's in a way our fault.
Yes, all of this.
Women forever will be the ones doing the grunt work while men get praised for their mediocre skills.
File: 1550230404666.jpg (366.83 KB, 500x600, no fuck this I'm done.jpg)
Thanks for the links, but if you want to discuss trannies and misquote studies you can do that in the GC thread >>360163>point out that it didn't correct for sexual orientation
It did, read what you link:https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-17352-8>Interestingly, both TrW and TrM displayed FA values in the CST and SLF more in accordance with their sex assigned at birth, whereas in the IFOF the FA values were more in accordance with their gender identity (sex-atypical for TrW, sex-in between for TrM). The IFOF connects the occipital, parietal and medial prefrontal cortices. The IFOF, in particular on the right side, may thus be involved in the perception of self (mediated by the mPFC50) and the perception of one’s own body (mediated by the right parietal lobe[51,52]). Consequently, aberrant FA in the IFOF of transgender individuals may be underlying to the unconformity between their perception of self and their body. Importantly, this finding of sex-atypical FA values in the IFOF did not change after accounting for the more heterogeneous sexual orientation among the transgender participants.
Who could have guessed that trans people have atypical brain areas (IFOF) responsible for self-perception and own body perception.>Importantly, the present data also provide a neuroanatomical underpinning for a GD/transgender-specific aspect - the body dysphoria and great distress due to incongruence between physical sex and experienced gender. The right-hemispheric differences between cis-homosexual and transgender groups, together with the confirmed aberration of FA in the (right) IFOF, provide compelling indications for the hypothesized different own body perception, specifically in transgender individuals. In line with our results, several previous neuroimaging studies found differences between trans- and cisgender groups particularly located in the right hemisphere[16,17,22,27,29] (…), and the right hemisphere in general have been reported to be involved in cognitive processes of (body) perception in relation to self, body ownership, ego-centric representation, and bodily self-consciousness[51,52,53,54,55].
Colour me surprised. /s>In conclusion, the present findings support the idea of a distinction and partial overlap between the neurobiology underlying sexual orientation and transgenderism. Moreover, the observed right-hemisphere differences between the transgender groups and cisgender controls, also after taking into account sexual orientation, specifically in the IFOF further emphasize that the signature of GD is related to self-processing and the experience of body ownership.>>374013
Hairdresser to the British Royal Family is a woman, Denise Patricia McAdam. She also worked with Grace Kelly, while we are at influential women.
Fashion?>Gabrielle “Coco” Bonheur Chanel>the only fashion designer to be named on Time 100: The Most Important People of the Century
Cooking?>When three Michelin stars were first awarded in 1933, two female chefs, Eugénie Brazier and Marie Bourgeois, were among them.>The lack of women holding stars has repeatedly led to criticism of the Michelin Guide, who have in turn pointed to the lack of female chefs overall in the industry.
You know, maybe they are actually not lying?
Maybe the problem we should tackle is the sexist stereotype that is still prevalent in many cultures and among many people, that women's job is to tend to the house and bring up children, and not be successful in career?>>374016
This is a problem with science overall, at least when it comes to recognition of women's research. Female scientists are dismissed by the wider populace and when it comes to awarding them for research.
Is it like this also in the scientific communities themselves? Because I don't believe that findings by female colleagues are dismissed there.
For both hairdressing and fashion you only named 3 women total, and the point still stands that men, gay ones in particular, are seen as better in these fields despite them historically being women’s work.
I hate how much straight women obsess over gay men and their work, they don’t care about us. Just because some guy takes it up the ass doesn’t mean he’s suddenly better versed in fashion/styling than the entire female populace
Then no one will want to go into said field because how in the hell are they supposed to afford living. You didn’t really think that through, anon
Men devaluing our work is in no way a good thing
I don't think we can pinpoint one specific absolute reason. I think there are many and I think that most of them stem from our biological differences.
Engels speculated that basically men wanted to control the biological means of production ie: wombs. Basically, it's easy to say if a child is a mother's child etc, it's easy to distribute land from mother to children because it is so easily tracable. But once the mother has multiple sexual partners, how do you know for sure who is the father? The only way is to control women and marry them etc. (sorry for this shitty explanation but I read it in another language and it's hard for me to translate it in english)>>373889
Can I ask you why
you're uncompfterable with body hair ? Is it just your own or if you touch a man's arm/leg or whatever (even accidently) would his body hair specifically disgust you/make you uncompfterable.
Look, I sometimes wax myself. I think you can be a radfem and remove your body hair but you're absolutely delusional if you think that your unease with body hair is "organic" and that it doesnt directly stems from patriarchy.
File: 1550236587051.jpeg (21.23 KB, 300x297, creditbabble3.jpeg)
Hairdressing was initially a gender separated profession, and later primarily male one. Dating back to ancient Rome and Greece, men would work with men, and women had their hair maintained at home. Hairdressing re-appeared as a profession around 17th century, where servants would be grooming wealthy people's hair. These were also men who would start hairdressing women first. Though, around the time, Madame Martin was the hairdresser at the court of Louis XIV, so it wasn't male-exclusive profession.
Only due to post-war sexism making hairdressing one of the few acceptable professions for women, alongside teaching, nursing and clerical work it's considered a female field. Blame modern sexism for flipping hairdressing into sterotypically female profession.
I don't know about fashion, I'm not too interested in the mainstream one, but the fashion I like is primarily by women for women.
Adding on to cooking. Eugénie Brazier, Marie Bourgeois, Marguerite Bise, Sophie Bise, Annie Féolde, Nadia Santini, Luisa Marelli Valazza, Elena Arzak, Helena Puolakka, Clare Smyth, Anne-Sophie Pic, Carme Ruscalleda, Dominique Crenn are all (but not all) female chefs who were awarded 3 Michelin stars.
Why are there so little? Because only 20% of chefs in the UK are women, while in the US it's less than 5%.
Cooking is not really a female profession (it's not tied to gender tbh). It's considered being women's work, because "women's work" is home work, which includes cooking, and not career as a cook.
I regret looking for some pic related.https://thoughtcatalog.com/nico-lang/2013/09/these-45-shockingly-sexist-vintage-ads-will-make-you-glad-to-live-in-2013/
But yeah, thank you America.
NTAYRT, but removing some or all of my pubic hair for most of my life has been related to the visual aesthetic of my piercings. Likewise for shaving my legs and sometimes my arms for my tattoos.
Also, freshly depilated labia are more sensitive.
Let's look at the history of women's oppression based on menstruation.
The ritual segregation of women to menstruation huts is often the first thing that comes to mind.
For example, in Nepalese Hinduism:https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chhaupadi#OriginThe practice of chhaupadi originates from the superstition that menstruation causes women to be temporarily impure, based on the myth that Indra created menstruation as a means to distribute a curse. In this logic, it is believed that if a menstruating woman touches a tree, it will never again bear fruit; if she consumes milk, the cow will not give any more milk; if she reads a book, Saraswati, the goddess of education, will become angry; if she touches a man, he will be ill.https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_and_menstruationAccording to the anthropologists Buckley and Gottlieb, cross-cultural study shows that, while taboos about menstruation are nearly universal, and while many of these involve notions of uncleanliness, numerous menstrual traditions "bespeak quite different, even opposite, purposes and meanings." In some traditional societies, menstrual rituals are experienced by women as protective and empowering, offering women a space set apart from the male gaze and from unwanted sexual or domestic pressures and demands.An instructive example is provided by the anthropologist Wynne Maggi, who describes the communal bashali (large menstrual house) of women in the Kalasha Valley (northwestern Pakistan) as their 'most holy place', respected by men, and serving as women's all-female organizing centre for establishing and maintaining gender solidarity and power. According to one body of cultural evolutionary scholarship, the idea that menstrual blood marks the body as periodically sacred was initially established by female coalitions in their own interests, although later, with the rise of cattle-ownership and patriarchal power, these same beliefs and taboos were harnessed by religious patriarchs to intensify women's oppression.
was menstruation regarded as unclean at best and cursed at worst by both women and men in so many primitive cultures? Was it simply because primitive man did not understand menstruation and could only interpret it as an illness?
File: 1550246813994.jpeg (38.74 KB, 305x400, 7EB7C881-4FFF-4B3C-AA55-587CC4…)
A treasure, truly
File: 1550247677761.jpg (64.27 KB, 350x471, $.jpg)
Eh, that one's annoying but:
"is it always illegal to kill a woman?"
"show her it's a man world"
"keep her where she belongs"
"why you should beat your wife"
"innocence is sexier than you think" with the pic emulating a child, plus pic related.
And of course men in the comments somewhow managing to turn the discussion under the article to misandry. Really?
File: 1550247823964.png (342.29 KB, 443x571, picture-32.png)
Don't forget "if she doesn't give it to you, get it yourself!".
Yet men are constantly killing one another, participating in wars and meaningless bloodshed in the name of "god" and killing animals on a mass scale. What the fuck is circumcision if not massive amounts of bloodshedding (where in some Jewish sects, they literally suck the bloody penis of the newly circumcised baby)?
But apparently none of that is considered impure.
What a fucking joke.
All of those things were ritually impure too, anon (except circumcision, which was done because not being circumcised was impure) and required ritual sacrifice to be considered "pure".
I don't think isolating women was right, but to give the Israelis some credit those things all did require different outlined sacrifices in order for one to be "pure" again.
