#MISOGYNY and SEXISM are so prevalent in society

[spoilerobin]

"tim figured out batmans identity!!" mia did it better!

[franklespine]

You know I think you guys might be on to something when you call Sam woman coded cause - genuinely - how do you, as writers of a show, be so misogynistic as to not include any female characters asides from damsels and hookups (specifically referring to the early seasons), and yet need so desperately to have a outlet for macho masculine patriarchy power dynamics that you have an adult male character experience misogyny?? How do you mess up that badly??

It's like, although they thought that putting female characters in the narrative other than to exist as sexy distressed lamps wouldn't appeal to the true blooded 2000s American audience. But yet it was completely necessary for there to be a bottom rung in the masculinity pyramid because - well how else can we as a society function!!

Anyway, ik reading too far into things is my special talent, and in most circumstances all of this stuff is just a joke in the show but wow they really had Dean poking fun of any of Sam's characteristics that don't fit into this Hyper True Blooded American Masculinity ideology as a butt of jokes for 15 years. The fact that he has longer hair, that he cares about his hair, that he's tidy, that he likes salads and isn't a big meat eater, that he's sympathetic, that he's a bitch. And of course these are just silly little jabs that Dean makes in sibling-like fashion but like wow 15 years. Damn.

And of course it's not only this that leads to the rather odd interpretation of a woman-coded Sam, but also the way he is treated directly by the narrative. Like, for example, being the family's possession, rather than an equal member. Dean has seen it as his job to look out for his little brother since he pulled him from the fire and the wellbeing of this infant was thrown onto his shoulders at age 4, and this has created a lot of ricocheting effects on both of them. This isn't to say that Dean doesn't love, care, respect, and value Sam, but it does mean that sometimes he treats him like a possession rather than a person. He makes a lot of crazy decisions in the show that he justifies as being for Sam's own good, even if it goes directly against Sam's wishes. After Sam leaves a note to Dean telling him he's going out for a bit to handle a case, Dean weasels his way in, not trusting him to handle it due to the mental issues Sam is facing at the time, and kills Amy, despite Sam begging him not to. Even though Dean knows Sam would never consent to an angle possessing him, he tricks him into it anyway. He does these things, and many others because he believes that he is acting in Sam's best interests, totally disregarding the fact that Sam has capacity to make judgements and handle the consequences himself, even going so far as to oppose what he directly knows or Sam tells him he wants.

Then of course there is the fact that the fear integral to his character - a loss of autonomy (bodily autonomy, but also autonomy to make his own decisions about his future, to be good, to be pure and faithful), is an explicitly feminine one. Then there is the strong subtext in his story of SA themes, I think in s4 a demon even refers to Sam as a 'whore' or that he's 'whoring it up' (with respect to Ruby), and the interesting prevalent idea of Sam questioning or going against the ideals/ideology of the masculine figure head (which would be Dean I guess) and getting punished for it. Sam suggests that maybe they take a more humanitarian approach with the cow blood drinking vampires in s2 and Dean punches him, Sam tries to get him to talk about their Dad and Dean punches him, Sam tries to get him to talk about Lisa and Ben and Dean punches him, Sam gets caught simply using his abilities and Dean punches him - twice. I think you get the picture.

Anyway. This post comes off as rather critical of Dean, which wasn't really my intention. It's more sort of a broader criticism of the rampant sexism that had its part in shaping the show - being one to come out of the early 2000s. Ideas such as this - you could really go on for hours as its fascinating how ideological frameworks are presented certain ways in media - and the way masculine and feminine social dynamics, to list only one, is presented in supernatural is definitely a can of worms.

[silvermoon424]

I seriously hate the “aro/ace people aren’t oppressed enough to be part of the LGBTQ+ community” argument so much. We may not get denied healthcare but most cishet people absolutely think there’s something “wrong” with us that needs to be “fixed.” I’ve lost count of the amount of times aro/ace people have been called “mentally ill” or even “not fully human” because we either don’t experience romantic/sexual attraction or we experience it differently than allo people do.

People really don’t understand just how prevalent amatonormativity is in virtually every culture. And let it be known that the same structures and beliefs that demonize aro/ace people for not confirming to society’s expectations of what a monogamous, “normal” relationship “should” be and what people should aspire towards also demonize other queer people for not fitting in, too.

Also, I don’t get the “you must be THIS oppressed to join the club” mentality. While it’s absolutely true (and we should never forget that) the queer community was and still is founded out of a need for mutual care and protection against a society that hates and misunderstands us, we’re also still fighting to end that oppression. And if that oppression lessens or even ends, it shouldn’t erase our identities. I think of it like this: if misogyny were to suddenly disappear, that wouldn’t make me any less of a woman because my experiences and identity as a woman are not solely defined by sexism. Likewise, if queerphobia were to vanish, LGBTQ+ people would still have strong identities because there are so many things about being queer that are not and should not be defined by oppression.

Idk, exclusionist thought (especially within the queer community) just bothers me so much.

[youryanderedaddy]

Yeah some obssesive men can be misogynistic bc they think a girl is theirs and they shouldn'r reject them bc they are nice to them?

However i think some obsessive men would act possesive,regardless of gender and non-patriarchal ideas..

Anyways. It's hard to find smut or just one shots with yandere boys without misogynistic traits :( or if they plant the idea of one,ppl would still labeled as misogynistic.

