#a politically incorrect feminist

[artemismatchalatte]

My owned TBR for 2023 (1/12) 

I wanted to share more of my books/reading habits on here. 

I think I promised more original content on here so I have a bunch of book covers for this December. These 12 posts would ideally make up a portion of my reading list next year, give or take a few titles. 

Happy Reading everyone! :) 

[sunflowerliberty]

good news! my chronic pain has finally been diagnosed after 8 years and is in fact treatable

bad news! my physiotherapist is kind of an asshole

[what-i-want-shitpost-vent-idklol]

Now i sure as shit cant say this on facebook. But seriously why are republicans the dumbest fucking hypocrites.

I am of course talking about bud light vs modelo and how modelo is now the popular beer in america. I drink both bcus its fucking beer and i aint a soofft biitcchh

[batmanisagatewaydrug]

first of all, this is all legit, and not bait, though i have a feeling it may come off that way, this did happen to me. please don't publish if tumblr sends it off anon.

i'm a lesbian with gender dysphoria, and while i haven't had much sexual experience, i would consider myself a stone top. in the last year and a half i began reading "terf"/radical feminist writings and reading "terf" tumblr blogs fairly actively, largely out of frustration with misogyny i was experiencing IRL. though i never engaged with the community i did stop identifying as genderfluid and started understanding my dysphoria as stemming from the trauma of being bullied by other girls for having a high-androgen DSD, and using different pronouns/transition thoughts as unhealthy coping mechanisms. i'm happy with this, but i also don't know if i'm attracted to women anymore.

i've always been attracted to women in a way that's stereotypically guy-like; i find feminine women very attractive and not so much fellow(?) butches, want to penetrate with a strap on, don't like bush much, cursory interest in BDSM/daddy kink. i read/watched het erotica and porn sometimes and identified with the man. what i read problematized pretty much every aspect of that- femininity as a cage, penetration as violence/straps as disidentification w the female body, infantilization of women, bdsm as abuse etc. also, desisting making me more conscious of dysphoria/knowledge of how extensive sexual dimorphism is putting me off both women with larger breasts and hips AND smaller breasts and hips/unrealistically masculine body types as well. so a lot of what turned me on before isn't arousing anymore, or i feel guilty about it, and i haven't been able to find butch4butch stuff which is much healthier very interesting.

i consider my sexuality healthier now on a political level but my ability to get aroused/jerk off has plummeted (used to be i could jork it sunrise to sunset) and thinking about being in a relationship w another woman makes me feel uneasy and weird, especially since a lot of what i read emphasized reciprocative cunnilingus/tribbing (which i don't like) as the healthiest sex options. i also think about both my dysphoria and my sexuality issues 100x more than i did before, even though i was promised the opposite (freedom from dysphoria and feeling happier as a lesbian), and it's stressing me out day-to-day. i'm aware based on your general ethos that you probably think i'm a terrible person right now, but i figured it'd be useful to seek the opinion of someone who radically disagrees with what i've read on what i could/should do next, since i admittedly miss being at peace with my sexuality.

thanks for reading.

hi there anon,

it's a bummer that you'd think I would assume you're a terrible person based on everything you've told me here. I generally try not to consider people terrible unless they're actively being shitheads or hurting other people, which doesn't sound at all like you're describing. from what you've told me, you've been up to your eyes in some information that's made you feel deeply uncomfortable in your sexuality and now you're seeking out a new perspective to help you make sense of that hurt. that describes most of the people who send me questions!

it's so striking to me that much of what you're describing is very reminiscent of what's recounted in The Persistent Desire, an anthology of writings on butch/femme identities edited by femme historian and archivist Joan Nestle that was released in 1992. in various essays and interviews countless butches and femmes recount their discomfort with the feminist turn against butch and femme identities that too place in the 70s, when both roles were declared problematic recreations of heterosexuality and summarily decried as politically "incorrect" for lesbians. it's shocking to me how much what you've described echoes these accounts experienced by lesbians half a century ago - the disowning of women who are "excessively" feminine or masculine, the demonizing of penetrative sex, general insistence that there are "correct" sex acts that every lesbian is supposed to enjoy, and the deep discomfort and insecurity that this causes among people who don't fit into the very rigid standards of proper lesbian identity set forth.

here's a link to a PDF, if that's interesting to you at all. it's very long, so feel free not to read it straight through; it's a great project to skim and an incredible way to get in touch with the lesbians who came before us. their accounts of their lives are so wildly different from the boundaries of "good" queer representation that feel so universal today; in discussing their own lives many of these women speak very bluntly about their experiences with abuse, drugs, sex work, and violence. it's a great glimpse into the lives and history of a lot of very ordinary lesbians just living their lives, and I'm very grateful it's been preserved.

now, as for what you're actually gonna do: hey. listen. first of all, if you haven't given up reading this stuff yet, you've gotta. you simply cannot keep internalizing stuff that makes you overanalyze your own sexuality so hard that you feel uncomfortable about being attracted to women. that's not "healthy," that's conversion therapy lite. there are other places to talk about feminism without being made to feel ashamed of yourself.

listen: there's nothing unhealthy about anything that you described about yourself. being a stone butch, being attracted to certain looks and aesthetics, watching porn, wanting to use a strap and roleplay during sex and not being interested in other sexual activities - all of those thing are completely normal and, yes, healthy. certainly healthier than feeling the need to repress your sexuality so hard that thinking about being with a woman doesn't feel right!

should we run through that list?