I think it's due to power and control over reproduction or womb envy. Fact that women carry the next generation and legacy of the species probably pisses them off. (look at all the men praying to every god in the sky for artificial wombs attached to sexbots to replace women on the planet) They claim they build everything but all things come to end, buildings fall and civilizations die away but people live on due to be born from women. They want that power so they flex and remind us all the time of how physically superior they are, how they can easily break us and abuse us when they want. I'm sure if we sat with our hands on our laps, quiet in a potato sack inside some shitty shack staring out into space while they go out to explore the world and lead interesting lives, they might still hate women for being so docile but the hatred might not be as intense? This is all just a personal theory>>374124>>374128>keep where she belongs >not too long ago women couldn't leave a marriage even if her husband was abusing her
No wonder many men now whine about divorce. They've lost control and desperate for it to come back
File: 1550315332052.jpg (16.29 KB, 460x322, 508da9a5-6b6f-4629-8fcf-936396…)
Crossposting from the GC thread
Today two radfem groups went to the 8M gathering to talk about what we're advocating for, taking a special note to prostitution and sexual trafficking, which is rampant where I live (South America), where the police and politicians run prostitution rings and no one bats an eye, women dissappear all the time, etc. They couldn't even say a word, all the libfems started censoring them, calling them names, calling them transphobic etc, one of the pro-sexwork (who is notorious for saying that she and the rest of her group know where prostitution rings are and where sexual trafficked women are imprisioned but refuse to disclose it because they won't receive any reward for it) pushed and shoved a few of my friends, and one tranny even choked a woman from one of the groups.
Link to videohttps://twitter.com/alikajr_/status/1096603117016281088?s=19
Another video added by anonhttps://mobile.twitter.com/mrqztrinidad/status/1096616666555969536
here's another vid where you can clearly see the tranny jumping to punch the girl talking, we are living this this kind of violence and misogyny here
Men haven't always hated women. Some African tribes were historically matriarchal. I think it came about once people began to personally own things, like land and animals, and so a united family structure became necessary - a marital union of mother and father who bore children. Before that, people would just have sex and everyone would look after the resultant children, so parentage wasn't really an issue. Once inheritance became a thing, parentage became an issue - mother is easily determined, but father is not. So male paranoia about raising another man's child kicked in… Plus a ton of superstitious bullshit about menstruation. I remember reading once that women were deemed satanic because the average menstrual cycle is 28 days long, the same as the moon cycle, which actually works out to 13 periods a year. >>373906
Minimising critical analysis of women's adherence to social beauty standards as "crying about it" - nice internalised misogyny. You sound like a man. The point of radical feminism is to liberate women from needing to do this shit to feel comfortable - if that hurts your feelings, Ms Thick Skin, libfem might be more your speed.
File: 1550327752398.jpg (51.22 KB, 1024x768, 870x619xpregnancy-week-5-amnio…)
>>374510>but I'm starting to lean more right purely because it's coherent and honest
then you're not a radfem. and literally how is leaning right more coherent and honest? both the right and left are misogynistic, but there's absolutely nothing for women on the right.
> Whenever I see leftists arguing against abortion they say "it's just a clump of cells!" - like all living organisms are a clump of cells, including the mother
65% of abortions are performed on, not fetuses, but embryos, at 8 weeks or less, which are not viable, at all, like, not even close, outside of the womb and the 'cell clumps' aren't as highly specialized as the mother, obviously? Like, this is 5 weeks, and this 'baby' is the size of a literal sesame seed despite the ridiculous 'magnification'.
sage for off topic but did you happen to become "radfem" because you don't like trannies
no offense but i have seen radfem spaces being taken over by women who don't actually believe in feminism but they just don't like trannies (or other dirty gays either)
Not real time, but PeachYoghurt has a forum site going.https://www.genderhammer.com
Related, should I include a resource list in the next OP? There will be a lot of overlap with the list in the GC thread, but there is a lot more out there.>>374510>>374525
And the politic of the right in the US is informed by Christianity, particularly Evangelical.
either way they can still be saved
we can introduce them to rad em works and try to pink-pill them
In your opinion there's nothing for women on the right, there's many women who disagree with you. Don't remember when you were awarded the power to dictate who was and who wasn't a radfem, either. Radfem is a critical analysis, not a political leaning, it's not inherent to the left (quite obviously, re: misogyny).
Please save me the pro-choice lecture as well. I've had a baby, I'm intimately aware of all this information, and I'm pretty sure I outlined my stance in my initial comment. Pointless response. >>374560
I'm from the UK, and the sudden erosion of women's rights is what introduced me to radfem, yes. I'm not the sort of person who needs to claim feminism though, I'd be quite happy as GC woman if I didn't agree with RF theory. I'm also bisexual, so the homophobia tack won't stick. >>374573
There were radfems from the first wave who didn't think RF was fundamentally anti-capitalist.
>"I especially can't stand women who don't align with my worldview, not in MY feminism"
Ah, the left-wing Stazi strikes again. Tell me again what makes leftist ideological structure different from right-wing again? If you disagree with the herd mentality you're out? This is what actually puts women off feminism, which is fucking sad.
Your assumption that I'm a rogue GC tranny-basher with no knowledge of RF works is wrong, sorry. If you've got a link to the text that says you have to rigidly stick to one political ideology, never question it, or you're automatically disbarred from being RF - please feel free to post it.
Ending this OT here, as I doubt I'll get any critical conversation out of it.
Radfem is a critical analysis, not a political leaning
Yes, fucking thank you. I'm politically independent, I know I value morality over finding people who share similar political minds like mine
said I think the vast majority of us would be libfems who didn't accept trannies as women and or didn't like pron
To put it broadly: class feminism (Socialist, Marxist) is based on economic class analysis, liberal feminism is based on legal systems, radical feminism is sex class analysis. I see a lot of class feminists who call themselves radical feminists; the difference is the reasoning behind it, and I think a lot of the theory they agree with is exactly what supports the misogyny of the left. Stuff like "Women should be liberated from gender roles to benefit society - prostitution is wrong because capitalist exploitation, but "empowering" women to have meaningless casual sex is right, without there being any negative consequences for men!"
>inb4 someone argues that isn't feminism
I know it's not. Charles Fourier, the guy who coined the term 'feminism' was a radical socialist, and he believed in liberating women from the oppression of marriage and prostitution…but also believed in creating a fuck free-for-all society, like a precursor to the "Free Love" era that was supposedly super-feminist. Two sides of the same misogynistic coin.
I was aware and critical of misogyny since I was in my tweens, so I’ve dabbled in a lot of feminist ideologies over the years but I feel like radical feminism puts to words everything that I’ve observed about the world best
It also feels like the only feminist community that still primarily focuses on the liberation of women which is a sad irony. Most others seem to now focus on men or marginalised groups, even if the problems they’re focusing on aren’t female specific
This is not the only time Atlus was gender critical. See this article about Persona 4: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/denial-of-the-self-queer-characters-in-persona-4/1100-6404712/
There's a male character who likes dolls and sewing but who acts otherwise trad male. Rumors in society call him "gay". The game shows him coming to terms with the idea that having certain hobbies doesn't determine his sexuality. Cue liberal rage, whining about homophobia.
Second female character is a "detective prince". Characters use female pronouns on her after realizing she's a girl. Liberals cries transphobia like it's impossible for girls to dress a certain way without being trans.
Pull quote from the article that made me laugh:
> The discovery that Naoto is physically female immediately trumps all of the years he has spent living as a male.
>>375309>how are women ever going to be liberated if we just let it slide when they participate in the trappings of their own oppression?
You are in the good path. Wish more girls were as woke as you.
I think feminism and women rights activism would be a lot healthier and effective if we make the women who actively work against women and for men accountable for their actions, instead of excusing everything they do because… They are women?? This is the shit that always made me skeptic about feminists, either liberal or not. And no, I'm not talking about the poor women who are sex workers so they don't fucking starve, I'm talking about women as the slutty ones you put as a example who just sleep their ways to the top leaving the women who actually do the effort to work hard to attain what their want as pointless, and more hardcore examples; misogynistic mothers who abuse their daughters or let their daughters be abused by their fathers, or women who date really shitty men out of convenience and enable them. That's just to put some examples. They are really terrible women out there who actively take part on our oppression and don't give a flying fuck because they hate us as much as their men do, and when you call them out, you are silenced under the guise of what you're saying is misogynistic. I've seen it happen a lot in feminist communities, of all kinds.
The only ones I've seen calling out misogynist women who abused and degraded other women have been radical lesbians. Wish heterosexuals/asexuals learnt a little from them.
>>375313>It's no wonder trash like tradthots exist when left-wing feminists ree at anyone who doesn't agree with their political stances.
well no shit? there are some tenants that are vital to being a radfem. can't believe the anons in this thread are being agreeable to someone expressing pro-life sympathies.
to respond to your statement >>374510
, many radfems are against capital punishment because many rads lean left and realize that the justice system can be exploited. if a rich man will never see the death penalty because he can afford the best lawyers then its not a fair or just system. and its a drain on resources due to infinite appeals and its not a deterrent against commiting crimes so whats the point of it? i don't see how thats incompatible with a pro-choice position. women aren't incubators or baby factories, a fetus doesn't exists and whatever "rights" it has should never trump those of the body it inhabits.
being pro-life is fundamentally incompatible with radfem politics. like >>374560
said, some of you anons just want a cool excuse to shame women and hate on troons. "im a radfem but i hate sluts you guys!" slut/whore/bitch are all slurs used against women and you should keep them out of your vocabulary. this doesn't mean you have to like women who sleep around, but those words can apply to every woman, not just the ones you don't like.