But with female yanderes (bc sexism thinks girls can't do no wrong and aesthetic,romanticizing mental illness) they make sadistic girls look more appealing and cutesy gaze.

Like I just want enjoy my sadistic boys in peace and them to have some cutesy :(

Oh you just made me drop an essay. I have a lot of thoughts about this actually.

Tw for discussion of misogyny, rape, stalking, lots of incoherent talking too lmao

Most yandere characters in mass media are female. I have this theory that (mostly) men like yandere women in fiction because it's a reversal of the socially accepted gender dynamics where women are seen as weak, fragile or submissive. We need to take in account that the trope started in Japan where those gender roles are still very prevalent to this day, and to a male Japanese audience seeing a dangerous, powerful, dominant woman is a power fantasy. It's unusual, you know? For the "prey" to be the predator. In retro horror movies the victims are usually women while the killers are men. So it's absolutely shocking (revolutionary even) to see the roles reversed. Female stalkers, villains, obsessive women, in a way they're all reclaiming themselves in cinema and media, and allowing themselves to be possessive and jealous the way men have been for centuries IN REAL LIFE. I have nothing but respect for media that chooses to engage with that, be it horror or even romance. I think it's easier to have a nuanced discussion on female yanderes than on male because of the physical difference and the way society views criminals based on gender and appearance.

Society keeps telling us that women are to be desired, they're always the center of the desire (and objectification/sexualisation). With female yanderes this is reversed too - men get to be desired (obsessively so), they become the center of someone's sexuality, which is rarely the case in real life where male sexuality revolves about being the dominant figure in the relationship. It's a way for men to be submissive without having to face a society that emasculates and mocks them for this submissiveness. Or at least that's the way I see it. It's a very interesting topic.

With male yanderes, the conversation is entirely different. It's hard to write about them without engaging in some way with misogyny. You can't write possessive men without thinking about the very real life implications of those behaviors. 200 years ago women were still considered property, they belonged to the highest bidder. Even today hundreds of women are murdered because they reject men who can't handle rejection, or who view them as property. Of course there are cases where women kill their male partners out of jealousy or paranoia, but the reverse are much, much more common. It's very important in those topics to be able to distinguish between fiction an reality.

There is the other side of it all. Fiction is fiction. It can be anything. Fiction of course doesn't exist in a bubble, but it doesn't need to be realistic or even engage with the real world. You can have possessive men who aren't misogynistic or rapey. But I choose to look at all perspectives. I enjoy working with some realistic traits from time to time, and that often means dealing with unpleasant, sensitive real world topics like misogyny, rape, inceldom, assault, rape culture etc. I look at the yandere genre as a horror trope first, and as erotica second. I don't consider it romance - although some slight yandere traits can be used to create perfectly healthy male yandere characters, my writing isn't an example of that at all.

Those are my two cents, sorry for the rambling, but as a writer (and a feminist) I really find this topic intriguing. There are so, so many aspects to it, social, cultural, etc

[femboykaz]

Your new tumblr name (title? pseudonym?) is terribly intriguing will you please share your wisdom/headcanon

Ahahaha, so, I have to be honest it came more from an inside joke with a couple friends than a specific "kaz is a femboy" headcanon. But also, I think it works well with Thoughts/headcanons that I've had about Kaz anyway so I stand by it lmao, so!

I've kind of always imagined Kaz as being very gnc (if not trans or enby). He presents himself however is convenient for him in the moment (for jobs, cons, etc.), or to make a statement (mocking the merchers), but when the way he presents doesn't really matter, that all goes out the window. Which doesn't have to be tied to Femboy Kaz but it can be, and I think he'd very much be the kind of person to say "fuck gender norms I do what I want" (insert tangent about autistic!kaz and social norms/expectations in general here) and at some point he realizes that what he wants is to wear pretty dresses and makeup thank you very much

And it can serve a purpose beyond personal feelings too! It's no 'mock the merchers and make them uncomfortable by dressing as one of them' but I think he still could (and would) use it to make a point and as a a sort of... act of rebellion? (since we have at least some indication that sexism/misogyny is prevalent at least to some extent in the grishaverse), especially if he found out any of his crew (crows or otherwise) had been having problems with it. Like just, him whole-heartedly embracing femininity and making it everyone else's problem, he knows it doesn't change anything, it isn't a weakness or something to hide/be ashamed of --- in him or anyone else --- etc., and he will gladly make other people uncomfortable with that and put them in the position of having to either face that or do mental gymnastics to hold on to their preconceived ideas

Also also also! I dunno I just generally have feelings about like…. As Kaz starts to heal, he has to open up not just to his friends but also to himself? If that makes sense? Like he has to figure out who he is as a person, just himself --- no 'I live to exact revenge in Jordie's name', no masks/personas, no Dregs, no Inej and Jesper & Co., just. Him.

(Which isn't to say these aren't still critical aspects of/don't have a critical role in who he is, but. Ya know. There's more to it, he has to figure out who he is beyond that, etc. I'm definitely not explaining this well but hopefully my point is getting across?)

Anyway, sorry, bit of a tangent there. Point is, I think his healing journey comes with its fair share of self exploration/discovery, and I imagine gender presentation/exploring femininity, especially as a man, being an unexpected but important part of that.

