misanthropymademe:

discouroborose:

It’s honestly really creepy the way biphobic radfems fixate on the sex lives of bi women. 

They can’t just say “bi women are attracted to men” or “bi women date men.” It’s always about sex, it’s always about how gross it is that we fuck dudes, how nobody wants to kiss a girl that had a dick in her mouth last week, how gross our pussies are for having been in contact with a cock. How we’re dick-worshippers and cocksuckers and bisluts. It always, always comes down to having sex with men, and it’s always just assumed that any given bi woman frequently has sex with men. 

There’s a lot going on with this gross trend but I’m too tired to get into it, I just wanna say that it’s really, really skeevy to me how obsessed people are with bi women’s sex lives. 

Hilariously, going by radfem logic (het sex is always coercive, women who have sex are always painted as broken and degraded as if they’re failed gatekeepers) the radfems are actively blaming the supposed victim. The only logical endpoint of men being unchangeable beasts is blaming bi women. Radfems love upholding the patriarchy they so deplore, it seems. 

lisaquestions:

So there was this study in which adults were shown a crying baby. Those who were told the baby was a boy interpreted the baby’s emotion as anger. Those who were told the baby was a girl interpreted the baby’s emotion as being upset.

Confirmation bias is when people only acknowledge information that supports their biases, or twists information that does not into information that does.

So whenever someone says “trans women are acting according to male socialization” or characterizes anything a trans woman does as being “male” keep that bit about the babies in mind, and confirmation bias.

For some people trans women can do literally anything and it is perceived as somehow stemming from a fictional essential ~maleness~.

I recall snowflakeespecial, for example, linking two webcomics. One was of a cis woman celebrating her breasts, and one was of a trans woman celebrating her breasts. These comics were very similar in presentation and both said basically the same thing. However, snowflakeespecial claimed that the two strips were obviously completely different because the one made by a cis woman was genuine, whereas the one made by a trans woman was evidence of autogynephilia.

This is also reflected when cis people know a woman is trans, they will interpret any behavior, any physical feature, anything to support the contention that said woman is obviously trans, even if they had no idea even moments before.

In short, the game is rigged. When TWERFs, when truscum, when trans women collaborators pull this shit, they’re not engaging honestly. They’re engaging in terms of “Trans women are men. Therefore everything they do is indicative of being men.”

This is also why they lose their shit when trans women refuse to comply with their perceptions, as happened last night.

The basic rule is, however, that trans women are not allowed to be authorities on our own experiences. Everything we say is debatable and simply being a trans woman makes one discreditable. Any attempt to step outside the very narrow, confining boxes that others have decided describe us is seen as an act of aggression.

For that matter, any attempt to assert boundaries is seen as an act of aggression. 

the-transfeminine-mystique:

tariqah:

tariqah:

Remember when TERF extraordinaire Sheila Jefferys said that the people she agrees with the most in reference to trans people are conservatives🤔

Now one of the things I find puzzling about it is that, when I look at the House of Lords debate on this legislation, those I agree with most are the radical right. Particularly the person I find that I agree with most, in here, and I’m not sure he will be pleased to find this, is Norman Tebbitt… Tebbitt also says that the savage mutilation of transgenderism, we would say if it was taking place in other cultures apart from the culture of Britain, was a harmful cultural practice, and how come we’re not recognizing that in the British Isles. So he makes all of these arguments from the radical right, which is quite embarrassing to me, but I have to say, so called progressive and left people are not recognizing the human rights violations of transgenderism or how crazy the legislation is.

-Sheila Jeffreys in the 2006, Andrea Dworkin Commemorative Conference. Also please do note that DWORKIN HERSELF was supportive of trans people and wrote that government should support trans people and provide medical help in transitioning and that trans women should be intergrated into women’s communities 🤔🤔🤔🤔

warriorsdebt:

diskhorsedudes:

catnipkittie5:

aro-bendy:

I guarantee you, anyone with “x critical” wording in their blog description is either a radfem or unwittingly drinking radfem koolaid

not to be that dude but what about kink critical or people who are critical of the media they consume (like su critical). i dont think they’re drinkin the koolaid, i think its just unfortunate that radfems ruined ___ critical. (which im confused anyway because I’ve literally only seen radfems use gender critical)

Swerfs often consider themselves kink critical so that’s been ruined for me, too. That might not be the case for other people but it is for a fair amount of people.

kink-critical is 12,000% radfem koolaid and that’s just the facts.

Like I hate speaking about this publicly in any capacity for a lot of reasons but this is like the 4th example of this misunderstanding I’ve seen this week and it needs to be addressed because I feel like people are starting to lose the thread of radical feminism and its pervasive toxicity by boiling the entire ideology down to only the TERF [and occasionally SWERF] archetypes so I guess I gotta bring this discussion down on my own damn head.

So here’s the deal: the foundational tenets of radical feminism result in many wide-reaching beliefs About The World, and men, and women, and people of other genders, and the way they interact–and they have a great deal of interest in classifying those systems of interaction in ways that reinforce the foundational tenets. One of those beliefs is that men are abusers and women victims, unilaterally. They believe also that women are brainwashed by patriarchy to accept, normalize, or overlook violence done against them by men. This is tied in directly with beliefs about BDSM being a system which allows men to abuse women, and which encourages women to believe they want it when in fact they are being conditioned to accept violence. If you’re seeing some kernels of swerf n’ terf ideology in that portrayal, good–you’re getting the point. BDSM [or a straw man of it, anyway] is usually the big bad in this system of beliefs, but the formation of the argument allows it to reach well into other kinks and sexual practices, reclassifying them into some form that denies the agency of everyone involved, paints at least one party as an abuser exploiting a power system, and positions radical feminists as the noble crusaders defending Good Misled Women from Bad Exploitative Men–tying the whole thing back into the core ideas they have about the shape of the world, and also tying them into their other beliefs–what kind of people are men, for example, or what kind of behaviours women are A. not allowed to do and B. are too ignorant to realise they shouldn’t be doing [in their belief system].

