This Is Exactly Why TRAs Are Always Homophobic And Biphobic.

"is xyz rape, is abc rape" is just the wrong way to approach discussing rape as a feminist. what you're doing when you're concerned about absolute parameters is centering what we should consider allowable by men. why center that. it's not that "everything" is rape, it's that you need to completely shift your paradigm. you need to consider what it means for women to move in a world where their sexual violation is essentially a given and up for negotiation. what does discussing rape actually look like when completely, one hundred percent centering the experiencing and feelings of violated women and completely disregarding what would be helpful for men to think is "only so bad."

BBC News

Trans former judge to challenge Supreme Court's gender ruling

Victoria McCloud, who stepped down last year, said the judgement had violated her human rights.

I hate this. They can't stop themselves from doing everything that they can to destroy women's rights. It's narcissism all the way down.

My favourite quotes from him:

"The Supreme Court failed in my view, adequately, to think about human rights points."

Because women's rights mean nothing, but men's entitlements are suddenly human rights.

"[This judgement] has left me two sexes at once, which is a nonsense and ironic, because the Supreme Court said that sex was binary," said Dr McCloud. "I am a woman for all purposes in law, but [now under this judgement] I'm a man for the Equality Act 2010. So I have to probably guess on any given occasion which sex I am."

There is no guessing. He's biologically male. He's deliberately obfuscating because he has a Gender Recognition Certificate.

"I am now expected to use male spaces. I have female anatomy. It isn't safe for women to use the men's loos. It is as simple as that."

I don't know what to say to this level of delusion.

The fight never ends. It's exhausting. Just leave women alone.

I think that it's because asexuality is to sexuality as gender identity is to sex.

There's no consensus on what asexuality even is.

If it's a sexuality, then it would be the simple state of not being attracted to either sex, the direct opposite to bisexuality, and then it's fair to discuss oppression, invisibility etc.

If it's a spectrum of whether someone is sex repulsed to someone who only enjoys sex after having a deep connection with someone else, then the real issues here are misogyny and pornification, since women tend to be the ones that claim some form of asexuality over men, and the idea of "I'm asexual because I need to form a connection to someone else emotionally before desiring sex and can't just fuck a stranger at a club like everyone else" is the definition of a pornified society. That also means that it's not a sexuality and it's wrong to conflate it with sexuality.

I personally can't see how asexuality can be both, but hearing "asexuality and aspec identities" does sound just like a sexuality version of people calling themselves "nonbinary."

I really dislike radfems hating on asexuals. Not desiring sex is deviant from what is expected of society, whether among the right or the left (yes, even among radfems and it's quite obvious). There's a level of sex negativity that is encouraged in these spaces (don't have sex with men), but people taking it further upsets you (because you're a woman with the same desire for sex as the men you dislike). I will always support asexuality and acespec identities. If you want sex positivity in any form and don't want those "annoying asexuals" to bother you, just go outside. Stop acting like your stance on sex is not a mainstream opinion

we need more mean bisexual radfems.

Happy Pride Month! To kick off pride I'm busting some myths about the Stonewall Riots, Marsha P. Johnson, and giving some love and recognition to Stormé DeLarverie!

This was sitting unfinished for months but I got it together and completed it in time for pride.

Edit (6/12/23): I believe only the first Joseph Ambrosini photo was confirmed to be taken the first night of the Stonewall riots; I couldn't find sources that indicated if the other photos were taken on that same night or not.

True. I'm not against venting at all, and I don't think there should be a compromising of principles, but at the same time, if feminists and feminism isn't trying to offer a supportive hand out to ordinary women and meet them halfway to dispel negative myths and go over the basics with them and generally welcome them into the cause, then what's the point?

One of the things that feminism needs to better grapple with is the difference between systemic and interpersonal issues.

The biggest reason that a lot of women push back from feminism with their additions to #NotAllMen is because those women know and love men who aren't rapists and who aren't physically abusive. It's entirely natural to rail against something that you see as attacking someone that you love.

When feminists advocate for single-sex schooling to protect girls, there's an automatic push back and outcry over the very real bullying that goes on in girl-only schools that have had long-lasting impacts on ex-students.

Glossing over the abuse that mothers put their daughters through often gives the impression that anything that counters any women-supporting-women narrative has to be stamped down on and ignored, or at worst, even denied, for the good of feminism.

It's far too easy as feminists to see criticisms like the above from women and then dismiss them, or repeat more statistics and then get frustrated at those women or call them handmaidens, instead of engaging and understanding why they're railing against what's being said.

No, not every single man is a raping woman-beater, but there are a ton more male abusers than female abusers, and a ton more female victims than male victims. That's a systemic issue, and we need to fix it. That doesn't make those loved fathers, brothers, cousins, friends or partners suddenly monsters out of nowhere.