But I think one of the biggest things for me here is that like… disability (trauma, chronic pain, mental illness) can be really alienating, not just from society/people around you but also from yourself and your own body? And how you dress and generally present can be incredibly important regardless of identity and neurotype and physical capabilities and all that, but then to bring in those other aspects --- the way it impacts how others view and treat you, how you generally feel, your own connection to your body and personhood, etc (how many times can I use "etc." in this post, lol) --- as well... Idk maybe this isn't a common experience but at least to me that all really intensifies the role/importance of outward presentation?

Plus, between his reputation and his limp/cane and the gloves, Kaz is probably already so accustomed to people taking the very nature of his existence as an invitation to… be invasive, I guess? (There's definitely a better way to explain what I mean but.) But anyway, even if a lot of the time people know better than to actually push him or voice their speculations and invasiveness to his face, it does happen and he knows it, so what's one more thing to give them? * Cue fun femboy times *

Idk if I… actually made any sense here and I was definitely very brief/vague but. Just some of my thoughts. If I was better at putting said thoughts into coherent words for people not living inside my brain, I'd be writing a whole essay on this, but alas….

Sorry I feel like this is probably a disappointing answer since none of it is actually inherently about Kaz being a femboy, but it's also not a specific headcanon I have about him, just something that can fit well with ideas/thoughts/headcanons/what have you that I had already, so I don't have much to offer there.

[dicapriho]

the truth is most men couldn’t give a shit about male domestic abuse victims. they don’t even give a shit about women who are victims of domestic abuse. not the stats , the commonness and normalisation of it all. nothing. the depp/heard trial made it okay for men to jump in on the misogynistic videos, ripping AH apart through memes, parody videos, because they saw so many women openly and happily taking part in it too this time. most of them didn’t even give a shit about depp, and probably don’t still. even after the verdict. where was this level of support for brendan fraser, terry crews, for all the male victims of kevin spacey, of bryan singer? where are the petitions calling for ezra miller to be removed from the flash?

all this meant was having the chance and excuse to be openly misogynistic for views, and receive praise, clout, hoards of new followers from it, because there was such a huge following for depp (the person they think he is because of his films/roles). to openly hate, despise, troll, and tear apart a woman finally. it was only about their own stats, their new found grasp at popularity. they knew they wouldn’t be called out on the sexism, the misogyny because it was fair game. it was amber - the liar. the crier. amber turd. the lies, the jokes about abuse and rape. the misinformation spread like wildfire; public opinion formed from biased tiktok, twitter bots. the lack of critical thinking staggering. “our capn’ jack!”. none of these meme pages, the bots, faceless accounts had any intention of learning about the truth - not about the evidence given in the previous trial. how he lost because the evidence against him was staggering. they have no intention to learn about the domestic abuse statistics. sharing charities, gofundme’s. most of them don’t even understand why the pair were in court in the first place - the legalities of the trial and what that means to other victims of abuse (past, present and future). they couldn’t give a shit about any of them because they didn’t care before the trial in the first place. they even ignored that #metoo counted male victims of domestic abuse too.

his supporters don’t care what his win means to victims, and how it’s stripped them of their right to call themselves victims of abuse. even his ‘fans’ who hailed themselves as victims of abuse, ironically don’t even understand that they can’t even call themselves that anymore, without threat of being sued - because of his win. they don’t care about the victims that don’t have millions in their bank, with no way of escaping their abuser, unable to divorce them, move to another country. they’d do it all over again online to the next woman who this happens to so publicly. because social media reeks of misogyny and society allows it. this trial has set back women decades, and men have jumped happily in on the trend too because women were so prevalent in tearing AH down too. all for that shrivelled red-wine-stained-teeth wrinkly ballsack of a man - * who by the way is back in court for assaulting someone on a fucking film set.

[eelhound]

"Despite clear evidence that antiabortion laws make women’s lives worse in a plethora of ways, women are generally not much less likely to support abortion access than men.

Some might argue that these women have simply been brainwashed by capitalist or patriarchal ideology. But this is unconvincing. An alternative explanation, put forward several decades ago by the sociologist Kristin Luker, is much more plausible. Luker’s book, Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood, was both a history of abortion restriction and a study of 'pro-life' activist women.

Among the women she interviewed, Luker found that they tended to come from less affluent backgrounds, have less education, and have fewer career prospects. For these women, motherhood was by far the most important and socially valued role they thought they could play in society. Without access to meaningful, highly paid, or prestigious career paths, motherhood was central to their self-esteem and sense of social respect.

Abortion access, by making motherhood optional rather than the central telos of women’s lives, dethroned it as the key source of self-regard and community recognition. And for 'pro-life' women, that was the abortion rights movement’s grave sin. The struggle over abortion access was therefore a struggle over women’s place in US society and whether that place was centrally defined by motherhood.

Though Luker’s study was conducted in the late 1970s, its conclusions hold true today. Among people with a high school education or less, women are still more likely than men to oppose abortion rights. At the other end of the socioeconomic spectrum, the dynamic flips: women are more in favor of abortion rights than men.

Luker’s analysis has the advantage of explaining the sincere investment in 'pro-life' politics by tens of millions of US women while also linking it to the political economy of capitalism. The United States’ devastating economic inequality creates a situation where, for huge numbers of women, the elevation of motherhood to a sacred duty constitutes one of the only sources of positive meaning in their lives. As scholar Stephanie Coontz has argued,

Women with less economic or personal autonomy are often drawn to a culture of family values that emphasizes men’s responsibility to look after women. Women who have a shot at achieving or competing on their own emphasize equality, supporting the kind of policies that make it possible for them to move up in their jobs and combine work and family.