femininity as cage - sure, okay, femininity isn't for everyone, and there are parts of it that suck. that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with women who like to wear dresses or put on makeup or shave or whatever, or anyone who's attracted to those women. genuinely I cannot think of anything less interesting or important to feminist organizing than getting hung up about what people want to wear. it's clothes, dude. it's fucking clothes. pick a more important hill to die on, I implore you.

penetration is not the same thing as violence. there's just nothing to debate about that one; it's patently absurd to pretend that every act of penetrative sex is rape and you'd have to fundamentally misunderstand how consent works to believe that.

straps are not about "disidentification with the female body," they're about augmenting a sexual experience. a strap-on is not more problematic than a vibrator or a massage oils or a pillow used to prop up a body part. unless those are also bad? are those bad? are pillows disidentifying from the female body also? I'm not up to date on this.

straight up I don't even know which part of your whole deal the infantilization of women is supposed to address, but a thing that I've always found interesting about a lot of radical feminists who are deeply distrustful of sex is the way that many of them seem to assume that women can't be trusted to understand their own sexual desires and need to be taught what's appropriate. seems kind of condescending to me, personally.

BDSM isn't the same thing as abuse. abuse, crucially, is not a situation that people can safe word out of or negotiate the constraints of. it's kind of like how, you know, I purposefully pay people to shove needles in my skin when I want a tattoo, but I wouldn't be stoked about it if somebody just ran up to me in public and started stabbing me without any warning or conversation. context is crucial. there can certainly be abusive people within BDSM spaces, but that's true of people of literally every sexual proclivity on earth, and certainly not an innate feature of BDSM. it's just make believe, dude. it's dress up. it's sex LARPing.

also, psst, hey. that thing about being attracted to women in a "guy-like" way? no such thing. men are humans, dude; they experience attraction in as many different ways as anyone else. for every dude interested in the same stuff as you there are men yearning for hairy women, muscular women, masculine women, women who will dominate them, women who would rather be eaten out then penetrated, and so on. to say nothing of the men who aren't into women at all! and, as is obvious from your own experience, men don't have a monopoly on those kinds of feelings, anyway! there are no men or women feelings, dude; it's all just people having feelings and fighting for their lives trying to figure out what they're into to.

I want to particularly talk about that last bit, where you mentioned not enjoying or wanting to engage in cunnilingus or tribbing. that's totally fine! people like different shit in all kinds of combinations - I'm personally a huge fan of getting eaten out and scratched up or bitten, but I don't do penetration and I've genuinely never met anyone who actually liked tribbing - and there are absolutely people out there who will, to paraphrase the poet Tinashe, perfectly match your freak.

(have you heard about the perpetual, critical shortage of tops that the queer community faces? you'd be a godsend, just saying.)

also, actually, hey I wanted to circle back to another thing as well: it's deeply alarming to me that whatever radfem stuff you've been reading has you feeling "put off" of women with wide hips and large breasts as well as women with small breasts and hips. what is wrong with either of those? both of those are just ways that women naturally look. women just look a wide variety of ways, and it's sad that that's upsetting you now. just thinking about this, conceptually, is giving me hives.

having been up to your eyes in all of this, I can definitely understand why you'd feel the urge to overanalyze you own gender and sexuality to the point of completely talking yourself out of identifying with anything that feels good for you. as I said, that's actually not healthy in any way, and as a sex educator I can't say that I think anyone genuinely invested in your well-being would want that for you.

entirely aside from their feelings on trans people, which I obviously disagree with pretty vehemently, one of the things about radfems that's most endlessly vexing to me is the insistence that such an extremely narrow range of sexual behaviors are appropriate. seems like a miserable way to live, and I sincerely hope you can detangle yourself from the morass of shame it's landed you in. you deserve better.

[gatheringbones]

the useful concept political lesbianism gave modern queer culture is that label policing is good and necessary political work and not policing someone’s personal labels makes us more vulnerable both politically and quite literally physically. shaming and dragging queer people who use politically incorrect labels also provides social cachet, it makes the attacker look as though they have a place of honor on the defensive vanguard of queer safety.

it hasn’t gone away. it will never go away, the need it fills is too important. Someone who ought to call herself a lesbian who calls herself something else is a crack in a dam. Someone who ought to call herself bisexual who calls herself something else is a lit match next to a broken gas line. Deciding not to forcibly correct them for their own good is political failure and compounds the danger posed to the entire community.

these people don’t see themselves as gutless bullies and they don’t see their position as inherently fearful and defensive: they see it as brave and socially necessary work that keeps queer people safe. they may or may not even be lesbians, they may loathe the lesbian feminists of the seventies and eighties for the damage they did, but the project of political lesbianism is alive and well within them and they get off on it.

[hairtusk]

i'm curious to know your thoughts on pulling apart problematic feminist canon, it's something i don't have a lot of experience with. like dworkin is obviously famous for her writing against porn and irl harassment of sex workers but she also wrote Right Wing Women which seems to be foundational and very correct when talking about gender and the far right. i haven't heard of of her discussion of pedophilia and bestiality, but she clearly wasn't afraid of controversial topics.

you seem, for lack of better words, smart about this kind of thing and i'd love to know how you think about these tensions!

This is a very interesting question. Unfortunately, before I can even begin to get into this topic, I need to address a few key points of your above.

'... like dworkin is obviously famous for her writing against porn and irl harassment of sex workers but she also wrote Right Wing Women which seems to be foundational and very correct...'

The wording in your above is very odd to me. The 'but' here seems to insinuate that, while Dworkin's work in Right Wing Women is 'correct', she is 'wrong' for her writings against 'sex work' and pornography.

