Front page of North Bi Northwest (Oct/Nov, 1995)
❝ Why I Am Bisexual ❞
reminder that lesbians are NOT more violent than men and we don't have the highest domestic violence rates. i wish people (mostly men) would stop deliberately misconstruing this
We should always talk more about the emotional manipulation and gaslighting that comes from being women under the patriarchy. Violence and threats only go so far to oppress women. The rest of the trap is the way that patriarchy has managed to trick women into keeping ourselves down, without us ever noticing it.
Take this paragraph:
Like Buffy, do we feminist women turn to mediocre men who can express messiness so that we don’t have to? Does it make us feel stronger, more powerful, or more competent by comparison—but also keep us measuring our worth in relation to others rather than to ourselves? The strong woman/bad boyfriend phenomenon reminds me of how I felt when I first began interacting with transgendered (male-to-female) women at book signings. The women whom Amy Richards and I met during the Manifesta tour often came with a critique that the book had no discussion of transgender rights. I felt terrifically defensive—obsessed with the way the M-to-F pre-op women would dominate the evening, often with just their physical bigness. I hated the way they invaded a woman-only space, seeming to merely endure our reading so they could get to “their” part of the evening. “They wouldn’t—couldn’t—do that if they had been born women,” I seethed. “You don’t see female-to-male pre-operative men heading to the Harvard Club to demand inclusion. Why is it always women who have to make more space and take in everything?” But as I learned more about the history of transgenderism and met more transgendered people—M to F and F to M and points beyond—I revised that interpretation. I wonder now if it offended me that these women could be aggressive and take up space while I still thought I couldn’t. - From Look Both Ways: Bisexual Politics by Jennifer Baumgardner
From a question about mediocre men that immediately brought TIMs to mind, this feminist woman automatically felt righteously repulsed at men forcing their way into a female-only space, who clearly didn't care about female issues, and only endured discussions of women's issues and thoughts so that they could bleat about themselves instead.
Instead of her accepting what she knew, the fact that TIMs act like men because they're men, and TIFs act like women because they're women, she flipped a switch, threw in that she met a range of trans "and points beyond" people, and suddenly, TIMs taking over women's spaces and demanding that everything be about themselves became her own moral failing.
Again, this last line:
I wonder now if it offended me that these women could be aggressive and take up space while I still thought I couldn’t.
Critiques of her understanding of feminism aside, from the above text, she knew what men are like, and she was right to seethe. And yet, patriarchy is so strong that women will tie themselves in knots to be seen as acceptable to others, because of the teaching that men always matter more.
In her case - and in quite a lot of other cases, from women who won't really even think about feminism across whatever spectrums there are, I would wager - there will be this underlying idea that these men that claim womanhood are simply somehow better women than they are, and that is why those men deserve support and love and kindness over everything else.
Because those men are the kind of women that actual women are telling themselves that they should aspire to be. That actual women are failures, and the fakes are somehow the real deal.
Those women can tell themselves that it's about being unapologetic and loud and forceful about their individual needs - but it's another manipulative trap. Women can never become like those brave TIMs. As soon as they try, they're called TERFs, remember?
Look at the number of women who spend so much time defending TIMs, whether they're trans identified or not. Of course they do. They've been taught that the best of women, the most vulnerable of women? Those better "women" are all male.
Why do I say all this in regards to the trans issue? Because we're living in a time where numbers of women have genuinely been gaslit into believing that men can be women, in such a relatively short space of time. That men somehow can become biologically female through saying a few words out loud.
If that doesn't tell you how effective the psychological abuse of women is under the patriarchy, I don't know what else will.
It's the difference between understanding individual and systemic issues.
The fact that men are the most likely to be perpetrators of violence and abuse, where women are most likely to be the victims of violence and abuse proves that there's a systemic issue of male violence that victimises women.
That fact doesn't stop a woman being abusive to another woman, or a man being abusive to another man, or a woman being abusive to a man. In every individual case, the victim needs support and the perpetrator needs to face justice.
All that we can do is fight the systemic causes of overrepresented male violence to prevent as much harm against women as possible.
There will always be evil individuals that will commit evil acts because they want to. Even in what would otherwise be a utopia, there will always be those that harm because they enjoy harming.
But the MRAs won't acknowledge any of that. It's much easier for them to be misogynists and go "but what about...!" There is no what about. Male victims will need male-only spaces to find safety after escaping abuse and the MRAs can go support those individual victims. Meanwhile, feminists who actually give a damn want to destroy the roots of male supremacy that makes so many men feel like they're entitled to beat, abuse and rape women (and other men, but the MRAs forget about that part because it doesn't help them try to justify their hatred of women).
At the end of the day, if it was only a case of "well some abusers abuse and feminists obsess over male abusers," then rape and domestic violence statistics would show that male and female abusers and victims both hovering around the 50/50 mark - but that isn't what's happening, is it?
I hate when males bring up female abusers as if it’s supposed to deflect from the majority of abusers being men. As a girl who was sexually abused by another girl from ages 6-10 I can acknowledge that it happens but is nowhere near as common as a male being an abuser. Yes there are female abusers but that does not deflect from the fact that majority are men, no matter how many women abusers there are it will still never compare to the amount of male abusers.
Rowling uses names like Cho Chang and Kingsley Shacklebolt for her Characters of Color.
Werewolves are a metaphor for HIV. Fenrir Greyback is a werewolf who likes to infect young children. Seeing as the Aids Crisis primarily affected gay men and there is a stereotype that gay men are sexual predators, this is pretty damning. Especially seeing as she has no visibly queer characters in her story.
Dumbledore is the only confirmed queer character in her story and she kills him off. I suppose Grindelwald was also confirmed as being gay, but that's not the best representation seeing as he was evil. She never explicitly states either of these characters are queer in the text, though.
Dobby wanting to be free is treated as an anomaly amongst the house elves. The rest are content being slaves.
When Hermione creates S.P.E.W. to try to help free the house elves and gets them rights, Ron and Harry both become annoyed with her and Ron outright mocks S.P.E.W.
The book treats any character who is overweight poorly. Typically, heavier characters are either nasty people or incompetent people whom she makes fun of.
The whole thing where the girls can get into the boys' dormitories but the boys can't get into the girls'. You could probably find something transphobic here, especially since JKR is a TERF, but even so, she ignores that through the use of magic, the girls could be just as dangerous as the boys.
She is oftentimes misogynistic, as seen when Mrs. Weasley believes the rumors spread by Rita Skeeter in Witch Weekly and begins to treat Hermione, a fourteen-year-old girl, poorly for them, but treats Harry just the same.
Even characters we are supposed to like, like Hagrid and Ron, make nasty comments about Muggles. And not just the Dursleys. Ron even makes ignorant comments about Muggle doctors, calling them people who "cut people up" and acting like they aren't as good as wizards. Considering they can't just wave a wand and make everything better, what Muggle doctors do is amazing and we all know it.
The goblins are antisemitic caricatures.
Feel free to add onto this if there's any I missed. It's been a long time since I read the series, so there's probably something in there that I've forgotten about.
Deliciosa
the most infuriating thing about personal growth is that even if someone else did have the answer you needed and conveyed it to you in a precise and effective matter, it won't make sense until you're ready for it. you could hear it every day of your life and it wouldn't matter a fucking bit until it finally clicks. there's very little you can do to influence when that happens, either
we need more mean bisexual radfems.
Mount Holyoke College students at pride in Northampton, MA in 1989. via mhlyonspride
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