While 'pro-life' women are a crucial part of the antiabortion movement, it would be a mistake to overlook the equally central element of male sexism. From Rush Limbaugh’s leering rants about college students and birth control to GOP candidates saying women should learn to enjoy rape, misogyny permeates the 'pro-life' movement. For many men, restricting abortion access, and reinforcing women’s primary social role as mothers, is but one part of the broader project of cementing women’s subordination.

But this kind of misogyny and gender hierarchy is also deeply rooted in capitalist political economy — though again, not largely as a direct consequence of capitalists. Instead, capitalism tends to reinforce women’s social role as caregivers. Women are paid less than men, so in many families, it makes sense for them to prioritize childcare and domestic labor, while it makes more sense for men to prioritize their careers. Women are consequently viewed as less reliable workers than men (particularly in occupations with nonstandard hours, like business and law), further locking the structure of inequality in place.

Such inequality, ultimately generated in the labor market, also fosters power imbalances within relationships. Women are more likely than men to stay in unhappy relationships because of financial concerns and more likely to bear the burden of household labor. Domestic violence against women is more prevalent when there is a bigger wage gap between men and women. Crucially, even households that desire an egalitarian division of labor are undercut by labor-market inequalities. The structure of capitalism, left to its own devices, renders inequality between men and women, and the patriarchal ideology that justifies it, inevitable.

The political economy of capitalism and the politics of abortion restriction in the United States are deeply intertwined. Those links, however, don’t lead to capitalists’ bank accounts. Instead, they run between the restricted opportunities capitalism creates for huge sectors of the working class and ideologies that emphasize women’s role as maternal subordinates to men.

Because antiabortion politics are rooted in the inequalities of capitalism, combating them requires challenging those inequalities. First and foremost, the political inequality at the heart of the US Constitution, which empowers minorities over majorities and allows unelected justices to legislate, needs to be dismantled. Though the 'pro-life' movement commands the support of tens of millions, the simple fact is that clear majorities of Americans oppose outlawing abortion. Real political equality would deal a devastating blow to the antiabortion cause.

Even more fundamentally, the structure of capitalist labor markets needs to be tackled head-on. As Lillian Cicerchia recently put it, we need to 'create ties between feminists, the labor movement, and health care campaigning.' Unions shrink the pay gap between men and women. Egalitarian social policies, like Medicare for All, reduce both the dependence of workers on their employers and of women on men who earn more than they do. Family leave policy can allow men and women to have equal incentives to perform unpaid domestic labor, rebalancing power in both the labor market and the family. And finally, of course, we need to fight for widespread, publicly funded abortion access for anyone who needs one.

There is a deep connection between capitalism and forms of gender inequality like abortion restriction. But misunderstanding the nature of that connection only hinders the fight for a truly free society."

- Paul Heideman, from "The Antiabortion Movement Is the Rotten Fruit of a Brutally Unequal Society." Jacobin, 8 July 2022.

[chaifootsteps]

That ask about the authors being a majority women thus unable to write sexism.

Do you know what internalized misogyny is? Because it’s extremely prevalent and likely what’s happening. These older women are likely writing characters how they were raised to believe they should function in a society.

Have you never experienced an older woman being oddly aggressive or maybe perhaps short with another woman who is outside of the societal norm for women? Like women who wear certain clothes, have certain hairstyles, live different lifestyles being titled several insulting and demeaning things?

Or even single mothers being ostracized largely by a community of mothers for not being married? Women can - ESPECIALLY IN AMERICA be misogynistic and hold those values as true to all women. Not because they hate themselves, well not all the time, but because they have also been led to believe it’s a competition. This is from a trans dude btw, so while I see why sparkpelt can be seen as uncomfortable in those reactions she had because I was uncomfortable reading it, I need to emphasize the inherent ridiculousness of believing women cannot carry internalized misogyny, especially older women who I often see have these issues more so than younger women.

Yeah, anyone arguing that misogyny isn't a problem in Warrior Cats wasn't paying attention during the Squirrelflight arc and has never read some of the shit people say about Lizardstripe.

[suck-on-a-fire-ball]

It sounds like it is very different being a spirit! I do wonder who that spirit in the varterral might be, but I am going to respect Justice’ wishes and not push further. Now, having a varterral as a pet… it might be fun! I can imagine it wanting to assist you at the clinic, and ending up sulking in a corner because it can’t figure out how to wrap a bandage properly, what will all those legs. The cats might not like it, though! Especially if the varterral knocks over those milk bowls… Perhaps better safe than sorry on this one!

While I do agree that all plights are equally important, I also think making comparisons, and especially parallelles, is sometimes necessary in order to have people understand. Just as you pointed out, a non-mage may not understand the mages’ suffering, but if you show the similarities to another plight (like treatment of the mentally ill) it becomes more relatable. Allegory and symbolism are powerful tools, as well! Just as in your society, there are many things that need fixing in ours. There’s sexism, homophobia, transphobia, racism, ableisim and many other toxic problems. I’ve had to choose a couple of them that are the most important to me, but that doesn’t mean I don’t get upset about the rest… As for magic, people here used to believe in it a few hundred years ago. Many feared it, which led to witch hunts and executions. Some of that can be directly placed at the Church’s feet, along with a lack of understanding and a nice dose of misogyny. However, there have always been stories about magic. Stories that are loved all over the world. At some point, I’ll tell you of the Legend of Atlantis if you like. It is…different, and the sort of story many would say there is no proof of – partly because much of said ”proof” comes from psychics. Me, I believe it whole-heartedly. But I am a little weird sometimes!

