darlington-v

[darlington-v]

hi welcome to LA! come with me i wanna show you all the oil drilling sites that are disguised as office/government buildings ^_^

[darlington-v]

[darlington-v]

This blog is a safe space for nightgown clad women with candelabras and scared byronic men

[darlington-v]

you cannot headcanon your way out of overt thematic structures on which the entire narrative is built

[darlington-v]

some of yall will reblog the dumbest white bullshit because you can't handle complexity and holding two things at once, solely because someone of a marginalized group is saying it.

[darlington-v]

pandora hearts is gonna get a reboot i just know it! let's make it happen!! c’mon everybody!!! *runs off excitedly and no one follows me*

[darlington-v]

New York please please please please we need Zohran so bad please I'll literally be on the news if that old white fuck wins

[darlington-v]

honestly, especially in the current state of the world, you all have GOT to kill whatever puritanical voice inside your head keeps insisting that if something is erotic it has no social, artistic, or intellectual merit.

stop acting as if someone can’t enjoy both erotica and literary fiction or classics. it’s not some dichotomy.

stop acting as if erotic art can’t be poignant and meaningful. and that includes all erotic art - not just fine art.

stop insisting that sex scenes or erotic material ruin movies and shows just because you, personally, get icked out watching it.

no, not all erotic art is high art, and not all erotic art is meant to invoke deep intellectual discussion - but insisting that makes erotic art valueless, a disservice to intellectualism, or whatever else - does nothing but add fuel to a fire built on conservative ideology.

[darlington-v]

real life: sorry im just not a social media kind of guy… i wanna live in the moment y’know…. im like really private i like having secrets

on tumblr at 11:41 pm : guess whose period just started while watching fraggle rock season 1 episode 17

[darlington-v]

Today I saw a pic of a baby cowbird next 2 its nest "parent" and it was so much bigger!!!!! Which is the sort of thing that gets normal people upset about the injustice of nest parasitism but makes *me* worry if baby cowbirds get bird dysmorphia

[darlington-v]

[darlington-v]

we as a society do not explore proxy sex enough………….

[darlington-v]

adult friendships are so dumb like yeah i think i can find a time to hang. how’s february 17th at 4pm

[darlington-v]

talking about how whiteness is evil as white person makes me... feel a little insane because i know people who don't know what i'm talking about are going to think im self flagellating when i'm not, esp because they have before. i have had people think i was holding shame and being self punishing when talking about this when i'm not ashamed because i have nothing to be ashamed of.

[darlington-v]

In general, understanding radical feminism for what it is and why it appeals to many people requires an understanding that the greatest strength of radical feminism as a tool for understanding misogyny and sexism is also its greatest faultline.

See, radical feminism is a second wave position in feminist thought and development. It is a reaction to what we sometimes call first wave feminism, which was so focused on specific legal freedoms that we usually refer to the activists who focused on it as suffragists or suffragettes: that is, first wave feminists were thinking about explicit laws that said "women cannot do this thing, and if they try, the law of the state and of other powerful institutions will forcibly evict them." Women of that era were very focused on explicit and obvious barriers to full participation in public and civil life, because there were a lot of them: you could not vote, you could not access education, you could not be trained in certain crucial professions, you could not earn your own pay even if you decided you wanted to.

And so these activists began to try to dig into the implicit beliefs and cultural structures that served to trap women asking designated paths, even if they did wish to do other things. Why is it that woman are pressured not to go into certain high prestige fields, even if in theory no one is stopping them? How do our ideas and attitudes about sex and gender create assumptions and patterns and constrictions that leave us trapped even when the explicit chains have been removed?

The second wave of feminism, then, is what happened when the daughters of this first wave--and their opponents--looked around and said to themselves: hold on, the explicit barriers are gone. The laws that treat us as a different and lesser class of people are gone. Why doesn't it feel like I have full access to freedoms that I see the men around me enjoying? What are the unspoken laws that keep us here?

And so these activists focused on the implicit ideas that create behavioral outcomes. They looked inward to interrogate both their own beliefs and the beliefs of other people around them. They discovered many things that were real and illuminated barriers that people hadn't thought of, especially around sexual violence and rape and trauma and harassment. In particular, these activists became known for exercises like consciousness-raising, in which everyday people were encouraged to sit down and consider the ways in which their own unspoken, implicit beliefs contributed to general societal problems of sexism and misogyny.

Introspection can be so intoxicating, though, because it allows us to place ourselves at the center of the social problems that we see around us. We are all naturally a little self centered, after all. When your work is so directly tied to digging up implications and resonances from unspoken beliefs, you start getting really into drawing lines of connection from your own point of interest to other related marginalizations--and for this generation of thinkers, often people who only experienced one major marginalization got the center of attention. Compounding this is the reality that it is easier to see the impacts of marginalization when they apply directly to you, and things that apply to you seem more important.

So some of this generation of thinkers thought to themselves, hang on. Hang on. Misogyny has its fingers in so many pies that we don't see, and I can see misogyny echoing through so many other marginalizations too--homophobia especially but also racism and ableism and classism. These echoes must be because there is one central oppression that underlies all the others, and while theoretically you could have a society with no class distinctions and no race distinctions, just biologically you always have sex and gender distinctions, right? So: perhaps misogyny is the original sin of culture, the well from which all the rest of it springs. Perhaps there's really no differences in gender, only in sex, and perhaps we can reach equality if only we can figure out how to eradicate gender entirely. Perhaps misogyny is the root from which all other oppressions stem: and this group of feminists called themselves radical feminists, after that root, because radix is the Latin word for root.

Very few of this generation of thinkers, you may be unsurprised to note, actually lived under a second marginalization that was not directly entangled with sexism and gender; queerness was pretty common, but queerness is also so very hard to distinguish from gender politics anyway. It's perhaps not surprising that at this time several Black women who were interested in gender oppression became openly annoyed and frustrated by the notion that if only we can fix gender oppression, we can fix everything: they understood racism much more clearly, they were used to considering and interrogating racism and thinking deeply about it, and they thought that collapsing racism into just a facet of misogyny cheapened both things and failed to let you understand either very well. These thinkers said: no, actually, there isn't one original sin that corrupted us all, there are a host of sins humans are prone to, and hey, isn't the concept of original sin just a little bit Christianocentric anyway?

And from these thinkers we see intersectional feminists appearing. These are the third wave, and from this point much mainstream feminist throughout moves to asking: okay, so how do the intersections of misogyny make it appear differently in all these different marginalized contexts? What does misogyny do in response to racial oppression? What does it look like against this background, or that one?

But the radical feminists remained, because seeing your own problems and your own thought processes as the center of the entire world and the answer to the entire problem of justice is very seductive indeed. And they felt left behind and got quite angry about this, and cast about for ways to feel relevant without having to decenter themselves. And, well, trans women were right there, and they made such a convenient target...

That's what a TERF is.

Now you know.