>>375309>I don't think men who think of women as sex objects are any worse then women who act like sex objects thereby sending the message to men that women are sex objects, either through their words or their actions.
Honestly why does men's perspective matter when it comes to how woman live their personal lives? Their perspective is intrinsically skewed anyway. Expressing sexuality =/= acting like an object, it depends on the context. If that's how a man views all women it won't matter what the words and actions of individual women are. Men call women sluts and whores even for rejecting sex with them. Women in very conservative Muslim countries get called whore for showing their hair. Words like these are basically meaningless and innately misogynistic because they are frequently applied to any woman to shame her regardless of circumstances.
Of course I don't think it's a good idea for women to lack sexual boundaries or have unprotected sex with multiple partners but that's a self-esteem issue, and an extreme case.
>Whenever I mention this to anybody they say its not feminist to shame women but how are women ever going to be liberated if we just let it slide when they participate in the trappings of their own oppression?
By that same train of thought you could make the argument that choosing celibacy or opting out of being "slutty" is participating in the trappings of your own oppression because it plays into the patriarchal expectancy for women to be pure and virginal. Whatever choice you make within this dichotomy, you're still doing it "for men" and they will look down on you either way. Do what you feel comfortable with. What misogynistic men think doesn't matter.
>>375506>Expressing your sexuality is different from objectifying yourself.
Yeah, no shit? That's the point I was making.>You sound like a libfem.
Nah, I've celibate by choice, and I'm anti-porn and critical of kink. I just don't live my life under a microscope always basing my decisions off of what men will think about me. Like who even gives a fuck?
Thank you! Why does radical feminism need to be "inclusive" of viewpoints that are contradictory to it (like being pro life)? Why should we care the some women are "put off" by the ideology or movement? Maybe these women's core beliefs are not a fit for radical feminism.
Instead of making feminism, any strand of it, some kind of fun girls club it should instead be an ideology and movement with dedicated members that aren't just keyboard warriors and will make an effort to help women out materially. I'm saying this as someone who does not fully identify with the label specifically because right now I am just a keyboard warrior.
How the fuck can you say you're a radical feminist but still perform toxic femininity and use other women? Or when you constantly excuse and defend the men in your lives?
It makes no sense. If you can't follow through some of it's basic tenants you're not a radical feminist. You actually have to do
the things that are hard and uncomfortable (ie stop performing femininity completely, look at your male relationships, look at your female relationships and lack there of), you don't just get to say radical feminist things to feel superior to other women.
How do we imagine female sexuality outside of a patriarchial society dominated by male gaze? To say its all high heels and cleavage and makeup is disingenuous, there’s pornography with petite women or chubby women with “natural” makeup and no high heels that still completely fall under the male gaze, there’s more to it than bimbo porn.
Women’s sexual desires exist independent from heels, sexy clothing and makeup, you take all that off a woman and you still can have a woman capable of arousal and having sexual feelings and enjoying sexual activity. it’s nearly impossible to say and no woman can answer this question because we’re all fed images of what men desire from the moment we’re old enough to read or comprehend a television program.
File: 1550466385856.png (30.83 KB, 469x439, azGc1rsvhl7o1.png)
It does often seem like we're so openly considered sex objects that many women are more aroused/satisfied by being found attractive than by sex itself or the man who finds them attractive.
This is a really good comment. Remember radfems, letting that label apply to everyone is what fucked feminism up in the first place. I remember first discovering feminism online in my preteens and telling everyone that I’m not “a man hating feminist” because “feminism is for everyone!”
Now it snowballed and we have people saying pornography is feminist, plastic surgery is feminist, makeup is feminist, being a housewife is feminist, religion is feminist. the label now means fuck all because we were stupid and self conscious and let everyone use it for themselves.
Well, yeah, that's why I didn't say "all". But for the most part, sexualized images of women follow the same bimbo script, even if it's been repackaged in different aesthetics to appeal to different audiences.
I agree that a female sexuality independent of male gaze is difficult to imagine. You've reminded me to catch up on the female gaze thread, so thanks.>>375562
I agree. The vast majority of girls are sexualized or pressured into sexualizing themselves before they've even had an idea of what they actually find sexually exciting. I also feel like this kind of mindset is what drives women to continue to have sex with completely horrible lays with zero stroke game and actually pretend to like it.>>375566
I get your point.
Women who are content with pandering to men instead of being a regular person shouldn't be empathized with. They just reinforce misogynist ideas. They allow themselves to be reduced down to whores. They can make their own decisions. They're deciding to contribute to the patriarchy and make things worse for us. How am I any less of a feminist for taking issue with this? Feminism is about women's liberation. Women's liberation is about freeing ourselves from our subservient status in relation to men. If they conform to that, they are part of the problem that we're trying to eliminate.>>375319>>375328
Thank fucking god. And like >>375319
said, I'm definitely not talking about prostituted women or women involved with the porn industry. That's totally different. Those women actually are victims. I'm referring to everyday women who pull this shit.
File: 1550512364591.jpeg (53.96 KB, 427x176, E2AE0489-DB87-405D-AA9D-33B2F3…)
Read Right Wing Women by Andrea Dworkin please. You don’t have to like these women but women who dress sexy and sleep with men aren’t our enemies and you’re wasting energy by putting them on the same level of men. Women cannot be lumped with their oppressors.
>>375780>I'm definitely not talking about prostituted women or women involved with the porn industry. That's totally different. Those women actually are victims.
Unless they've been trafficked they chose that lifestyle. They could have had a job flipping burgers but decided to put a price tag on their indignity instead. I don't think less of women who get sucked into the industry though, we all make bad choices at some point.
You act like you've never internalized any misogynistic beliefs.
>>375929>Yeah but I grew out of it around the time I was 14.
Wow you're so cool and woke anon. 14?!? 14?!?!? God-tier. XDDD
Get over yourself. You aren't doing shit for other women by feeling self-righteous and patting yourself on the back for being a perf feminist. This woker-than-thou mentalty is a plague on leftist spaces.
You're being selective in your reading comprehension. Women can do sex work all they want, but it's not an empowering thing. It's the ones that try to push the narratives it's feminist to be a sex worker because she's getting paid.
And the troon thing, these are men who think they know what being born a female is like. They only know the stereotypes. Other women who try to push the narrative we need to coddle these men who demand our attention are not helping.
I'm the anon you're talking about - I'm not fucking "buttmad" about anything and I don't want feminism to include everyone. That's cool though, create radfem as being only for liberal leftists and watch it dwindle to the point of non-existence. I'm not sure if you've noticed, but your political fellows have mostly deserted you for liberal feminism, whereas moderates and conservatives are actually willing to debate this stuff, even when it's with people they fundamentally don't align with. Radical feminism is not based on leftism - if it was, why was it so white and middle class initially? It's based on critical class analysis, something that has been done across the political spectrum, it was just populated by leftists at first because it was the New Woke Thing. Your comment honestly reads like you're more invested in preserving the movement for your own benefit than for anyone else's. If a woman agrees with and works to apply the basic tenants of radfem, then guess what? She's a radfem! That's really how social theory works. Continually bleating things like "RF is inherently anti-capitalist" when that was never a universally held view, then deciding that women who don't agree with it can't be radfem, will weaken the movement. As will the apparently inability to read - I never said I was pro-life, I said I can logically understand the argument put forward by pro-lifers, even though I'm pro-choice. Thanks though, this experience has been really illuminating as to why other radfems I know have abandoned the movement. Hopefully you'll realise that there is room for freedom of thought here, just like there was amongst the guiding voices of radfem (Andrea Dworkin being a prime example: how can she be considered RF if she believes men can be women?!)
Out of this thread, enjoy your echo chamber.
Anon god bless you, I dislike these people who gatekeep radical feminism requiring another woman to believe in a set number of things that have no relation to feminism at all.
Radical feminism's true focus is about sex based oppression, let's keep it that way. Leave everything else at the door and save it for later. Focusing on one subject at a time makes it way stronger than trying to focus on multiple at once.
Yeah, I get that you're mad but there are still moderate and right leaning radfems out there whether you like it or not or refuse to accept they hold the same radfem beliefs as you.>>375562
I agree with you but nobody mentioned capitalism and you're assuming all leftism shuns and doesn't participate in capitalism.>>376207>but your political fellows have mostly deserted you for liberal feminism, whereas moderates and conservatives are actually willing to debate this stuff,
See, what confuses me here is that the general leftist consensus is "let everyone be happy and do as they please" when it comes to pornography, transgenderism, and the way women's oppression is framed in moral terms. Many libfems wouldn't consider radfems leftist because of this, and I'm not speaking in economical terms.
Capitalism literally disproportionately affects women when compared to other economic systems.
>>376221>right leaning radfems out there whether you like it or not or refuse to accept they hold the same radfem beliefs as you.
This is why radical feminism needs to be gatekept. You people are so desperate to make it appealing to people it doesn't even suit and are going to end up completely defanging it and hijacking it (ironically, just like trannies), DESPITE the fact that there is no reason why these "radfems" can't just call themselves gender critical. Stop. >>376242
A million times this. Why are liberals even trying to cry their way into radical feminism? And worse yet, why are anons defending right wing leaning women trying to claim they're radical feminists? Are they angling to make radical feminism completely toothless? GC feminists and radical feminists ally together and there's no problem with that generally. Why do they need to be wholly accepted as radfems?
Trans-exclusionary and gender critical folk?