Firstly, I refuse to use the terminology of 'sex worker', as I believe it normalises the idea that men can buy access to the bodies of women. I am firmly of the belief that consent cannot be bought, and that if consent is not given freely and without coercion, it is rape. Money is coercion. If sex can be bought, then rape is just wage theft, and I refuse to be party to that idea. That being said, I have enormous compassion and respect for women who are currently, or who have formerly been, prostituted. I want them to have access to dignity, respect, safety and protection in law, as far as is physically possible.

I hold the same view of pornography. People have always enjoyed watching other people have sex - this is inescapable, and I have no problem with the sensual or the erotic. However, the erotic and the pornographic hold no relation to one another - please read this short Gloria Steinem essay for more clarity on what I mean by this [source 1]:

I firmly believe that there is absolutely no ethical or moral way to establish an industry based on pornography. It is inherently exploitative and degrading, especially to women and homosexual men. Even if there are women who freely consent to appear in pornography (and I don't believe that's possible in our current society), I believe that even if one women was exploited, trafficked, coerced or forced into it that the whole industry should be abolished. Nobody's orgasm is more important than the safety, dignity, or health of a woman. This goes for both pornography and prostitution.

So, you can see how I find it difficult to answer your question in good faith when you posit that Dworkin's work fighting pornography and prostitution are somehow 'incorrect' or wrong. Indeed, I believe one of Dworkin's best essays details the exploitation of prostitution, and how it normalises rape. See the below pages for a taste of how she tackles this subject [source 2] and find more in her book Pornography: Men Possessing Women (1981):

Another vitally important point - you say that Dworkin was famous for her 'irl harassment of sex workers.' However, Dworkin was, in your words, a 'sex worker.' See the below extract of an article by Catherine Bennett in The Observer [source 3]:

Additionally, I can find absolutely no evidence that Dworkin ever 'harrassed' prostituted women or men, and, if you've ever seen her interviewed, you would know that she is incredibly gentle and soft spoken. Please watch the below video of Dworkin appearing on After Dark, to observe her manner of debate:

It's very funny, because the amount of misinformation spread about Dworkin floating around the internet has resulted in this [source 3, ibid.]:

I would be extremely interested in whether you could provide a legitimate source for her 'harrassment', beyond her academic and political criticism of the so-called 'sex industry'.

I really do appreciate that you say I seem educated on this particular topic. And I would, absolutely in good faith, be interested in answering your main question, if you still care to hear my opinion. However, you can see why I had to clear up these topics above, to make my stance absolutely blatant before we delve into more complex feminist politik.

Bibliography:

Bennett, Catherine, 'Doubts About Dworkin', The Observer, 8th June 2000 (https://www.theguardian.com/books/2000/jun/08/society) [accessed 12th September 2024] [source 3]

Dworkin, Andrea, 'Whores', in Pornography, Men Possessing Women (New York: 1981, The Women's Press) pp. 203-204 [source 2]

Feminist VHS Archive, After Dark: What is Sex For?, Online Video Recording, YouTube, 2022 [link] [accessed 12th September 2024]

Steinem, Gloria, 'Erotica and Pornography: A Clear and Present Difference', in Take Back the Night: Women on Pornography, ed. Laura Lederer (New York: Morrow Quill Paperback, 1982) pp. 35-39 [source 1]

[texasthoughtsaboutnothing]

EDIT: I have received several new pieces of information that I'm distributing throughout the doc that further reinforces my stance on this, and is valuable to know. Also, I have sections where I'm more clear on my stance after thinking on it for a while and following more discussions on this. I hope I don't disappoint anyone with my thoughts.

If any part of what I've written here resonated with you, I shamelessly ask that you spread it in your preferred manner, and if you feel there's parts that need work please let me know.

Still gonna regret writing this, I'm sure.

[Warning: Long. Like, really.]

Because of all the shit happening with Arknights, PM is under fire once again as it ties into the larger narrative surrounding Korea and its full on gender war (a real thing that's apparently happening).

For those who don't know, way back in July Limbus Company got the event for 4.5 that included swimsuit versions of Ishmael and Sinclair. The fact that Ishmael was in a full bodysuit while Sinclair was shirtless with a collar led the Korean equivalent of 4chan to accuse PM's lead illustrator of being a feminist, which I guess is a bad thing if you're drowning in Korean culture war bullshit.

Turns out the lead illustrator was a man so they pivoted to the CG artist Vellmori and invented a whole host of bullshit links between her and an extremist group to try and get her fired.

And in accordance with their wishes PM fired her. Except they didn't. Probably?

Most everything known from this point onwards is, bluntly, tainted. It's a lot of machine translated Korean posts or, one way or the other, hasty conclusions from people with agendas (including me, no one is immune to propaganda).

Did Vellmori reach out to a newspaper to whistleblow on PM's flagrant disregard for worker's rights? That was the story at first but follow-ups implied it might be a complete fabrication or an overstatement of her grievances (EDIT, I have received information that while there was a phonecall to Vellmori from PM, it was to set up a meeting to properly hash out next steps and any claims she was fired over the phone are incorrect, and the newspaper that reported as such quietly retracted that statement).

Did a labor union jump the gun on spreading this story to gain political capital without reaching out to PM for their side of the story? Maybe if PM's version of events is true, but that's assuming a lot of malice of an institution doing it's best (EDIT, I have received information that the people directly responsible for handling the PM issue acted independently and were later found in violation of several union laws, including allegations involving CP that I do not want to and will not get into).

