Im So Tired Of Being Unable To Say "no/please Stop" Because If I Do The Other Person Will Hurt Themself

Monstera deliciosa

i promise it is not subversive or satirical to be a caricature of what men think of women. they don't get the "joke" you are literally just reinforcing those beliefs

Does anyone else think it’s weird that basic female names are insults now. Like it started with Karen but it’s bled into nearly all female names. When someone is talking about a fictitious generalization of annoyances they experience and they attach a female name as a joke. Like I saw a post recently that said something to the effect of “I hate when old people go on long rambles when I’m just trying to do my job. I’m not your therapist Janet” I agree with your point here but why are we attaching a female name to this for no reason. What about the name being female makes it inherently evil. Is it because it’s commonly associated with older women? Why isn’t there a male equivalent to “Karen”?

My friend recently said she doesn’t like the vitriol toward the name Karen because all Karens she has met were nice. Then she threw out a couple other generic female names she thought were much eviler and asked my opinion. I told her my opinion was that I don’t attach morality to names just because they’re names usually given to female babies.

TRAs when they're pretending to not be insane for the sake of an argument: Sex and gender are different

People: Ok cool so you're a male who is socially identified with a "woman" gender role. Here's your passport that states your sex

TRAs: This is literal murder

It's not enough to make a mockery of women's social identity. Now apparently our sexual identity, like the biological state of being a literal female bodied person is also theirs to play with.

Hunter "I'll never stop being trans" , ok so why do you want to cos play being a "cis" woman with F on your legal documents. You aren't female, that's what makes you trans.

Really tired of people on this hellsite acting like being gay comes with political obligations

Homosexuality is apolitical. Sexuality doesn’t come with a set of beliefs or rules.

Gay people belong to a diverse array of beliefs, religions, and communities and yes that includes ones you disagree with or dislike.

Stop saying shit like “terfs can’t be lesbians” “so and so isn’t allowed to be a lesbian because of xyz” “he’s not actually gay because he is of a/b political group”

It makes it clear you think being gay is a choice and that it comes with a set of rules you need to follow to be ‘validated’.

Gay people are gay even if you don’t like them. Shut up.

The internet is amazing for unlearning what the patriarchy has taught us to be automatic. It's even better to practice personal feminism.

Because we're online, we can take a step away and analyse our thoughts if we feel angry, disappointed or disgusted at another woman. We have the ability to pause and not hate the woman that sneers at feminism, but feel grief for her and understand why she rejects it.

When we catch ourselves lashing out at other groups of women, the internet gives us the opportunity to work through those negative emotions and remind ourselves that patriarchy pits us against each other on purpose.

It's an incredibly powerful tool to use. Where else can we finally learn how to personally dislike another woman, to hate her views or wish that she was better educated, but not blame her for countless generations of patriarchy and still genuinely hope that she grows, succeeds, lives well, is happy and, most of all, safe? Where else is the space that allows us to go through the negatives to come out the other side, even when it's hard, without harming another woman?

In this space, where feminists will most likely agree on 90% of issues, there's still anger and infighting and backbiting thanks to the misogynistic female socialisation that tells us that nobody hates women more than other women, and that misogyny carrying on to think that other women want to trip you up or are readying themselves to attack to tear you down.

Men aren't thinking about how best to free women. We have to do that ourselves. Do you honestly think we can even come close to dismantling even one small section of patriarchy if we haven't learned to actually stand shoulder-to-shoulder with other women?

If you can't support and uplift and care for other women even in the same space with the same general ideals as you, how do you think you're going to be able to support and uplift and care for the women that hate everything that feminism stands for and promotes everything that feminism stands against? How are you going to be patient and understanding enough to teach her? How are you going to avoid victim-blaming her if she ends up being hurt?

That's why the internet is so useful. We can learn to dislike other women and step away from other women for our own sanities if we need to, we can understand that we will never be able to be best friends with every other woman, we can criticise other women and hold other women to account for their actions, but with this curated space and time to think, not being face-to-face, we can start the process of genuinely caring for every single woman anyway - especially the ones that we dislike the most.

I'd argue that that is the most important activism that feminists can do right now, the one that has to happen first before patriarchy can actually be ripped apart the way that it needs to be.

It doesn't even need to be as frightening as that.

I love my male family members, and they're definitely good men in general. They're kind and supportive and listen. However, they're still misogynistic. They don't even register the misogyny. They're not abusive or controlling, they're not violent or deliberately cruel. They even agree with a lot of feminist beliefs. They're simply misogynistic over labour and the like, and they still benefit from the patriarchy.

Men being kind or helping with something doesn't change the truth of the patriarchy. It's such an asinine argument.

hey um gyns did you hear? Yeagh. Post about 3 men helping with shopping cart?? Systemic misogyny GONE. systems of male control POOF. Men good always. Men amazing. Radfems should go outside and meet 3 shopping cart men who are so kind and cute. Then they'll change their evil Minds.

"But some women fantasise about sexy priests!"

Those women imagine attractive men wearing ordinary priest clothes. There isn't some obvious and acceptable g-string with a priest's collar around it swapped in. The fantasised priests are just... attractive, romanticised priests.

The whole point of nuns being sexualised, as far as I understand it, is the transgressing of boundaries (as above), the male obsession with owning and touching and fucking an underlined-capitalised-bolded virgin, and/or their need to fantasise that those pious nuns will take one look at that one specific man and suddenly turn into a nymphomaniac for him.

Maybe the message was "Ha, I'm not straight like religion tells me I should be! This is me being sexy and breaking free!" but it just underlines what men want anyway and upholds that the likes of nuns are some minor, sexy taboo for men.

Nothing is or can be subverted when it's sexualised, because the only message that men understand is I can jerk off to this.

Re: Chappell Roan’s nun stuff and the sexualization of nuns

I do not think a religion itself is owed any kindness or respect. I don’t think the misogynistic practices of these religions are sacred or deserve to be treated as though they’re immune from criticism and mockery.

However, I also do understand that nuns and similar religious roles are held by women who don the outfit and play the role because they have a commitment to their religion that includes sexual purity (whether brainwashed or not… though probably brainwashed a bit). I think the sexual mockery of a woman or a group of women who indicate their desire to not be seen sexually is weird. I believe even religious women are owed respect for their sexual boundaries. And the main fetish surrounding sexualizing nuns is that it is a clear violation of sexual boundaries and consent. That is the part that needs to be understood. The sexualization of nuns is because it is enticing to cross the set sexual boundaries of a woman. And the woman being religious can either add to the fetish (in the eyes of men) or it can be a defense against criticism, i.e. “I thought we hated Christianity but nuns are somehow off-limits?” (‘Religion-critical’ leftists).

I just don’t agree with the premise. I truly do think it’d be a whole different scenario if it were a religious role being sexualized that wasn’t about sexual purity. If that makes sense. Like the issue with the nun sexualization is that the whole fetish surrounding sexy nuns is that it is sexualizing a woman who doesn’t want to be sexualized. If it wasn’t a nun, but it was a random female celebrity who was being highly sexualized after she made it clear she didn’t want to be sexualized, I’d say the same thing.

Does this make sense? I’m at urgent care rn and im struggling to focus