More or less conservative transphobes afraid of their sexed world being undermined. The more extremist ones being a hate group, calling themselves feminists to virtue signal. Compounding it with "radical feminism" is some absolute joke, but some people seem to equate it with male-hating.
I see it as feminist-appropriating transphobes vs trans-appropriating sexual deviants lmao.
I agree in many places with GC movement, but not with the black-white thinking. I'm yet to run into someone acknowledging transition as the effective treatment and agreeing with medical research hinting at biological source of gender incongruence.
The issue with sex work exclusionary feminists is that they usually oppose sex work completely, to the point of wanting to ban it. That won't help anyone, especially women who do sex work, and will only put them at higher risk, because they will have to work illegally.
Personally I find sex work disgusting, but it's not a reason to hate on people who do sex work and enjoy it. It's more important to help the ones who do it not out of choice, but due to other reasons, like being discriminated and unable to find other job for being women.
Both terms are insulting imho, I don't know why would anyone use them to describe themselves.
File: 1550583024101.jpg (64.58 KB, 1600x900, n4scgse21iuz.0.jpg)
Anons ITT trying to accuse anyone who doesn't agree with their view of radfem as being either a libfem or right-wing
Central issues engaged by radical feminists include:
Reproductive rights for women, including freedom to make choices to give birth, have an abortion, use birth control, or get sterilized
Evaluating and then breaking down traditional gender roles in private relationships as well as in public policies
Understanding pornography as an industry and practice leading to harm to women, although some radical feminists disagreed with this position
Understanding rape as an expression of patriarchal power, not a seeking of sex
Understanding prostitution under patriarchy as oppression of women, sexually and economically
A critique of motherhood, marriage, the nuclear family, and sexuality, questioning how much of our culture is based on patriarchal assumptions
A critique of other institutions, including government and religion, as centered historically in patriarchal power
If certain anons don’t agree with these points then they’re not radfem, that’s just fact. I don’t see how it’s a bad thing to point that out.
You sound like a total libfem.
Plenty of women in Thailand and other poor countries work as prostitutes willingly because it’s the only way they can make real money. Laws against prostitution in America mainly impact Black and Latina women anyways so it’s not like “privileged white women” are the only ones hurt by SWERFs. I agree with the others that sex work isn’t ideal and the institution of it doesn’t seem great. But there’s plenty of work that seems pretty shit and we just get on with our day.
All of this. The screeching leftist radfems who can't deal with someone agreeing with the core idea of radical feminism but also being a supporter of the free market are doing what the retarded libfems did to feminism - ruining it with intersectionality that doesn't even belong there. And how the fuck is making radical feminism appealing to all women "traitorous"? You need to be diplomatic in order to gather as much allies as you can, you can't go into a governmental meeting and start shitposting without compromises like you'd do on an imageboard. I'd imagine that any sane woman agrees with points presented here >>376286
but because all the autistic loud as shit lefttards they don't want to associate with the movement.
Well, have fun with your extremist group, those are always taken SO seriously and go REALLY far.
File: 1550587222327.jpeg (531.98 KB, 1242x2053, 3FC21FC6-B238-464F-AB5D-71DC5A…)
The anons going on about how capitalism is the worst thing for women are ignoring the experiences of the many disenfranchised women globally.
Here’s a list of socialist states in 2019, take note on how many of them are known to be absolute living hells for women. It’s almost as though dismantling capitalism won’t solve all of our problems and can often create more.
compare the rate at which mcdonalds cashiers are raped while at work to the rate sex workers are raped while at work, anon.
then slap yourself for being such a dipshit.
Please point out who in this thread said they categorically disagreed with everything radfem stands for, then called themselves a radfem. I'll wait. >>376286
And women can believe in all of that but still be putting none of it into practice, because of their living situation. What does that make them? Are they still radfem, or does being so oppressed by patriarchy that you can't be a radfem mean you're not one? This ideological gatekeeping is pointless when it means shutting out women who are for the fucking cause! Like radfem is just overflowing with support? This is why feminism will never actually achieve anything, women too busy arguing over the semantics.
>>376311>This is why feminism will never actually achieve anything, women too busy arguing over the semantics.
Firstly, this is just wrong. You can thank past feminists for many of the comforts you get to enjoy today.
Secondly, I’m the one who posted the list and my point was that these are the core values of radical feminism - if you don’t believe in them then you’re not a radical feminist, and I stated as much. At no point did I say that they have to actively be put into practice.
You seem insanely pressed regarding how ~hard~ it is to practice radical feminism for some reason.
Why is that?
In your personal and local life, what are the things you are having trouble following?
Do you still perpetuate femininity?
Do you still have relationships with men?
Do you lack real female friendships?
What is it about your life right now where you can believe all of what radical feminism says but not actually perform any of it?
Radical feminism grows through its members actually doing things, giving it support ideologically doesn't mean very much.
Anon you have to take a hard look at your own beliefs. Even as more of a lifem with a softer approach to sex workers, I can grasp that prostitution is synonymous with exploitation of the most vulnerable people and that perfunctory sex to pay bills is not consensual. If we lived in a world where it was just an additional thing anyone might dip into as a paid hobby because they liked sex then we could have room for a debate, but we don't. A choice between destitution and prostitution isn't consensual.
The right to give or decline consent to sex is a vital part of all feminism, nobody should be in the position where they have to trade their consent to live. This is why a McDonald's manager can give you shit work, but cannot legally force you to fuck as part of your job.
I'm sure past feminists weren't sat about on lolcow telling other women that they weren't feminist enough to be part of their feminism. My apologies for not saying "current feminism".>>376286
So you say belief is enough, but then >>376318
says that ideological support isn't enough. Which is correct? Obviously one of you isn't radfem enough. /s>>376318
I have no problem practising it in my own life, but I'm not the only woman in the world. Why are you making it about me as an individual? Ever considered how women under Saudi Arabian guardianship law might be unable to practise radfem? Good attempt at trying to make it personal so as to undermine my question.
not just that, but if it's just work then it's ok to threaten unemployed women with the loss of social security benefits if they don't become sex workers.
the only way to stop this would be to make it a specialized profession that requires training and a degree, and since 99% of sex workers are living in deep poverty and unable to afford that, they would be out of a job unless they once again broke the law to do it.
File: 1550590016794.jpeg (95.32 KB, 632x900, 2C616B7A-DEE9-4B9B-B0FC-FD00FD…)
To the anons who are preaching about needing to practice activism in order to be radfem:
I posted this before about how Saudi women seeking asylum are being turned away at the border and sent back to the very country they were seeking refuge from and will most likely kill the women for disobedience. https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-04/border-force-accused-of-targeting-saudi-women-traveling-alone/10768036?pfmredir=sm
Abstaining from practicing femininity is all well and good but maybe our resources should be pooled into actually making a difference to the women who need it most, even if it’s just globally bringing awareness to this issue so that Australia feels the heat.
I’m disappointed but not surprised that such a current life threatening issue is being ignored to instead infight.
Pray tell how you think the movement is going to achieve anything if the only thing in it is ideological support?
Of course there are women more opressed than us and that cannot put radical feminism into practice, how is this news? Except to actually liberate those
women we need less opressed women to start doing
Ideological support for those women isn't enough because it doesn't actually get them out of their situations.
Ideological support doesn't help any women get out of their situations, it literally takes other women doing
Spreading the message is all well and fine, but it's not going to help the most opressed women.
Why are you incapable of seeing things im multitudes? No one said women are all innocent victims or can’t be complicit in patriarchy, but upending the power systems that enforce sex based oppression isn’t going to get us absolutely anywhere if we focus our time on getting mad at other women. Women aren’t in power like men are. Even the most conservative, religious, far right, misogynistic woman in the world is less complicit than your average man.
And what do you mean by how the patriarchy “rewards” women, there is no way to live life as a woman and only receive benefits from patriarchy and misogyny. Are you talking about camgirls who get paid by men? They’re still at risk of being unable to get another job due to doxxing. Housewives? They may be “rewarded” by not being ree-ed at my incels online but they’re still in a vulnerable place and at risk of having nothing of their husband leaves them, plus the threat of domestic violence.
>treating every women like a poor wittle misguided pwincess who doesn't know any bettew and shaking your fist at those mean, mean men who treat us oh-so-badly instead of actually doing something
What is “doing” something to you? Fun fact: it’s not complaining about whores and sluts on lolcow
I'm not arguing with you, I'm illustrating the point that anons in this thread don't actually all agree on how radfem you have to be before you can be radfem - ie, that ideological gatekeeping is fucking silly when we could all just be working together towards the common goal of female liberation.>>376330
Actually there are many radfems who are involved in trying to help Saudi and Korean women by spreading awareness and contacting media, including myself, which is why puritanical anons ITT sound so ridiculous. Just hoping that their exclusivity complex comes from some actual IRL activism.
>>376461>Actually there are many radfems who are involved in trying to help Saudi and Korean women by spreading awareness and contacting media
I’ve posted this twice and you’re the first person to actually respond, so thank you. I can’t do much as a single person but if we actually pooled together our resources to gather awareness around this issue until hopefully someone with enough power to do something becomes aware of it, but all anons have been doing in this fucking thread is infighting and slapping each others tits like a bunch of retards on a short bus.
Why don’t we actually make this thread useful and share among one another what is happening in our corner of the world and see if there’s anything we can collectively do (even if it’s something as small as spreading the word about it).