PM's story is that once the harassment flared up and involved physical visits to the development office, Vellmori wanted to quit. (EDIT, I have received information that the wording of the various statements can be interpreted as Vellmori leaving of her own volition but also under encouragement; if you see claims that she was forced to resign this is what that claim references.) There was a rumor about her getting 2 years of severance pay, but I don't know if that was ever corroborated and is likely false, but she would have gotten something in accordance with Korean Law which they were found in compliance of.

Everything after announcing her termination of contract (not translating the initial announcement, framing it as a company policy issue, keeping quiet on it for months, constant vague threats of lawsuits) was supposedly a bad attempt at trying to quell the harassment by making it go away. Instead, it exploded, and now if you're a fan you'll have to deal with this coming up forever. I know there's fans who follow me that'll resent me for making this post as they just want to move on (or think I'm wrong or misrepresenting some details).

I resent making this for what its worth, and am trying my best to be accurate, but for me this is part of moving on, acknowledging the bad and the factors that mitigate it. And yes, I think there are several mitigating factors.

Why did Cassie Wei, lead singer of Project Mili who is both Korean and a woman, speak out in KJH's defense?

Why hasn't, to my knowledge, Vellmori said anything since and by and large just disappeared if she was so poorly mistreated?

Why have, again to my knowledge, none of the Voice Actors and Actresses spoken out against PM in solidarity?

Why do PM continue to have partnerships with progressive companies like Arc System Works?

Why did the labor union retract their statements against PM and apologize following an actual investigation?

EDIT: New info. Why did the labor union censure the people responsible for handling the PM issue, who later quit the group seemingly in disgrace?

Why did PM not bring their own lawyers to the meeting with Vellmori while she was allegedly encouraged to bring hers?

None of these questions completely absolve PM of wrongdoing, if you were set on condemning them it's not hard to interpret each in a very uncharitable way. For example, most of this is easily answered by the fact we live under Capitalism and we inevitably all have to swallow our morals and ideals to make rent. I could retort that maybe PM did the same by capitulating in any degree to harassment (which they have done historically as what happened with Ruina's ending) and not specifically endorsing any ideology or political belief (which is wild considering the actual content of their stories). But I think that ends with a circular argument that boils down to whether you believe in PM or not.

To be clear, even if you want to interpret all the Vellmori stuff as charitably as possible, PM undeniably fucked up and has labor issues in its history. The artist for the manga Leviathan, Monggeu, came out during the whole thing to speak on her treatment as a contractor; how she was given an impossible workload and the company denied her requests for delays, delays caused in part by suicidal depression caused by the workload. Though KJH personally apologized to her, she was let go over the phone and spoke out only after she felt the company now had a pattern of abusive work policies. The author of Wonderlab also deleted her stuff in solidarity.

That's all bad. Really bad. I stopped playing Limbus because I felt extreme disappointment with the company and managerial tendencies of KJH. Credit to a reddit user I won't name for pointing this out, but this information is far more concrete than anything involving Vellmori as Monggeu broke her silence independently months after things happened on her personal Twitter. However, there isn't nearly as much focus on this or calls for Justice for Monggeu.

This opinion is mine and mine alone, but her situation, which I must stress was awful and shameful on PM's and KJH's part, doesn't tie into a culture war like "Vellmori being fired for feminist tweets" does. It is a clear cut example of bad labor and managerial practices that lead to harm towards an employee, but its an everyday tragedy, not a martyrdom. And so I wonder how much the treatment of labor is actually part of this discussion, the more actionable issue than changing all of Korean society. I wonder if PM's supposed kowtowing to incels is highlighted above all other context because it casts PM as an enemy in a culture war.

I say the above because I've seen online culture war stuff happen before, and it scares me beyond just whether a company I like gets redeemed in the eyes of others. I have seen lives destroyed in the name of a just cause for nothing, including good progressive causes like feminism. If the only thing that would satisfy or lead to forgiveness is a revolutionary purge, do you actually want to build anything?

I digress, and I hope I didn't turn you off too much with my thoughts and fears there. It's important though, because there was ultimately an apology from PM.

In it, among other things, they laid out their flawed logic on how they wanted to handle the situation, addressed their treatment of both current employees and past contractors, and promised to improve and protect employees better. Since then, things seem to have changed at least from an outsiders' perspective. The game moved away from a strict list of deadlines and towards a more open-ended dev pipeline. The game is less buggy than it used to be after updates. They changed policies on content to make it easier to produce by limiting VA without any blowback from their VA's so we can assume proper talks were had. Translations don't have as many errors as they used to while the quality has been maintained even after losing a major translator (which is its own tale of baffling choices by the company in its own right). And they've kept all this up for Season 3 so far without any announcements of delays and, in fact, far more content than usual. All of this, to me, points to better management.

Maybe I'm naive to think so but I want to believe that the evidence points to the crimes of PM not coming from a place of malice and antifeminism but incompetence. I need to stress KJH didn't kill or rape anybody, nor was he verbally or physically abusive. He was a really shitty boss, and I understand how much it sucks to have a shitty boss, believe me. But a shitty boss can become not shitty, and my hope is that happened already, and that a company that produces good art that's worthwhile will thrive as a result.

I say all this because I actually care about this company and art it produces. If I didn't, last July wouldn't have hurt so much. If I'm cringe for it, so be it, but I believe constructive change should be recognized and rewarded, and it's for those reasons I came back after following the game for the rest of its second season.