If mages were integrated into your society, I wonder if fear would be as prevalent as it is? I imagine magic can be used to make life easier in many ways! Farming, construction work… and, of course, healing. Not to mention art and music. I can certainly think of a few things I would like to try if I had magic! Someone clearly benefits from mages being feared, locked up and treated as things. The Chantry? Some other group in power? The whole system seems absurd and heartbreakingly cruel to me. I understand that there are some bad mages, but that doesn’t make it acceptable to lock up and mistreat every mage! Obviously, you already know that… sorry. I got carried away.

@aidanthecryptid

...

Part 3 / 4

You make a good point though about a pet Varterral… the cats would not appreciate the presence of such a large, frightening creature. That convinced me more than Justice’s warnings, or even the pure risk of potentially getting caught – having cats around is very important after all! Let’s leave the Varteralls to their own lives.

Thank you for seeing my side of things! I agree, sometimes making such parallels is important – I fear though that people will miss the point of understanding and begin to assume that the plights are all equal or similar. Each plight has its own struggles. Sometimes, to make someone understand, you have to take some more drastic measures though, even if those drastic measures tiptoe on a line of going too far…

Ah but you mention stories of magic? Stories stem from some truth, don’t they? (I shall actively refrain from starting a rant based on the words ‘witch hunts’ and ‘executions’ – I hope my society never stoops to such measures… Of course I don’t know the context, but the words alone already allude to something far worse than I like to imagine). If it is not too much trouble, I would be very happy to hear about this ‘Atlantis’. Especially if you believe in it – I am curious to hear your thoughts!

I met a psychic once. Most of them communicate with spirits in some form or way, here in my society. The issue with this is the authenticity of what these spirits tell the psychics. Some times they are truthful, and sometimes the spirits seem to enjoy playing with us a little. The time I met a psychic the only information the spirits would give him was that I were to encounter a tabby cat the next day. I never did. I had my hopes up all day. I have a feeling the spirits were enjoying my misery quite a bit.

If mages were integrated into society thing would be so much better! I fear, though, that there would still be a great fear of blood magic, but just as people have the ability to murder, hurt and manipulate each other with words and actions in plenty of illegal ways, there simply need to be rules and attempts to keep order. What we have in place now is oppressive and alienating. And yes, aside from aiding in healing people, magic can be of great use! I will admit, sometimes I use it to clean up a little quicker… though if any elders of magic were to hear me say such a thing they would frown. That’s not what magic OUGHT to be used for… but it’s quite handy, especially when you have to scrub floors. Saves me a lot of work.

No, do not apologize for getting carried away about mage rights – on the contrary, I find it refreshing to see I am not the only one that gets carried away! It's also relieving to know I am not the only one that thinks this way. The Chantry most certainly has made use of the oppression of mages. Whether this was the original intent is difficult to say, though, as there are plenty of stories of mages making the choice to remove themselves from society once nobles began to use demand their magic be used for simple matters such as scrubbing floors – ironically enough, I have used magic in such a manner before but at least that was by my own choice.

[lonelyvomit]

is it valid for me to dislike someone because i dont really like the vibes they give off or is it dumb and childish. (for context they seem fake, like a clout chaser and just genuinelly irritate me.(

I mean it depends cus I 100% believe in some people just having straight up rancid vibes and that we should trust our gut instincts and if someone feels Bad(tm) to us then we shouldn't try to force ourselves to like them.

however. there's so, so many girls who get "bad vibes" from other girls purely due to jealousy, internalized sexism and misogyny. we're literally all raised in a sexist society and quite a bit of it gets taught to us no matter what, and that shit is really fucking hard to learn to recognize and then learn out of. so especially in these "clout chaser" situations, is that person actually acting weird or are you just inclined to think so because the sexist idea of gold diggers is so prevalent in our society?

you don't have to like someone if they genuinely give you icky vibes, but it's worth taking a second to ask yourself why, and be honest with yourself even if you don't like the answer.

[trans-wojak]

women bitch about misogyny so much meanwhile 99% of "misogyny" is women not getting special treatment lmfao (relevant examples: https://archive.ph/IUzLD http://breakingthescience.org/RichardGelles_MissingPersonsOfDV.php)

Honestly, a lot of the time they (feminists) accuse men of misogyny for very mundane things and it’s annoying because

1. They engage in full blown misandry all the time and pass it off as ‘acceptable’ because women have experienced gender based oppression or play it off as “just joking” (which is exactly what they get mad at men for doing)z

2. They can contribute to women having irrational fears. Most violent attacks on other people are experienced by men. But feminists will try to have you believe women are having a fucking genocide by lone strangers. I’m not denying women experience a huge amount of violence, especially through DV but men do too, it’s just not socially acceptable to talk about. Even in cases when the woman is the aggressor, the police are gonna arrest the man most of the time. Women face more rates of intimate partner violence but we also don’t know just how much men face it cause it’s not documented as much.