Not sure if this would be better here or in gender critical: https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/crime/edinburgh-labourer-shouted-abuse-at-transgender-woman-in-bonnington-1-4872906/amp
But here’s something to discuss, a man has been made to pay a trans woman £500 compensation for his verbal abuse; has anything remotely similar ever happened in response to the verbal abuse women are subjected to?
>>376778>they're from my part of town
I'm wondering if this is one of the trans women I've seen around here, who are both middle aged, overweight men in extremely short mini skirts. If that's the case they probably just thought it was a drunk man having a laugh.
I wish people who insulted/harrassed me on the streets would be fined, though. I've never had anyone lift a finger to help me even when men got physical with me in broad daylight.
I expected it to be worse than it was, but when I read the article it was a group of men laughing as the MtF passed and that was it.
That's still fucking annoying of those men and they should keep it to themselves but I wouldn't even dream of going to the police over that. I've had men follow me home, men physically grab me as I passed, men spit on me. A group of men laughing at me and then doing nothing else? That's just any other day.
We may as well use it as a precedence to push police to do this much for women too.
Not that anyone actually has the time to stop and call the police every time an idiot screams at their breasts but if someone ever does and the police don't take them seriously, we can bring up this case as an example of why they aren't doing their job properly. If we have to share bathrooms, we also should get to take a share in their sense of entitlement.
Scottish farmer here. My best friend was grabbed by a man as she left a supermarket a year ago. He just grabbed her arm and started yanking her towards his car. She only got away because she started screaming at the top of her voice and struggling and he got spooked and let her go. Still screamed "Bitch! Bitch! Fucking BITCH!" at her as she ran back inside though.
She actually did go to the police, but they didn't want to bother doing anything about it. There might even have been CCTV since it happened in a car park but they said it would be too hard to track him down.
They don't care about us.
Yes and it's awful but we should still use this as leverage to improve things going forward, if a TIM is getting this care then I'm going to demand it too.
Also I'm not going to pretend the police have ever given a shit but there are actually slight improvements being made in how sexual assault cases are being handled now since the large scandals. There are always going to be shit police but we can and should keep pushing for change.
On the plus side, if more financially available it could end the use of surrogacy for hire, which is often a really exploitative industry. In countries where it's illegal to directly pay for surrogacy couples will have it done abroad, in places with less regulation or protection of the surrogate mothers. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-28627374https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-42845602
personally too would like to have a baby but wouldn't like the actual pregnancy effects, so it's kind of cool that it could be an option that wouldn't wreck my body or career even if it probably leads to a lack of connection between baby and mother.
"men too" feminism is the most logical one, especially when many women are trying to turn things up instead of looking for equality between men and women
The problem is that feminism began as a legit movement for liberation of women and we got very far, but nowadays is going to the extreme where it often promotes violence against men (at least where I live it happens)
There's nothing logical about it. equality is objectively a loss for men. They will never be on our side when it means they have less control over us, and wishy washy men too feminism is inherently incompatible with our liberation.
The system is the way it is for a reason, men didn't design it to fuck THEMSELVES over.
nta but animal rights does
do that. it promotes for animals and humans to have he same rights.
That is not at all the same thing anon, the idea behind it is that animals should have the same rights as humans - it isn’t human focused activism with an end goal of equality for humans.
This is such a dim comment
>>376983>when you combine artificial wombs with sexbots
Won't ever happen. Misogynistic men claim it will as a cope and to hate women further for existing. But that artificial womb tech is too valuable for the medical industry that it won't be put on the open market for the general population to buy. Seriously, nobody should be worried over artificial wombs because some mgtow talked about it in a YouTube video. Most it will do is exist in hospitals for emergencies or for conservation efforts to preserve a species of animal.
What's more realistic for our future as women is combating mtfs who demand our spaces and our bodies.>>377774
They especially hate women cooperating with each other. It's that divide and conquer mentality that they haven't moved on from.
i mean "combine it with sexbots" as a general term. Not sexbots with artificial wombs inside them. i think we're about 200 years away from that.
>exist in hospitals for emergencies or for conservation efforts to preserve a species of animal.
I wish i would could trust like that. Give it a few decades and it will be treated like surrogacy where you skip the middle man. I think its good to think about the implications of artificial wombs. Especially in our current political environment. we cant even use yoinic imagery without mtfs and their allies screaming at you. If artificial wombs are ever used for human fetuses you can kiss away "womb = woman" because now "womb = rentable machine".
it's not a pressing problem right now but im really worried for the future.
>>377813>it isn’t human focused activism with an end goal of equality for humans.
And neither is all feminism, it's about the liberation
of women. You're mixing up different theories of feminism.
>Imagine being a young woman during that period.
"That period" represented by those ads was nearly a century, from 1893 in #23 to 1988 in #35.
Those ads reflected cultural norms, and sexism was the norm.
You really think that you never internalized any mysoginy since the age of 14? >>376299
China is capitalist. Socialism is just a name there, if you truly think that China is left-wing to this day, you're completely uneducated. >>377754
you're literally retarded.
I'm not gonna lie, the brainwash-y effects (for example: use of dreamy songs like "Pure Imagination" - a song rumored to trigger
dissociation in MKULTRA victims
- the flashing colors, hazy filters, repetition, attempts to manipulate the viewer's mood when showing certain clips by adding sad music with lyrics like "I've had it up to here", etc) used in each video remind me of those sissy hypno videos men on 4chan obsess over. Since this person references Pizzagate a lot in their videos, I'm not convinced they're not completely aware of what they're doing.
I don't disagree with the messages they're putting out, but it's clear these videos have certain "influences". On top of that, the suspiciously deep voice that sounds like it's deliberately being forced to have a feminine "lilt" makes me want to stay away. It's too creepy, like some kind of psyop or reverse psychology attempt.(wrong thread)
>>382811>>382811>I don't think men are pieces of shit by nature but its how society and culture comes at play.
i agree. they're absolutely shit people but giving them the biological excuse plays into their hands in multiple ways and is dumb. gives them carte blanche to escape accountability and validates the male female brain bullshit, ironically. it's shown that the culture and way that people are raised can turn them into massive pieces of shit/sociopaths. look at the children of the hideously wealthy. growing up with the entitlement, constant asspatting and ball-flouring that men grow up with, being encouraged into literal sociopathy as they are, i think it's silly to say conditioning isn't to blame. we know conditioning is to blame for pervasive gender norms placed on just women, that are demonstrably harmful to a degree that's impossible to even calculate, and people genuinely believe those are ingrained, so why shouldn't the same be said for men?
plus it's like, light skinned people have been, historically, pieces of shit to darker skinned people and it has been that way for millennia, but does that mean there's a genetic component to their shittiness? no. i mean, it's just dumb to start assigning biological underpinnings to the bullshit garbage behavior of any oppressor class so they can escape actual culpability. people gonna scapegoat and violate and bully and shit on anyone they can to get their way and continue the cycle, it's human nature and def not exclusive to dipshit males. there is literally NO part of male culture that is healthy or sane and men are encouraged to go full retard from day 1. there are literally no salvageable qualities to their culture. there's no chance they won't be absolute trash.
There are absolutely biological differences between the female and male brain, every inch of our body has sexually dimorphism differences, but they’re definitely not the reason as to why men are mysogninistic. I’d say it’s more so their aggressive and dominating tendencies being allowed to exist to toxic
levels that’s a big part of mysoginistic culture, they’re stronger than us and have used that to bully women into submission over generations and now all typical male behaviour is seen as normal and female behaviour as the outlier. But again, this is mostly because they can keep getting away with it that mysoginy is pervasive and continues to be passed down onto boys who would otherwise be nonconformist
We spoke with Julie Bindel, author of a new book about prostitution. ‘Putting an end to the sex trade requires a twofold change. It’s necessary to create fully developed and well-thought-out exit paths for women who are prostituting themselves. … At the same time, we must put up deterrents in front of those who are paying.’
When the film Pretty Woman came out in 1990, the image of the happy prostitute—who, thanks to her work, meets and marries a handsome billionaire—swept half the world.
This was the first powerful pop culture argument in favor of the sex trade. In her book Il mito Pretty Woman. Come la lobby dell’industria del sesso ci spaccia la prostituzione (published by ed. VandA ePublishing, 283 pages, €15; translated from The Pimping of Prostitution: Abolishing the Sex Work Myth, ed. Palgrave Macmillan, 2017), Julie Bindel debunks the assumption that sex for pay is a job like any other.
Bindel conducted 250 interviews in 40 countries, in which women told her what it really means to be a prostitute.
They spoke of the tremendous odor of the clients, of the pain of a raw and ulcerated vagina after being penetrated by many men, of the horror of having sperm and other fluids come close to one’s face, of beards rubbing against their cheeks until they bleed, of not being able to eat, drink or kiss their children because of what they had had to do with their mouths, of cramps in their arm or elbow after desperately trying to get the client to finish so they wouldn’t have to be penetrated again.
Then, Bindel reconstructs the origins of the movements for legalization, reveals who is financing those acting as part of the pro-prostitution lobby (which also includes the likes of Amnesty International) and their methods of persuasion, chronicles the disastrous and damaging effects of laws decriminalizing and regulating prostitution, and showcases the results of the “Nordic model,” adopted in several countries, including Sweden, Ireland, France and Iceland, which is the only approach that truly manages to fight the phenomenon of prostitution, as it addresses the core of the problem: the existing demand and the clients.
Together with Rachel Moran’s Paid For: My Journey Through Prostitution, Bindel’s The Pimping of Prostitution is an essential read in order to understand that prostitution—in the words of the American sex trade survivor Evelina Giobbe, the founder of WHISPER (Women Hurt in Systems of Prostitution Engaged in Revolt)—is an industry “driven by men’s demand for unconditional sexual access to women based on their social, economic and gender power—in other words, patriarchy.”