To be clear, you don't owe a company your time or your money even if they improve their culture and policies, and if you felt that what PM or KJH has done is unforgivable you are well within your rights not to engage with it ever again or even tell others about your grievances, as much as I might disagree. But if you want them to suffer, to lose business, maybe even to go under despite how many other women work for and with them... I don't know. Please don't just think of these people as enemy units in the war against feminism? Ask yourself that if Vellmori broke her silence tomorrow and asserted she left of her own volition and condemned groups like the PMUA, would you believe her or immediately assume she's under duress?

This is not a cut and dry, black and white moral issue where a great evil needs vanquishing, it's a messy as hell moral and labor issue involving multiple people wrapped up in larger cultural and social issues no one initially involved intended. There are real people involved who stand to get hurt, not to mention who's been hurt already. Justice can involve other things than a firing squad. Please at least acknowledge that much. inb4 "No and kindly die"

EDIT, regarding the lawsuits. If you didn't know, PM is currently suing the labor union and a separate organization once called the PMUA (Project Moon Users Association) now called the KGA (Korean Gamer Association). I have seen unconfirmed reports that the former has ties to the disgraced Korean Ratings Board exposed by Blue Archive Fans for crypto bullshit. In addition, I have seen criticisms of how the PMUA used donations and their effectiveness in actual addressing PM and its labor issues, including demonstrations on days workers and management weren't even present and being the ones responsible for leaking documents that Vellmori allegedly wanted to be kept private. All of that supports PM's allegations that these organizations were in fact targeting them as part of political ploys and they never cared about any of the victims or ideals they touted as representing. For all the above, PM is suing for defamation, which is well within their rights by my reckoning. Regardless of my thoughts, this is where we are now.

Last and by no means least, feminism is good. Wanna be clear on that, I believe in equal pay, reproductive rights, that grip strength is a stupid metric to measure human rights by, that men are not owed sex and love by women regardless of circumstance, the whole shebang.

Also, what's happening in South Korea is scary and serious and bigger than just a terminally online culture war shitfest, more like an active bomb about to explode. I support the women who live there and their fight for equality, I just don't think PM fundamentally has anything to do with it and constantly trying to drag it into the line of fire feels like faux activism. I think the scope of the gender war is very far beyond the limits of gacha game discussion, or for that matter the actions of a single company of, like, 50 people.

(I swear to god if Vellmori makes a post tomorrow accusing KJH of SA or something after I wrote all this I will throw myself into the ocean.)

This will actually be the last time I talk about this unless something changes, I want to believe I was respectful the whole time and don't mean to belittle anyone for their beliefs or choices (unless you're an incel, please be better, also take a shower).

[feminismisstillahatemovement]

Hi there, I’m a bit curious about your name. As far to my knowledge, there has never been a single point in time where feminism has ever been a hate movement, nor is it currently a hate movement.

So, my question is: why did you name yourself after such a profoundly incorrect statement?

Feminism, particularly of the past 50 years, is founded upon a unique narrative of the world ("Patriarchy Theory") that divides all women and men up into classes of ‘innocent victims’ and ‘privileged oppressors’, and as such has done more to foster hate and drive a wedge between the sexes than any other political movement in history. Instead of seeing men and women as brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, sons and daughters, friends and lovers, feminism sees only an endless "gender war" that it alone started and it alone propagates, with no realistic end ever in sight. 

Even fairly moderate feminists today think and speak of men almost exactly the same way Nazis thought and spoke of Jews, and that’s why I say feminism is a hate movement.

[sickofthis666]

Man, I miss when tumblr wasn’t the "t4t" website. Now we only got girld*ck jokes and trans rights are the only social issue that's worth mentionning, apparently. It's obvious if only by seeing the amount of posts, pinned posts, and bios with the mention "terfs/transphobes dni".

As an afterthought, some may add racists, ableists and/or homophobics to their little list. Sexism doesn't even appear.

Reading users bios, it's like everyone on this website is trans now - see also, reblogs of people's own post years later with the mention "im a girl now :3" - even though statistically, they're... what? 2% of the population?

Meanwhile somehow half of said population doesn't deserve to fight for their rights. BLM vanished but fear not, TLM is there. Online feminism peaked in 2016 with "the future is female" and #MeToo ended with a lot of calling out by victims but very little consequences for the abusers.

Your brain won't explode if you campaign for more than one cause at a time, I promise.

Old sexism was "your biology determines your behavior". New sexism is "your behavior determines your biology". Same result. Same harmful stereotypes. Some things are meant to harm, no matter how much you want to reclaim them or have fun sounding quirky by using insults/politically incorrect language. No, calling yourself a slut doesn't change from a man calling you that, because the very definition of that word is harmful. An insult doesn't stop being an insult because you enjoy it or because you decided to interpret it in a way that fits you, like religious leaders interprets scripture in a way that fits their interest.

We were supposed to get rid of the idea that women enjoying sex like men do is shameful, bad, disgusting, unnatural. We were supposed to make it neutral, just the way men get to have it, but nooo, you guys wanted to be quirky, rules breakers, special. Somehow you're convinced that doing the complete opposite of what society commonly deems acceptable automatically makes you cool, Good, right, and better than the others. It doesn't! It's not a dichotomy! Same thing with whore. Calling a man that moves his hands when he talks or has a high pitch or exaggerated manners "effeminate" makes you a misogynist and a homophobe, actually.

P*rn doesn't automatically becomes Good and healthy just because society frowns down upon it. Degrading women became a trend. God forbids you kinkshame, but somehow mocking vanilla sex is great, actually. Obviously vanilla must be Bad since it's the opposite of porn, and we all decided at some point that porn was Good. Can’t find f/m erotica on this website that doesn't include at least One sentence specifying how the woman is degraded/seen like a toy/less than human by the man. It's Very Important.