3. I agree with gender equality/equity. But part of that includes remembering that not everything is misogyny, I’m sick of being told EVERYTHING trans men face is misogyny instead of the fact there is deadset transphobia aimed at trans men. Some of it is misogyny yes, but some of it isn’t too.

4. While it is true misogyny is prevalent in society, there’s a double side to it - women get more sympathy for poor behaviour. When they commit crimes they are more likely to gain lesser punishment because “it’s a poor woman, she wouldn’t have known better.” Yes that’s misogyny but denying that it benefits them is redundant - considering they always point out that the patriarchy always benefits men.

5. A lot of them aren’t consistent with beliefs. Pro choice but only for those with uteri. If a man wants to give up parental rights for a child he never wanted, they tell them they’re losers who shouldn’t have sex/use a condom/get a vasectomy. The same talking points used against women who want an abortion. I’m aware that abortion is wayyyy different to payments for child support but at the end of the day, telling men they can’t have sex if they don’t wanna pay for a baby is against body autonomy.

6. They like to accuse me, a trans man that the only reason I do X or Y thing is to look “more male”. They think trans men should act “more female” because they still see us as women. I’ve lived as both a man and a woman, they both have disadvantages in life. We can acknowledge this without making it a pissing contest. Women face sexism yes. I’m not gonna deny that at all but my criticisms of some women aren’t invalid just cause they face oppression. That’s not equal.

7. I don’t know if it’s my autism or not but I honestly just see everyone as people first, gender is second. If I’m in a room of mostly women or mostly men, I don’t really pick up on it until later. The only time I notice (cis) men more is when they’re all bigger/taller than me and it makes me dysphoric lol. I treat women the same way I treat men. This includes not acting like women need to be coddled just for being women, so I won’t change the way I speak for them i.e online feminists being mad I talk crass and say cunt a lot.

[art--portfolio]

My Statement of Intent for Phase One:

"With each phase of Unit 1, I intend to focus on different issues surrounding how institutional sexism has affected the perception of mental health concerns among women and people AFAB. I think that by selecting different subtopics for each phase will allow me to address a broader range of issues and their consequences so that the scale of the impact that the patriarchy has had on the handling of mental health issues can be more effectively conveyed.

During phase one, I want to focus on the misconceptions of the mental health issues of women and people AFAB and how this has created a cyclical labyrinth of sorts wherein mental health issues are created, ignored and then worsened. I’m particularly interested in parallels between historical and contemporary misogyny such as how mental health issues were and still are treated as a ‘taboo’ topic of discussion, or how women were and still are perceived to be overly emotional, for example, as these parallels would imply that the labyrinth has existed in some form for as long as the patriarchy has.

Within my work, I want to question why the misconceptions of mental health issues are still prevalent as they’ve had an incredibly detrimental effect on the representation of women. In the art world specifically, these mentalities have allowed for work that illustrates women who stray from the notion of ‘traditional femininity’ to be labelled as controversial but the criteria for this notion have often been used to prove ‘weakness’ among women – this relates to the metaphor of the labyrinth as women and people AFAB have effectively been trapped in a paradox which refuses them equality.  

Effectively, I want to harness the construct of controversy for the entirety of my Unit 1 project to create highly symbolic work with a narrative that lingers due to its disturbing nature. But I also want to question why it’s disturbing and the definition of controversy in regard to mental health – is it controversial or is it simply truthful in a society that wishes to ignore the truth? During phase one, I'll be illustrating the more dire reprisals of the ‘cyclical labyrinth’ that women and people AFAB have been trapped in. I'm keen to explore the concept of ‘Hysteria’ as this is an example of a historically misogynistic treatment of mental health whose effects have prevailed into the modern era; mental health concerns are treated in the same flippant, belittling manner that they were generations ago. I intend to focus on how the use of the term ‘Hysteria’ has alienated women and people AFAB (creating mental health concerns), understated the importance of their conditions (ignoring their mental health concerns) and made them feel idiotic for suffering with such issues (worsening their mental health concerns)."

[rjalker]

What Julia Serano said:

Misogyny, (AKA traditional sexism) and transmisogyny (AKA oppositional sexism) both exist and both are serious problems we need to combat. We cannot dismantle transmisogyny until we dismantle misogyny. The only reason transmisogyny exists in the first place is because misogyny exists. You can't defeat one without defeating the other. We have to combat traditional sexism if we want to defeat oppositional sexism.

What too many god damned assholes choose to hear instead:

Oppositional sexism is the only real sexism. Traditional sexism is not real, or if it is, it's not actually a problem and doesn't really oppress anyone. If you say that traditional sexism exists you're saying oppositional sexism doesn't. Only one of these forms of oppression is allowed to exist at a time. You are not oppressed for having a pussy. Cis women do not need to celebrate their bodies. Cis women celebrating their bodies is inherently transmisogynistic. Women are not oppressed for their bodies or reproductive systems, only their genders. Trans men and AFAB nonbinary are not oppressed by traditional sexism, because they aren't women. Only one form of oppression can exist at a single time and if you talk about other forms of misogyny that means you're a transmisogynist. No, in fact I didn't read the book that coins the term and explains what it means. I'm a bigot, I don't actually care about making a good argument, I just want to shit on other people for my own benefit.

It must also be noted that Julia Serano is exorsexist and racist(1) as fucking shit, and homophobic(2), and literally straight up lies about trans men to downplay and erase their oppression(3), but it's not like any of the people touting her words like holy gospel while literally going against what she's actually saying give a single shit about that...