A radical feminist and activist, and a journalist renowned for her investigations into religious fundamentalism, violence against women, surrogacy and human trafficking, Bindel is in Italy until March 9 on a tour to present the Italian edition of her latest book.
is this bait? yes it's totally fine. acknowledging and understanding all of the issues that radfem is trying to address doesn't mean you can't be into men. you just have to protect yourself and not tolerate any misogyny or toxic
masculinity from them.
File: 1552438765866.png (104.27 KB, 460x699, b49ee1111dd2217ef141880512ad6a…)
The Angry Lesbian Separatist Feminist is a trope, not an accurate descriptor of rad fems.
It can't be. From what I've researched, misogyny exists in the state system along with slavery and all sorts of discrimination. Tribes and other smaller societies never experienced the same dynamic.
We also need to account for the fact that the most predominant religions in the world are abrahamic. Most Abrahamic religions came from herding cultures that were male dominated for some reason. The greeks grew crops and women were respected nearly as equals. I don't remember much because I studied anthro so long ago but I would read more into it. Real interesting stuff.
I agree with both >>382847
. It's a combination of biological and social components. You can raise a male in a very tolerant society, a male who has good values, a male who isn't a sociopath, and he can still end up doing horrific things. And vice versa.
It's just like in psychology the idea of nature vs nurture. Nurture seems to play the biggest role in the outcome of the self, but nature also plays a role and can override nurture even in what seems like the perfect environment.
There is a difference between male and female brains but it's not like what trans/TRAs say. Yeah there's obviously something different about our brains but it's not something that can be mixed up in the womb or some crap like that. This is why many steer clear of the male/female brain talk because they don't want to seem like they support what often is used in the trans community as proof of trans-ness (even though it was debunked, see the GC thread).
What do farmers think about this?https://old.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/comments/b1xbeu/feminism_is_not_about_men/eioxk9k/
Drama between hetpartnered radfems and Pink pilled radfems
I have read that "barbarian" cultures like the Mongols.Gauls.Celts often had higher amounts of Gender equality then "civilized" peoples
Spartan women had more rights then other women in the Classical Period and It was common for the richest citizens in Sparta to be women
I personally find this kinda shit not helpful. I think we can critique men as a whole while realizing that we can have our own good experiences with me.
But I consider myself more gender critical/gender abolitionist not a radfem.
Yeah I read that
during Caesar's Invasion of Gaul
In battles Gallic women would stay behind and cheer for the men to fight on but also care for the wounded and injured men,If any man came back that was not properly Injured they would hassle and at times beat him to go back and fight in the front lines
Sparta was pretty fucked up and parasitic, though. Their society could only exist as it was because for every Spartan citizen they had 10 helot slaves to keep society running. All that Spartans themselves did was fight wars and birth more soldiers. Males and females were segregated from a very early age and it was forbidden for married couples to see each other in daylight for the first years of their marriage, to discourage emotional attachment and emphasise sexual activity and procreation at night. Spartan women were much more independent than e.g. Athenians, but only because the men were always off fighting and dying in wars somewhere. Their value first and foremost was in breeding more soldiers. A Spartan woman who died in childbirth was considered as heroic as a Spartan man dying valiantly on the battlefield, but likewise a Spartan woman of fertile age who wasn’t actively popping out healthy babies was as much subject to scorn and contempt as a Spartan man of fighting age who didn’t fight.
Gauls and Celts were a varied bunch but I like the story of Boudica. She was the wife of an Iceni king and when he died without a male heir the Romans assumed his territory would default to Roman rule. However the Iceni custom in such a situation was for his queen to take over as their ruler and when the Romans disrespected this, her people were prepared to follow her into rebellion. It’s hard to know how many of the details are true and Roman authors certainly loved to write about crazy barbarians doing silly barbaric stuff like treat women as people (good thing our armies are over there to civilise them, right?) but it’s nice to know that she’s been picked up as a British folk hero either way.
New GC Reddit for woc
Also where did the GC threads go? I was gonna post this there….
I’m a straight radfem but even I’m
sick to death of a lot of other straight radfems. They marry shitty men and it’s so hypocritical. And I don’t mean “occasionally shows male socialization” I mean straight out porn sick losers and shit. They’re fucking enabling men and then want to complain about porn. Stop dating men who watch porn and maybe men will actually fucking stop??
I have literally had a lesbian separatist argue with me,that years of happiness with my bf means nothing since his male socialization will creep in and make him mistreat me eventually and that we should break up
I'm not going to call him a "Nigel", demurely kowtow and apologize for "sleeping with the enemy". One can be hetpartnered and " One can acknowledge male violence and the overarching impact of patriarchy and try prioritize woman oven men as a group but still love and cherish the Individual men in our lives
I'm now white knighting him
It shouldn't be controversial to say that I don't think my bf is my oppressor in any way
You’re one of the insufferable ones. Being glad at news of women’s abuse because your man ‘isn’t like that’
You don’t center women
the number of women in the US who Identity as "feminist" are about 18% and of this 18% most are either libfems or the feminism is about equality for everyone type people
radfems and gender critical feminists are a small minority
even if we were to all stay single and celibate for the rest of our lives it would still have no significant change and it would be pushing more women away from feminism
There’s a whole hell of a lot more women who are uncomfortable with porn and such than those who identify as feminist. If a percentage of women held their standards and refused to date men who do that stuff, it would encourage other women and show them that it doesn’t have to be normal. All of our advances have been driven by a minority of women whose ideas slowly spread.>>390219
Oh please, what’s the chances that someone else would be spouting the same exact shit word for word everywhere?
I can provide a screenshot/link of someone using that exact sentence several times and one saying that news of another woman’s abuse made her glad
Again, it’s probably you. Getting tinfoily now but I fucking bet you’re the anon who started this conversation >>390192
Just so you could talk about your Nigel
I am that anon who posted this >>390192
and that on the vent thread but I never ever posted anything about being glad women got abused
File: 1553416587194.png (159.81 KB, 640x1136, A1CB1B4E-FB01-42F6-8F9A-778663…)
NTA but you posted this in TWO fucking reddit threads. gtfo ESL chan.
File: 1553442006475.jpeg (195.51 KB, 640x1079, 475F7F64-CBA3-4C52-B1A2-A6A0BE…)
Thread title was “man deafens woman’s ear during rough sex”
There’s at least one other thread where the “kowtow” line comes up, too
File: 1553442209954.jpeg (120.36 KB, 640x795, 01B991F2-32B0-4A2A-882E-2F8E45…)
Forgot the second part
At this point, I think it's not only "NAMALT", but a hint of "I'm not like the other girls uwu".
What the fuck did you mean "This just makes me glad"? How does "This makes me glad" sound even close to a sane thing to say in a thread about other women being abused? Why are you talking about how great your boyfriend is instead of, I don't know, the fact that enough men are like this, and that it's so common that you can just open Reddit and see hundreds of cases of this shit?
Nope, all you can talk about is how your bf totally isn't like this. It's all about you.
Dickmatization is real.
File: 1553451341961.png (797.94 KB, 1738x2048, Screenshot_20190324-141345.png)
It's this fucking sperg who posted this retarded shit here multiple times and on Reddit.
I'm bi and dating a guy, but I don't talk about him and how great I think he is in radfem spaces. There's a time and a place for everything, and I feel like radfem spaces are where you go to criticize men as a social group and their control over societies, not to talk about how my or your experiences with certain men are so great.
It should go without saying that not all women's experiences are the same to the very letter, but it's not my or any other woman's place to try and "Ok but my boyfriend is nice" when other women are trying to discuss how utterly shit men can be, the ways they get away with it and what can be done to improve it and/or keep ourselves safe.
I don’t believe women when they tell me how great their guy is. 9 times out of 10 they go on to be like “ugh I’m mad my husband wants to go to a strip club!” or “my bf never cleans, but he really
gets systemic oppression of women, tehe~!” somewhere else
Also anyone in a feminist space is already aware that conversations are on a class basis, there’s no fucking reason to NAMALT.
*libfem males anyway>>390436
I've had significantly worse experiences with male feminists than I ever have had with normal dudes, even the dudebro type.
I resent that so much. Like, what do they think radical feminism
even is? Tradthots incorporated?
It's like they only think in black and white. There is only one feminist outlook, and every woman who doesn't subscribe to liberal ideology must be an alt-right handmaiden/housewife like themselves.
They think they're above libfems because they respond to the failures of the left by "demurely kowtowing" (to use Reddit-Anon's words) to the spirit of "tradition", but they're really both just doing the same fucking thing, aka exactly what men want, just with different attitudes about it.
No, history shows a constant oscillation and reaction. Culture isn't static and swings between 'liberal' and 'conservative'. I'd expect radical feminism to grow, not shrink, in reaction to the failures of liberal feminism. Radical feminism was even smaller a movement 5-10 years ago. British feminism has helped kickstart a burgeoning revival. Outside of the Anglo sphere radical feminism is surprisingly popular in Latin America.
In terms of broader cultural zeitgeist I think 'leftism' as we understand it in the US is reaching a point where it can't sustain itself. Im really hoping to see something new
taking its place to contrast the new kind of conservatism. I hope new activists and ideologues can present novel ideas and ways of looking forward.