The solution to "women shouldn't have to wear make up to be considered seriously/human" wasn’t "women like their cage actually", it was destroying the cage or put the men in it with us. Cause that is the definition of gender equality. Treating men and women the same regardless of gender.

Hijab will never be feminist as long as men don't wear it too. It's the difference of treatment, simply because of gender, that is sexism/misogyny. The intention of the wearer doesn't matter - the result does.

"Taking your husband's last name isn’t sexist because *I* would be honored to do it" affirmed a woman to me - Since when does sexism mean "mentality/behavior/outfit/etc that all women as a mindhive dislike"? Oh wait - it doesnt - never did; it means difference of treatment between genders, overwhelmingly balanced in favor of men. The day men don't see taking your wife's last name as emasculating, degrading, insulting, belittling, diminishing, disgracing, shameful; the day they take their wife's last name spontaneously, almost systematically, the way women do; the day merely suggesting the idea to them isn’t preposterous;

the day women don't see taking your husband's name, as honorable, normal, the bare minimum, the day women stop taking their husband's name almost systematically, because it's an evidence in their eyes; the day women are not pushed to take their husband's name because it makes administration's work easier, because it's the only way for them to prove that they're related to their children - when i was a little kid, school staff once refused to let me leave with my mom at the end of the day simply because, since she hadn't taken my father's name, obviously she couldnt possibly be my legitimate mother; that "incident" lead to her renounciating her own name; before that, she hadn't entertained the thought; - the day french civil service stops differentiating between Nom d'épouse (wife name) and Nom de jeune fille (maiden name), making marriage an event so decisive in a woman's life that it changes her status; whereas men are born, live and die with only one name, their own, and no one else's.

That day only, we'll be able to affirm that this part of society/culture/custom is not sexist anymore.

In favor of men, not because I hate men, or because women need someone to blame, or because men are inherently evil, but in favor of men because men have been ruling society for thousands of years. Our kings are men. Our presidents are men. Our Prime Ministers are men. Our religious leaders are men. Our CEOs are men. Billionaires are men. The most powerful and/or rich on this earth are men. And people in power, in a logical conclusion, decides measures that will favor themselves over others.

Feminity isn’t real. Masculinity isn’t real. Just like the economy, or borders, it's something humans made up. And yet it would never cross your mind to romanticize or fantasize about those concepts.

Boomers' sexism says "if you're a woman, you must act feminine." Gen Z's sexism says "If you're feminine, you must be a woman."

Feminism says "You'll always be a woman no matter what - but so what? You can do whatever you want."

This website is full of selfrighteous, full of themselves assholes who pretends to be Better than everyone else because they're sooo tolerent, sooo inclusive, they condemn nazis and terfs - but mostly terfs. Terfs never commited murders, contrary to neonazis/white supremacists/incels, but that is but a detail my friend - vigorously, they boycott JKR absolutely - but not their favorite rapist male artists/authors/actors/singers -, they have the moral High Ground. Yet the second they smell an Enemy, someone who doesn't adopt 100% of their causes, verbatim, no holds barred! Anything goes! Death threats, rape threats, stalking, doxxing, going after family members... calling The Other, the Villain - of course they're the villain, since I am the Good Guy and they're against Me! - names, a loser, ugly, fat, a virgin, who can’t get laid/p*ssy. Yes I said Asexuals were a part of the community, what does this have to do with anything? Death and rape threats are okay if they come from My mouth!

[queenvhagar]

"Average Team Green fan is bastardphobic" "Team Green thinks irl bastards are worse than other people" "Team Green fans are bad people because they actually don't like bastards"

Not sure if y'all know this but... fiction is not real life, and recognizing or discussing the actual dynamics of a cruel and unjust fictional world as it is written by the author does not equal an endorsement, promotion, or adoption of those elements or beliefs as they exist in that fictional world or in real life.

In real life, I and likely most if not all Team Green supporters could care less about the institution of marriage as one of making legitimately born babies. Personally I don't care if your parents were married to each other. Many people don't get married and still have families together. Children are children, people are people. Luckily in the modern world, in many places, having children out of wedlock is not really even that much of a taboo anymore. People can do what they want as long as they're happy. If I get married and/or have kids ever, that's my own business. I have no specific duties expected of me by my family or the world and the messages coming from society that I as a woman need to be married and make babies before I get too old? I can just ignore that. Nothing happens if I do.

In the fictional world of ASOIAF though, this is very clearly and unequivocally not the case at all. Westeros is obsessed with blood and bloodlines. Blood brings power. Blood continues power. The blood and the name together bring power. Great houses intermarry to bring themselves more power and alliances, under the agreement that the next generation will share the blood of their parents and families and that blood will preserve their power and status as it has for generations. This is essential to feudalism and the way that power and inheritance works (in Westeros and in the real-life history upon which it was based).

This is why it's such a taboo to have or be a bastard in Westeros, and why it's illegal to try to place a bastard in the line of succession. Marriage alliances are built on the principle that the trueborn children made from those matches will come from those particular parents and pass down that particular family's blood. If someone without that blood tried to claim that name and power, people would view that as the family losing the power they've held for generations. They would see it as an injustice. Wars would be willing to be fought over it. It's an indisputable fact that in this world trying to place a bastard in the line of succession will lead to bloodshed. This is especially the case for the Iron Throne. If you don't agree, read the source material and rethink how this world views women, bastards, bloodlines, and the right to the throne.