1: Says nonbinary people are all actually just binary trans, but in denial and specifically claiming to be nonbinary to feel superior to trans women. She also claims nonbinary people are privileged for being nonbinary, and doesn't bother to even pretend to explain how or why she came to this conclusion, and goes on to state that human brains are inherently gendered either male or female, and that gender is biologically innate, and that the white western gender binary only exists and is so prevalent /because/ it's the only natural one. [Sarcasm: Because I guess she, a white woman, lives in a world where white people have never ever committed genocide against any other culture that has more than two genders. Nope. That never happened, totally. It's just natural for the white western gender binary to be dominant because it's the only one that's right! End sarcasm.]

2: Says gay people are not oppressed for their same-gender attraction, only for being gender nonconforming. She then goes on to say that butch women are treated better by our society than traditionally feminine women. No I'm not joking. I wish I was joking. So she apparently thinks that only gay men are oppressed for being gender nonconforming, because a man being gender nonconforming means he's feminine, but a woman doing it means she's masculine, and since she's masculine that means she's no longer oppressed for being gender nonconforming. So by her logic, only gay men are oppressed for being gay, except they're not actually oppressed for being /gay/, they're just oppressed for being feminine!

3: First saying trans men are privileged for always passing, then saying they're privileged for always being treated like women. Even though her Whole Entire Argument™ is that women and people perceived as woman-like are always more oppressed than men. She's literally claiming shit about trans men that literally two seconds of talking to a single trans man will instantly disprove. She literally switches between saying trans men are treated as men or treated as women depending on which one will make them less oppressed in regards to her current argument. Literally Schrödinger's Privilege.

[fadedelegance]

If feminists had cards, I would literally be a card-carrying feminist. I started to pick up on the prevalence of sexism in society and throughout history when I was 16. I remember a huge catalyst for that was the text book for my World History class. For each culture we read about, there was always a sub section entitled “The Role of Women”. I noticed that in every single one of those societies, men thought they were superior to us and made us second class because of our sex. Every. single. one.

I’d REALLY like to know why the fuck men think they’re better than us. Is it because of the physical advantage? It’s more like we have different physical strengths: men are brawnier, but women are more pain and sickness tolerant. I don’t think one of those is inherently superior to the other. They’re simply different. Do they think their penises make them special? Oh honey, no. Again, genitalia are simply different. Homo sapiens reproduces sexually, not asexually. Someone has to have the small gametes, and someone has to have the large ones. It just so happens males have small gametes (sperm) while we females have the large ones (ova). That’s just the way it works. We are different. Being more muscular and having a penis does not make you superior. Get the fuck over yourselves.

Oh, but ask the user quietspiral: I hate women. I’ve likely been a feminist longer than she’s been alive, but yeah, sure, I have internalized misogyny. Society has brainwashed me into hating my own sex. Either that or behind my phone and laptop, I’m a sexist man. 🤣😂😂😂🤣😂😂😂

Yes, this does offend me. You can say anything you want about me except to insult my intelligence or to question the sincerity of my dedication to the advancement of my sex.

[sokos]

These are some of the most dangerous countries for women.

And according to this different survey, the 10 most dangerous countries for women are:

10. United States: due to the prevalence of sexual violence—including rape and sexual harassment.

9. Nigeria: due the internal problems in this country, women are the ones who pay the consequences the most. Kidnapping and high rates of human trafficking.

8. Yemen: women have little access to health care and protection from violence.

7. Democratic Republic of Congo: Sexual violence and rape being used as a weapon of war.

6. Pakistan: economic discrimination, physical violence, honor killings, no access to education.

5. Saudi Arabia: economic discrimination and women still have to depend on their husbands.

4. Somalia: lack of basic health care and civil protections. Maternal mortality and HIV rates remain high, and women continue to face harmful cultural practices such as female genital mutilation and child marriages.

3. Syria: massive health care shortages and high rates of non-sexual violence related to the war.

2. Afghanistan: The ranking is due to the country’s high rates of female discrimination, non-sexual violence, and poor health care.

1. India: India is rated the most dangerous country on Earth for women, according to experts. The world’s largest democracy was ranked highest in terms of sexual violence and human trafficking, which includes forced labor and domestic servitude.

I was surprised to find so many people complaining about the accuracy of this study above like this

Even in the comments of the tiktok at the top, everyone was offended and saying sexism in their country can't be that bad and that other countries had it worse. When the shock should be directed towards how prevalent violence against women is worldwide! How even in the most privileged countries, women are still discriminated! Everyone should be working to stop the violence against women everywhere and taking real preventive measures instead of fighting about which country has it worse or if there's even misogyny in their beloved country. When people have so much trouble recognizing the problem exists, it makes it so much harder to actually fight against that problem.

This other page also includes on the list of most dangerous countries:

1. South Africa: notorious for sexual violence. It is estimated that over 40% of South African women will be raped in their lifetime. Of the women who were asked if they felt safe walking alone at night, only 25% of South African women said yes, the lowest of any country. Additionally, South Africa ranked the worst for the intentional homicide of women.

2. Brazil: Only 28% of women reported feeling safe walking alone at night and the country has the third-highest rate of intentional homicide against women. Brazil also ranked sixth for the percentage of women who have experienced physical or sexual violence by their intimate partners at 36.9%.