I think men on a fundamental are flawed in their nature(I believe women are flawed as well in similar and other times completely different ways ) but I do think its possible for a man/woman to overcome these flaws through his/her own will power
that to me is SO a man who has overcomed his human flaws
I am the only who see's that about him
I love him
Not wanting your husband to have a social life or be able to talk to people is abusive
and controlling, nothing about that is feminist.
holy shit that entire post.
File: 1553482162300.jpg (255.23 KB, 1200x900, 1708w-getty-fruit-closeup-Cars…)
Yeah! Fruit is great, I love fruit. Why is it good that he doesn't eat fruit? How is abstaining from fruit feminist?
I do not control him
he was like this before I met him,In fact I made him cut down on his self Discipline
he has difficultly understating people at times so I help him but he's content with just being me and I'm content with just being with him
I feel other men should emulate him and try to be like him
he only eats vegetables and meat
he'll eat fruit if has to but says its healthier to eat vegetables(mostly potato's) and he never eats any junkfood at all
File: 1553549536637.png (278.1 KB, 1066x1308, ll.png)
This person really found it sensible to compare women who do sex works to dogs
unironically, and then complain that radfems are the ones who don't respect them.
And people are agreeing with them in the notes (though, some radfems did call them out). I want off this ride.
File: 1553787220147.gif (1.53 MB, 540x304, gif1.gif)
Does anybody have any suggestions on how to 'de-brainwash' yourself out of the 'not like other girls' and seeking male approval mentality? No matter how illogical I know it is, for some reason my brain tries to make other women the enemy.
File: 1553841752209.jpg (66.52 KB, 533x371, Germaine-Greer-headline-festiv…)
what are all your thoughts on Germaine Greer ?
She's called out troons for a long time now but she's also shamed women who came out against Harvey Weinstein saying they spread their legs for Movie Roles,defended Woody Allen and also she said that one of the goals of women's liberation should be women having the right to be able to apprentice young male beautify with out scorn
so in 2003 she released an Art Book called the beautiful boy filled with over 200 Pictures and paintings of young teenage boys with her commentary on it
her exact quote was "Well, I'd like to reclaim for women the right to appreciate the short-lived beauty of boys, real boys, not simpering 30-year-olds with shaved chests."
"Well, I'd like to reclaim for women the right to appreciate the short-lived beauty of boys, real boys, not simpering 30-year-olds with shaved chests
Does anyone have a good article on the problems with sex work?
I had a discussion with someone recently who had a problem with me calling sex work unethical. They kept replying that it is just someone providing a service and they are receiving payment so how can it be unethical. I tried to explain that practically nobody chooses to become a prostitute willingly. They are either forced by their situation, or literally forced by someone else. There might be a unicorn who willingly does it, but you cannot differentiate between the two, because the women who were forced will lie about it. Either to not get hurt by their pimp etc, or because they need to lie to themselves to be able to get through the horribleness of it. Eventually the discussion had the sticking point of how is sex work unethical in and of itself. How is it harmful even to that one unicorn, because if it isn't, apparently I am not allowed to say prostitution or going to prostitutes is unethical.
File: 1553843261157.png (265.92 KB, 498x1162, Image1_2.png)
I don't know about an article but the best way I can explain how it's unethical (on the john's part, not the prostitute's) is that money is coercion, and there can be no real consent when sex is coerced. If you hold a gun to somebody's head and say 'have sex with me or I'll shoot you', it's rape. If you tell them 'have sex with me or you won't be able to eat or pay rent', it's not much different.
And the conditions sex workers work under certainly wouldn't be considered ethical from a HR standpoint, if it was judged like a regular job. Sweatshops, child labour etc are just providing a service for money, but they are unethical as fuck.
>>373703>SJW is a right wing/centrist dogwhistle for "possess empathy". Children taking puberty blockers can be SJW, but so can feeding the homeless.
That's dishonest, you aren't going to get called an SJW for feeding the homeless, but you can feed the homeless and still be an SJW depending on what you do.
The term is generally applied to leftist moralists. Someone who feeds the homeless isn't an SJW. Someone who goes on the internet and shames people into feeding the homeless, however, is.
Oh and I really liked this explanation as well. Probably too convoluted to bring up in a discussion IRL though.>Well known woman hater Thomas Aquinas said “Prostitution is like a sewer in a palace. Take away the sewer and you will fill the palace with pollution.”>His meaning was that a certain class of women exists to absorb, indeed to serve as a sewer, for men’s dehumanizing and violent sexual desires, thus providing a buffer between this ignoble form of fornication and the “castle,” that is, the kind of wholesome fleshly congress reserved for good and proper women and their husbands. >We see this ancient pretext for misogyny repeated throughout history in a variety of ways, including the oft-cited-never-proven idea that modern prostitution (and pornography) somehow protects society at large, and women in particular, by providing a class of women upon whom it is acceptable to let loose the excrement that is violent male sexuality. >Prostitution and pornography are falsely attributed as being means by which to reduce rape and general violence against women when in reality, they just concentrate these things onto the rape-able underclass, leaving the “good” women to bear men’s children, clean their homes, and be their wives.
File: 1553873150201.jpg (186.38 KB, 1000x1202, man_in_the_glass.jpg)
what are your thoughts on Training men ?
I think men on a fundamental level are flawed in their nature(I believe women are flawed as well in similar and other times completely different ways ) but I do think its possible for a man to overcome his flaws through training and his own will power
So you can save the males in your life and make them better you just have to make them think its their side
start with self discipline for exercise and diet then add reading later on and with in a year you can mold a deadbeat man into a Ideal male
one who doesn't get offended when you say stuff like "Men Suck" "Kill all Men" and one who cares for yours and others needs
NTA, but if the shoe fits, it won't slip off. Sorry if you were triggered
My thoughts are that this >>392209
poster honestly sounds like a man trying to shift responsibility for men's actions onto women. It'd be great if it worked that way my dude, but it doesn't. There's a whole stereotype around women trying to change the bad boy (see: all men) and failing miserably. Individual women trying to change individual men won't amount to anything. You're better off supporting feminism and other women; the change has to be collective.
Although, the relationship conundrum is a tough one for sure. My own view is that you should only enter a relationship with a man who is a radical feminist, and who genuinely applies it to his own relationships with women. Very few men like that out there, but I'd say no relationship is better than one with a man who's gonna degrade and abuse you, and again, trying to change a person is a very bad idea. Committing to a relationship because you think the man is going to change is basically a death sentence.
Yeah, many men love the idea of them being helpless and that a proper, good woman can and should change them by acting like their mom or unpaid 24/7 coach.
And if they don't succeed in bettering themselves, it's the woman's fault.
You can never 'fix' a man but you can help a man that has a good demeanor to begin with become a better functioning person because that's what relationships are about, helping each other grow. I encouraged my bf to stop playing overwatch, get a skincare routine, go to therapy, and keep his room clean but I didn't invest a great deal of emotional labour into making him do those things, he simply listened to my advice because he genuinely wants to improve his life. He started out as a feminist ally and radical leftist so he understands my need for equity in our relationship. If you're a feminist don't settle for someone who doesn't support what you believe in.
A lot of men have poor self-discipline but they have no desire to put effort into not being a scrot. Women should never waste a second of their time on these men. We need to hold men to high standards or cut them off immediately because our self-preservation comes first, no negotiation.
File: 1554121902446.jpg (26.89 KB, 405x430, L.JPG)
Just found this
You really shouldn't use stoicism or ancient Greek notions to "fix" men considering how misogynist ancient greek society was.
The thing about "fixing" men is that the reason men are the way they are is because of private property, ultimately. One constant of "civilization" is that men have forced women (and sometimes other men by creating a new gender, its interesting that eunuchs had their genitals removed because they were forced to do jobs typically assigned to women) to do free, unpaid labour, whether that be domestic, sexual or child rearing, for them. They forced women to effectively be their mothers and do everything for them, without pay, for thousands of years and they don't want to give it up.
I think men can "change", but its not women's job to do it. They need a loud wakening call into just how vile their behavior is and that women will no longer do all their unpaid slave labour and be their sex slaves.
So tired of this logic>the right porn is good!
When we know how harmful it all is, especially being exposed so young. Hope these men never have kids so they can only hurt themselves in the end>>395737>Don't forget these people's only concern with regard to women is to get them back into lifelong slavery to their husband like in the "good old days"
This. They only want breeding stock and despise that women are people. Seeing them as allies can only hurt women
The thing to remember is, women are always going to be pushed away from the right wing. There are exceptions of course, especially when money is involved (its no coincidence many right wing women are raking it on patreon), but the truth is, any ideology based around oppressing and abusing a group is naturally going to push the abused away from it. I mean, look at how right wingers treat women who support them, they call them "thots", make hideous memes about them, causally talk about how they want to do vulgar things to them. I really don't think half of them would put up with it if they weren't making enough money to justify it. Not to say there aren't women who've been indoctrinated, but more that as mass, naturally women are going to seek liberation, and will keep seeking it until the world ends or they get it.
>>395746>Call them thots
This something I see on both sides of the spectrum and a lot of it is done in a "comedic" joke way.
Slightly OT maybe, I recognize a lot of women are more politically independent compared to men, who always try their hardest to fit into a political ideology. I see it a lot on this forum. A lot of women are shamed for disliking far left politics despite also disliking far right politics, both far sides strive to try to police women and their beliefs.
On top of that, an alliance with the far-right means alienating all women who aren't part of a very specific race/class, and in the end, it fucks women of all race/classes over, anyway.
It really is the stupidest move for any pro-woman group to take.