No, female-only schools aren't perfect and there are bullying scandals in all schools, that doesn't excuse the individual abuse that victims have been through, but in general, they're safer for girls, and girls achieve higher grades than in mixed-sex schools, which is important to discuss and improve on.

No, abuse victims shouldn't be silent over what they've been through, and female abusers deserve to face justice. Continued cycles of abuse and female socialisation and mental illess etc might explain some of the abuse, but it doesn't excuse it. The point of feminism is to free all women from patriarchy, so that even the worst of the worst of women don't suffer with misogyny, not coddle the evil and the abusers just because of their sex.

There is so much difficult nuance, and there's too much reliance on the systemic to the point that the interpersonal is completely erased. It stops individual women from seeing anything in feminism that's useful to them. If they have counter-examples to any systemic issue, then they'll use those personal examples to dismiss that there's a systemic issue at all. If they're met halfway and the systemic vs the interpersonal is explained, then there's a much better chance that they'll pay attention or even go away to think about it to eventually become feminists, too.

I’m gonna talk about the “men don’t receive flowers until after their death” bullshit

I didn’t believe it as a kid back in my mega liberal phase until I got my first boyfriend a small bouquet as a gift (his team won debate championship and won a trip to the capital) and this mf LAUGHED in my face when I gave it to him

Another boyfriend I made him a homemade card for Valentine’s Day and he took the card and didn’t say thank you, only “you didn’t have to do that”

Another boyfriend would just donate shit I bought for him. Not even a thank you

So no I don’t give a flying fuck if a man doesn’t get flowers in his life and I don’t think he even deserves em in death

It might sound strange, but peaking about gender helped me to accept my bisexuality, understand feminism and start me on a real path to understand that I'm a person whose actual consent matters.

When I was younger and unsure (and quite hateful about) my bisexuality, and thoughtlessly repeated some feminist talking points, I ignored all of my doubts because they know better. At first, I didn't know why I was uncomfortable and upset about the push for bisexual women to accept being in sapphic relationships with males. Or why it was transphobic for a bisexual woman to not date/have sex with a TIM. Etc etc etc.

I doubted myself and my upset until I saw the sexual harassment of lesbians, and others that were much more intelligent and switched on than myself pointing out the lesbophobia and rape promotion and apologism, as well as the repeated, underlined anger about sexuality and consent.

It was first my outrage about lesbians (and, to a much lesser extent, gay men) that made me realise, wow, my sexuality doesn't implicitly suggest consent, which then made me sit back and actually consider how other women were fawning to avoid the rage and lesbophobia and biphobia and doxxing and rape and death threats, which then spread further to understanding my existence as a woman.

There's a stereotypical and misogynistic point that men bring up about how feminists are always miserable and obsessed about oppression, as if it ruins us somehow, but it absolutely does feel more grounding.

You spend your whole life isolated and only allowed crumbs of sanitised and safe "feminism," to the point where you dismiss every slight and every harm, from the mansplaining to the assaults as random or bad luck or whatever else, and then suddenly, you're not crazy or oversensitive anymore, you're able to understand it.

As twisted as it sounds, it's grounding and peaceful, too. If you can break free and question the so-called holy right of males taking everything female for themselves, when family members, friends, the media, charities and even governments promote it all as progressive, then you can question everything, and there's no more empowering start to a journey than that.

Does anyone else feel more grounded since becoming gc. I'm no longer being asked to ignore my instincts, my emotions, and the reality around me in favour of a constant "religious" trial. I used to be so disassociated, but now I can just point out the obvious and not feel like I'm going to burn in hell for it lmao. Lots of religious words in here but you get it. I mean it when I say tras are spiritual. You have to be to ignore reality that much. And it feels just as good when you deconvert.

Like Velvet...

Bristol, Vermont

I knew it was a TIF because there was a mention of "trans men" in there and wanting to reject the actual use of the word "woman," but I wasn't prepared for the self-satisfied, smug pose on her actual Yale page.

Sage Journals

Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Subscription and open access journals from Sage, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

Actual dystopian level sick this is. Legitimately floored. What the actual fuck.

“”I argue that pregnancy is not to be defined by biological phenomena but instead as a genre of political, aesthetic, and affective experience and expectation. As a multidimensional genre of experience, rather than merely a biological datum, pregnancy can potentially establish a shared ground between trans and cis women. Pregnancy is an existential experience involving birth and becoming in a larger sense. We need a more all-encompassing notion of pregnancy””

Pregnancy is not a haha fun little inclusive to all club. Are you fucking kidding me.