I'm not sure when people started thinking that the discussion of in-universe conflicts and issues as they exist in fictional worlds actually reflects on an individual's real life personal values or feelings. People knowledgeable of the world of ASOIAF criticize the character of Rhaenyra for birthing three obvious bastards (while she is already on rocky political ground as the first woman named heir) and then attempting to unsuccessfully gaslight everyone into thinking they are legitimate heirs despite the opposite being so clearly true. This criticism stems from knowledge and awareness of the world, beliefs, and laws of Westeros (that Rhaenyra herself also knew but believed herself to be the exception to). Yet when people point out how dangerous or stupid it was of her character to do this, knowing everything that is known about the world of ASOIAF and this specific conflict, suddenly stans feel the need to defend the vision of her that exists in their heads (one incorrectly furthered by the show's adaptation of the character as a modern feminist girlboss who can do no wrong) and make up fake scenarios or claims about the world of ASOIAF or about the critics to support their incorrect takes.

Saying Team Green fans, those who are not a fan of Team Black, or those who criticize the show's adaptation are bastardphobic in real life is similar to those Team Black stans who claim that Aegon's actor is a morally corrupt rape apologist because he plays a character who got written to be a rapist (likely after he was cast, by the way) or people who say authors shouldn't write a scene about murder or murderers because it endorses or promotes such behavior. Y'all really out here rewriting the Hays Code and essentially campaigning for censorship of media because you can't distinguish between real life and fiction. It's crazy that media literacy is at such an appalling state, though unfortunately it's clear that certain forms of internet fandom have really exacerbated issues that have already existed. Now, any character can be shoehorned into specific categories or types or memes that fit their understanding of media and those who disagree or desire actual thought, complexity, and analysis to go into stories or characters apparently shouldn't have a voice or platform to express their point of view, or if they do, it means something about them as a real-life human beyond this person is interested in discussing the story.

I've previously expressed that despite the fact that I love this story as a truly a morally gray conflict with gray characters that tells a rich sociopolitical story of a family tearing itself apart for power, and despite the fact that there are no winners, heroes, or correct sides to this conflict, I would call myself a Team Green supporter. And largely this is due to the lack of media literacy and understanding of the source material that the writers and general audience (see: uncritical Team Black fans) seem to have and the absolutely insufferable ways that they seem to constantly want to demonstrate to everyone that actually they're right and correct in their surface-level takes.

[gacha-incels]

twitter user JeungA-lbtmg asking you (specsthewitched, donqueerote, anyone reading this) to reconsider supporting a game and company that has engaged in the misogynistic act of feminist ideology verification at the behest of incels, told the woman who made the Leviathan comic that there shouldn’t be “PC” (politically correct) things in it, worked her so hard she frequently had suicidal ideation, and adds memes to their game from the incel message board that initially went after the artist Vellmori. The fact that you think this Korean user is a bigot complaining about “PC”/“queer”in the game and can only answer them based on this incorrect assumed fact is very telling. women living in South Korea now who are directly affected by the pervasive, violent misogyny there are still consistently trying to educate fans on the English speaking web about Limbus Company/Project Moon’s role in the recent explosion of feminist ideological verification (ex. incels attacking women for basic feminist ideas and getting them fired from their jobs and worse) and you think this person is some sort of bigot for telling you this? They get slandered as “project moon haters” because you guys think this huge societal issue doesn’t expand beyond a little gacha game you’re addicted to. You can at the very least understand what this person is trying to tell you, so that you can say with your full chest that believing PM is some bastion of queer art (“half of project moon’s inspiration is queer”) and making content is more important to you than the wishes of Korean women (directly affected by project moon’s act of misogyny) to stop engaging with the game. You can do whatever you want of course, it should just be with knowledge of the situation, not thinking that everyone who tries to tell you about this is some bigot.

[transunity]

The Transunitist Manifesto

(here is a link to where it is being hosted- it is also copy-pasted below for easier reading)

Introduction:

21st Century trans politics is in many ways different to 20th Century trans politics. Some of the problems facing trans people then are gone. Others remain. And yet others are entirely new, borne out of the political landscape which we walk today. This Manifesto is simultaneously a response to the world as it is today for trans people and a commitment to building better solidarity and unity amongst trans people of all kinds. It is an affirmation to love, respect and help others in our community whenever we can- and to be alert to each others needs and problems, so that no-one ever feels like they are on their own. This is Transunitist theory at its core: compassion, respect and solidarity above all else.

Why Transunitism?

Transunitism was coined in the early 2020s by myself and a few other trans and nonbinary acquaintances online. Collectively we noticed that 21st Century trans politics had become unstable and imbalanced, inadvertently feeding into the transphobia it was supposed to be guarding against. Transunitism could be considered a wave of transfeminism, in that it draws from the same roots as transfeminism (and thus feminism as a whole), but recognises that a shake-up of the current trans politics is needed to better serve the community as it stands today.

The name Transunitism was chosen for its immediate understandability. Simply, it describes the desire to explicitly strive for greater transgender unity against our common and uncommon oppressions. In the last few years, trans politics has seen a rise in toxicity and vitriol between different transgender groups. This has had a negative effect on overall trans solidarity and unity when fighting against transphobia. As a result, transunitism is needed to help repair those bonds and create lasting solidarity against transphobia in all its forms.