3. Russia: It has the second-highest rate of intentional homicide against women, largely contributing to its third-place spot on the list. Russia also ranks as one of the top ten countries to have laws and regulations that limit women’s ability to participate in society and economy in an equal manner to men.

4. México: Mexico ranks fourth overall for the most dangerous countries for women, as well as ranks fourth for the percentage of women who feel safe walking at night and for intentional homicide against women. Only about 33% of women reported feeling safe walking alone at night. Additionally, Mexico ranks third for non-partner sexual violence, which about 16% of women experience.

And other countries like Iran, Dominican Republic, Egypt, Morocco, and Thailand.

Notice how most of these are third world countries. The last page I used says the safest countries for women include Canada, Switzerland, Norway, Austria, Poland. But I found out that:

- According to the Canadian Women's Foundation: Women in Canada live at greater risk than men of domestic violence, sexual assault and harassment, and sex trafficking. Approximately every six days, a woman in Canada is killed by her intimate partner. 67% of Canadians know a woman who has experienced physical or sexual abuse. 6X Indigenous women are killed at six times the rate of non-Indigenous women. 6,000+ women and children sleep in shelters on any given night because it isn’t safe at home.

- In Switzerland, Every four weeks a woman is killed within a partnership. 28% cases were perpetrated by ex-partners who committed psychological and/or physical violence. In 72% of cases women were harmed, while in 28% men were the victims. And this says: According to the research involving interviews with 4,495 women and girls aged 16 and over, one in five women surveyed has been subjected to sexual violence, and more than 10 percent of women surveyed had been raped. Only 8 percent of women surveyed reported the assault to the police.

- In Norway, During 2018, a total of 3509 cases of ill-treatment in family relations were reported. 64 percent of the victims of domestic violence, including the servere domestic violence, were women. And 80 percent of the victims of sexual crime were women. A total of 8374 sexual offences were reported to the police in 2018.

- According to this, Austria’s homicide rate is low, at fewer than 1 per 100,000 people, but its proportion of women killed versus men is high. Last year, 31 of the country’s 43 total murder victims — 72% — were women, according to Roesslhumer’s Autonomous Austrian Women’s Shelters, a non-governmental organization that tracks the issue. There are a handful of countries where the rate of femicides is slightly higher, including tiny Luxembourg, but Europe-wide about 75% of slayings are of men, according to the European Union’s Eurostat statistical office. In Austria, femicides almost doubled from 2014 to 2018, going from 23 cases to 44, according to Eurostat.

- In Poland, the government has found that over half of Poles (57%) say they have experienced some form of domestic violence in their lives. Among women, the figure is 63%. The researchers also report a “concerning” acceptance of violence among a significant minority of the public. This includes over 10% of men who believe there is no such thing as rape within marriage and that, when it comes to sex, wives should always agree to what their husband wants.

So called "safe countries for women" are actually not safe at all. Misogyny is not only a thirld world issue and I wish more people understood that.

[petekaos]

i’ve been meaning to talk about this for a while, but because of recent events i feel this post needs to be made. i’m going to try and articulate all i want to without too much anger, but i just want to say that i’m going to be talking about the mistreatment of women and sexism and misogyny in asian communities and especially among asian men.

i don’t believe this is news to anyone -- but i am transgender. and this has allowed me as a trans man, unlike trans women, to see multiple patterns among asian men, both out of the perception of me being a woman and me being a man. i have not physically transitioned to a point where i completely pass yet, so normally asian men see me as a woman, and i have been on the side of being humiliated and degraded and demeaned and having to laugh it off -- but this is not about me.

this is about the times i have been seen as a man. how once a woman turns away, the jokes start, and oftentimes right in front of them. the idea of a woman being made to serve men is an idea that is very much prevalent among asian men. a woman exists to cook, to clean, to be objectified and made fun of, to make rape jokes about. i cannot tell you how many times i have been involved in sexist discussions with rape jokes and objectification and glorification of porn as an asian man among asian men and how many friends i have lost to comments such as these. this is because asian men are conditioned to think that asian women exist solely to please and serve them -- but this does not excuse our misogyny or our sexism. especially in this case -- they are grown men. they have infinite resources at their disposal to learn and do better. this should not and must not become a holier than thou argument where you say that your faves would never be like them or that you’re thankful to have stanned someone else. this is not about brightwin, or offgun, or frankdrake, or anybody else who has not said anything problematic that we know of -- yet. because let me tell you this: every single asian man thinks this way. every one of them. it is what has been ingrained in this society. so, especially non-asians, the focus right now? is on rape victims and on asian women and how asian men treat women.

trans or not -- i am a man. one day i will appear enough as a man according to gender standards in order to be fully accepted by asian men as one of them. the point is: it is not on asian women to call us out on our sexism and misogyny. it is ours. and you should not be waiting for a next time. asian men, we need to unpack and examine our own biases, our own internalised prejudices. and we need to be calling out our fellow asian men on it because we cannot and will not expect asian women to do the emotional labour for us. when your friend makes a rape joke, will you let it stand? when your father makes a sexist comment, will you let it stand? when your brother objectifies a woman, will you let it stand? when you catch yourself slipping, will you let it stand?

asian men, we need to do better. we need to protect and defend and support and uplift and amplify asian women and their voices. we need to do right by asian women, and we should have been doing it for years.