Don't repeat the mistakes of Susan B. Anthony and co.
File: 1554617990524.png (149.08 KB, 495x350, asddslk.png)
I only lurk the GC threads here. Sorry if this has already been discussed but I had a question regarding fashion/radfem
I see a lot of radfems reject fashion and makeup entirely. And I understand where they are coming from.
But what about alt-fashions? I wouldnt say many men like woman in extreme alt-fashions. And some are even used to deter men. I enjoy alt-fashion as a creative outlet and I like participating it and being involved in the community (which is predominately woman in my choice of fashion).
What are peoples thoughts/opinions on this? Can both co-exist or can alt-fash be feminist?
To clarify I dont feel obligated to wear my clothes/makeup. Most days Im casual comfy and no makeup. But when I dress up its truly because I enjoy it and find it creative
File: 1554619175611.jpg (297.68 KB, 2000x1333, img.jpg)
I know plenty of radfems who belittle women for having a mainstream style but still always go for a "Punk" aesthetic
File: 1554623526552.jpg (102.9 KB, 640x1138, 9sgexon1i7q21.jpg)
thought this was good and relevant lol
File: 1554625086694.png (1.44 MB, 1194x1214, jqqgh0hou7j11.png)
I'll contribute a relevant meme too
File: 1554626332059.jpg (71.04 KB, 500x655, sb0fp41fs8p21.jpg)
I'll contribute as well
File: 1554650145554.png (579.84 KB, 2268x1810, IMG_20180302_192925.png)
it's meant to highlight how stupid those "that is not feminism, this
(prolly something very libfem or Male centred) is!!" statements are
File: 1554663089017.jpg (81.6 KB, 540x760, jqnmrworurl21.jpg)
File: 1554663183882.jpg (82.29 KB, 640x720, Gi24Nmh7LYXdizv_D173AHWveDKPuf…)
File: 1554663278365.png (568.17 KB, 960x667, biuq8rssu8q21.png)
I want to know the stats on sex trafficking in places where SW is legal. I know it can slightly lower the spread of stds and stis but all the time I hear from lib fems that legalizing sex work will eliminate trafficking because the demand for victims
would disappear… Yet you'd still have women being treated like worthless objects. How is that empowering gdi
God that reminds me, in Germany a while back there was this huge scandal about how they were telling women that they should go into prostitution and won’t be receiving benefits.
So many libfems were shocked that a) it was actually being treated like a viable work option and b) that only women were being targeted. What do these retards think that yelling about how it’s exactly like all other will achieve at the end of the day?? I just hope it never reaches the point were employers can start demanding it of their female employees just like it can already be demanded that women have to wear makeup and heels. I mean if sex work is work, then how is it any different from having to grab someone a coffee while you intern?
>>396130>legalizing sex work will eliminate trafficking because the demand for victims would disappear
That's clearly bullshit if you think about it for more than three seconds. How many women do you know who would go into prostitution willingly, even if it was legal? Actual physical prostitution, not selling nudes on Snapchat. It's legal in my country and yet every woman I know, including all SWIW libfems, would still rather struggle on benefits or work a soul-crushing grossly underpaid food service job than head to the red lights district. When I was in middle school we were warned about so-called loverboys who would manipulate and blackmail teenage girls into prostitution and become their pimp. Legalization didn't make this kind of behaviour disappear, it made it easier
. After all, they're not asking the girls to do anything illegal!
stolen from a deleted post on r/GenderCritical
I have been doing some research on different branches of feminism and have stumbled upon amazon feminism!
Here a quick blurb about it from a site:
> When I first heard of Amazon Feminism, I was a little confused. It both ended up being exactly what I thought it was, and even more, in the best possible way. Born in the unlikely place of being inspired by Ayn Rand, Amazon Feminism is a branch of feminism that emphasizes female physical prowess as a means to achieve the goal of gender equality. At the most basic level, adherents of Amazon Feminism are dedicated to the image of the female hero in fiction as well as in real life – as expressed in the physiques and feats of female athletes, martial artists and other powerfully built women in society, art and literature. The fictional poster-goddess of the Amazon Feminist movement was Wonder Woman, who was conceived in the early 1940s and based partially on the Amazons in Greek mythology.
>During the women’s suffrage movement, there existed militant suffragettes. Amongst these, those who practiced physical culture and who engaged in violent forms of political protest were frequently referred to as ‘Amazons’ by novelists and newspaper journalists. In the early 70’s Gloria Steinem drew attention to the concept of Amazon Feminism with her praise of Wonder Woman as a feminist icon, and her criticism of DC’s decision in 1968 to change Wonder Woman’s powers. Wonder Woman’s famous equipment had been replaced with mere-mortal Kung-Fu. The year after Steinem generated attention toward this issue, Wonder Woman was changed back and her popularity with young female readers increased. According to Thomas Gramstad, “Amazon feminism is concerned about physical equality and is opposed to gender role stereotypes and discrimination against women based on assumptions that women are supposed to be, look or behave as if they are passive, weak and physically helpless.”
>Further, “Amazon Feminism rejects the idea that certain characteristics or interests are inherently masculine (or feminine), and upholds and explores a vision of heroic womanhood. Amazon Feminism supports and celebrates female strength athletes, martial artists, soldiers/women in combat, firefighters, lumberjacks, astronauts, power lifters, etc.” Ultimately Amazon Feminism is about the ability to view oneself as the captain of their own soul, as a person willing to face and resolve any conflict – and, as a woman, to refuse to see oneself as a victim of man-made or biological circumstances – separates oneself as a warrior from those ‘ordinary’ people, male or female, who are willing to drift with the current and bend with every breeze. Wonder Woman remains central to the ideals of Amazon Feminism, she embodies this idea that through hard work and discipline women can become strong and independent and free themselves from their economic and psychological dependency on men.
This looks pretty interesting and great since there are actual real women who practice amazon feminism. It is a different way to break down the patriarchy. Radical feminism states that women are oppressed due to their biological gender. Not only reproduction but women being weaker than men has caused for a lot of violence and strife.
Amazon feminism empowers women to find their own female strengths (whether it be flexibility or speed) magnify it. Of course men would still have more political and social power (that’s what other forms of feminism is for such as radical some liberal lol) but the violence faced by women would decrease.
Sometimes women want to play nice with men but forget that can put them at a disadvantage.
what are your thoughts ?
I feel like ideology like this is the only way forward.
Most types of feminism are self-defeating, the foundations of them are always built upon victimhood and suffering. It allows women to always retreat into the identity of being a victim
, to relinquish responsibility and essentially give up any meaningful power they had.
People view traumatized women as weak or like they don't know what they're talking about, when instead we need to be treating traumatized women as experts.
I'm really feeling this. The time to be nice is over. Being nice got woman absolutely nowhere. The world we live in doesn't not reward niceness, even though the men in the world try to gaslight any woman who thinks otherwise as being "crazy", "psychotic" or "out for blood".
It's funny to see men react so suddenly when women start speaking of initiating violence (such as shooting pedophiles, rapists and other undesirables - all primarily men) or organizing groups.
It's so telling. They are afraid.
I really suggest watching a few of this woman's videos. I don't agree with everything she says (the stuff about the esoteric/magic side I know nothing about) but damn does she give a good wake-up call.
legalizing sex work doesn’t eliminate trafficking, but it does lower its rates. not because it’s more difficult to find unwilling victims
, but because it gives women the agency and more avenues to ask for help. lots of trafficking victims
and prostitutes can’t ask for help because they’ll be arrested themselves if they report anything to the police. it’s difficult to seek justice even if you’re just a random civilian snatched up from the street.
men will never stop being rapists and degenerates, and nothing short of a worldwide women’s revolution will ever stop the porn and the sex work industry. the best thing we can do in the meantime is try and institute laws to protect the unfortunate souls who are currently stuck in them. it’s not about empowerment or sexual liberation no matter how much libfems want to pretend like it is, but you have to understand that criminalizing sex work does nothing but harm and deny justice to women who are already suffering.
Who the fuck are these people who have clearly never done a basic search on this shit? Legalizing prostitution, even if you try to “unionize” it does raise the rate of trafficking, they just traffick women of color/immigrants who can’t get out of it and who no one cares about.
And look up the fucking Nordic model holy shit there’s this thing called criminalizing the demand
No but the rate rises which affects woc the most….
>legalizing sex work doesn’t eliminate trafficking, but it does lower its rates.
Showed you have no fucking clue what you’re talking about, but nice attempt there
File: 1556245560976.jpg (63.18 KB, 480x688, IMG_20190425_214104.jpg)
Im sorry if i sound retarded saying this but i dont understand her logic, i think she's the sexist one impliying the lack of femenine qualities erases your womanhood. She's talking about women desings in videogames btw, so…if a woman isnt showing her hips or tits or has some muscle then she's being erased?
No, she's right. It's very common for a woman not to be taken seriously or considered strong if she has rather feminine qualities. It goes both way, though, since masculine women are also judged.
Basically, women are just judged no matter what.
i think its definitely real. or at least in some women, maybe some people just dont have it.
i personally always feel significantly more irritable, hungry and angry the week before my period even though im usually fine.
Apparently it is true for some, but I always thought it was a meme. Like, the first couple days I was indeed more irritable, but that's because I was in constant pain, who wouldn't have a shorter fuse?
Nowadays I have a very light period and usually no pain, so no more extra irritability.
this happens to me too. tbh whenever i inexplicably begin to feel depressed i know i'm abt to get my period. i hope it doesn't get you too down