Because that’s the thing about radical feminism at the end of the day. All of the beliefs are interconnected and products of the same twisted logic, usually reinforced with just enough grains of truth or plausibility to make them appealing–and to make them likely to be picked up, embraced, and circulated by people who may not recognize their origins. This is deliberate. Recruitment is a major game for radfems, and rather than hit a potentially open-minded, reasonable person over the head with “trans women are men” right out of the gate, they seed these other, tangential beliefs first. They package them in conspicuously TERF-free wrapping. They sprinkle them into communities where they’ll be taken at that face value. They market them to vulnerable people looking for a way to explain, understand, and heal from bad things that have happened to them. And then, when you’ve swallowed that key piece of their logic, they bring you into the fold by giving you more and more of the big picture, each step leading naturally and by design from the one you’ve already accepted.

And I know this, because that’s how they got me. They found a young, scared, confused, hurt person–someone who had had their interest in kink used by unscrupulous people to rape and abuse them, and someone who had been alienated from mainstream feminism due to complicated trauma reactions around those same events. It wasn’t my fault, they assured me. Of course Other Feminists weren’t equipped to understand me. They could help me heal. They could help me understand. They knew what I’d been through and they had the answers. They got me hook line and fucking sinker by using their kink-critical ideologies to exploit my trauma and vulnerability and position themselves as the answer to my pain. And then they fed me more, and more, and more beliefs that all seemed like such a natural extension of that first one, the one I was the most receptive to. It took me years to figure out what had happened and disentangle myself, and I’m still deprogramming a lot of it.

So, yeah. Kink-critical is radfem ideology down to the bones. And because I know it’s gonna come up–you’re allowed to not like kink in general. You’re allowed to be squicked or triggered by specific kinks, or even the whole affair. Complicated or even outright negative reactions to those things are well within the range of normal. But “kink-critical” as a whole, and as an unexamined belief including refusing to question where it came from, who it benefits, and what it leads to, is pure radfem bullshit. 

saw one of those “only trans women are allowed to combat terfs and terf rhetoric” posts and in the notes was a trans guy asking if it was okay for him to fight terfs. like hey quick question what the fuck is the reasoning behind telling people to not fight for us. activism is labour and demanding that trans women and only trans women take an active stance is so wild? that’s why we have allies? to take some of this burden off our backs?

canmom:

if you ‘defend’ trans women by accusing twefs of ~disrespecting our identities~ or whatever, you’re basically doing the twefs’ work for them.

respond with materialism, talk about how women are constituted as a class regulated by sexual violence and how this works in the same ways for cis and trans women, talk about how twef ideology exposes us to greater sexual violence and death, talk about how ‘biological sex’ is ideology that maintains gender and discuss the actual complexities, etc. etc.

but don’t make it about ‘identity’ please because not only is that easy for them to ridicule, even if it’s accepted it still makes trans women into lesser/fake women.

Lol ur afraid to argue actual arguments cos you know your case is built on wet tissue paper. But whatever, its not like TERFs arent reactionary fuckwads who uphold systematic oppression and are willing to work with fucking nazis to keep trans people down :^)

trelesire:

hate–police:

itchy-astroterf:

Nazism would actually be ok if it wasn’t misogynistic and racist. Sound economic principles. 

You completely forgot about the fact Nazism is hugely based in antisemitism, but fuck Jewish people, right OP?

not to mention you just admitted youre a Nazi sympathizer.

Ok this is definitely some Kiwifarms level troll shit. Itchy 100% suspended belief with this one.

the terf supports nazism, i repeat the fucking terf supports nazism, what a surprise

itchy-astroterf:

actualchickennugget:

itchy-astroterf:

piplup-against-ddlg:

itchy-astroterf:

transboyurameshi:

 photo yuya98ujt_zpsaeqcj5bv.png

softly but with feeling* what is even going on anymore oh my god kudos to the blog runner this is the most bizarre committed troll I’ve ever seen

“Nazism, when you take away the bigoted elements, is a perfectly fine on an economic level” = “I LOVE NAZIMSM! HATE ALL THOSE JEWS ALL OF THEM. I SUPPORT GENOCIDE!!”

????????????

“Purple is a nice color if you take away the blue!” It’s not purple anymore, it’s red.

Do you even know what Nazism is? Like legitimately. Not just “waaaha jew-hatred” but the actual principles and economics behind it? Do you? Probably not. I bet you just think it’s evil™

because that’s what you were taught in school, no context except for the problematic aspects which can easily be disconnected from the economic ideas. I implore you to actually look into National Socialism without the bias that it’s inherently evil.

Why don’t you just say “I hate Jews” instead of “Nazism is fine on an economic level” it saves you 20 letters

I am not a Jew-hater. I am literally ¼ Jewish. My grandmother was full semite.

terfs are just getting it all out in the open today omg