Transunity theory largely draws from transfeminism, however, transunity theory also has some key developments of its own. Transunitism utilises transfeminisms beliefs that everyone has the right to define their own identities and to expect society to respect them- especially without the fear of discrimination or violence (1). It also utilises the transfeminist idea that trans peoples relationships with oppression, privilege, patriarchy and feminism are complex and at their most basic interpretations, are rarely black and white or as clear cut as is often suggested (1). These principles have been a part of transfeminism since its inception, however, subsequent interpretations of transfeminism have neglected one or both of these principles, leading to the need for transunitist theory to develop.

Transfeminism originated as a movement mainly by and for trans women, but much like feminism as a whole, many others can find solace and support in it. However, one of the flaws in early transfeminist theory was the neglect of non trans women in transfeminism. This has since been recognised by many early writers of transfeminist theory, however, mainstream transfeminism continues to neglect or even deliberately deprioritise non trans womens issues in the movement. The initial error is understandable, but is by no means the way forward. Feminism (as arisen from cis gender dynamics) prioritises mainly cis womens issues due to the lack of support womens issues have compared to those of cisgender men. The error is that those cis gender dynamics are frequently applied to transgender politics, but such a thing is not possible to achieve and often leaves other equally marginalised people with little to no support from transfeminism. The truth is that transfeminism has its roots in the mainstream feminist movement, but has different dynamics to it and requires more nuance in its application. Often, the (incorrect) application of transfeminism has been to prioritise trans womens issues on the unfounded assumption that other kinds of trans people's issues (particularly trans mens) have more support. Clearly, this is not the case for the following reason: Namely, that patriarchy does not value trans men as men the same way it does cis men (nor would it value nonbinary people the same way), therefore non trans womens issues are not receiving support from the patriarchy and thus prioritising trans womens issues at the expense of other, struggling trans groups is in the long run, damaging for solidarity and detrimental to non trans women.

Transfeminism's Role:

Since transfeminism was coined in 2001, its usage has morphed and changed. At present, the dominant strand of transfeminism does not promote unity and solidarity. Instead, it has fallen into relying upon toxic and often separationist politics- a crude distortion of the founding ideas of transfeminism. Emi Koyama, author of The Transfeminist Manifesto, was explicit in transfeminisms inclusion of all trans people in its movement. She wrote that transfeminism began primarily for trans women and that "it is also open to other queers, intersex people, trans men, non-trans women, non-trans men and others" (2). Her initial publication of The Transfeminist Manifesto was in the year 2001. Two years later, she revisited it and added the following in the postscript of the 2003 edition "I take full blame for the fact that this manifesto is heavily focused on issues male-to-female transsexual people face, while neglecting unique struggles that female-to-male trans people and other transgender and genderqueer people face" (3). Numerous other transfeminist publications recognise the need for greater solidarity between all trans people and for transfeminism to be explicitly inclusive of all transgender and nonbinary people. Talia Bettcher explained in 2017 that "since trans men are also vulnerable to sexism, transphobia, and the interblending thereof, trans feminism would be ill-advised to exclude them from its purview" (4). Despite the academic push for greater inclusion and solidarity, socially these ideas have not manifested. And so transunitism was created to bring awareness to these ideas with clarity of intent and purpose.

Transunity Theory:

Transunitism is not solely created from transfeminist and feminist theory. It also draws upon ideas of stewardship towards fellow trans people that are based upon ecological and environmental concepts.

Transunitism was coined by myself and a small group of other trans people online, but what is known as the transunitism symbol is my creation. I took inspiration from ecological and environmental movements to create a metaphor to explain transunity theory. Hopefully, many readers will be familiar with the recycle symbol and a variation on the three Rs. The recycle symbol usually consists of three arrows in a triangle shape. Each arrow point melds into the point above it and so on. The symbol represents how steps taken to recycle refuse follow on from one another and are interconnected. Typically, the three Rs are reduce, reuse, recycle and all three are equally important steps one can take to help the environment. The three Rs can be reordered and the sentiment still makes sense. For transunitism, the concept is much the same- three elements of trans theory which interlock and intersect which must all be upheld, otherwise neglect is risked. Instead of the three Rs, transunitism considers the three Transphobias.

The Three Transphobias

The three transphobias (or types of transphobia) are the subdivisions that transphobia can be broken down into. Transphobia itself is an umbrella term and while it can be used universally on any kind of anti-trans discrimination, it is helpful to subdivide it further in some instances to describe the specific challenges each part of the trans community faces. Over recent years, there has been a movement to establish a term for the transphobia primarily experienced by trans men. This manifesto will use the most popular term, transandrophobia, to refer to the concept. The transphobia primarily experienced by trans women is known as transmisogyny, while the most popular term for the discrimination primarily experienced by nonbinary people is exorsexism. There exist less popular terms for these concepts, but these will be the three used in this manifesto. I also acknowledge that further groupings exist within the trans community which the terms trans women, men and nonbinary people do not adequately cover.

Transmisogyny is described variously as either the transphobia primarily experienced by trans women or as an intersection of transphobia and misogyny. The term transmisogyny itself is at a crossroads- it is used often to refer to the transphobia usually experienced by trans women, but it is also often used to refer to any intersection of transphobia and misogyny- this has proved to be problematic, especially when attempting to include non trans women's experiences in transfeminism. There are transfeminists who believe that only trans women, as women, can experience an intersection of transphobia and misogyny. However, this is a flawed understanding of misogyny, since many non-women experience misogyny frequently (i.e. much homophobia directed at gay men is based in misogyny). Nevertheless, this has become the prevailing view in much of mainstream transfeminism. This is a problem, since transmisogyny as a concept could very much describe the experiences of trans men and nonbinary people as well as it does the experiences of trans women. However, it is my view that transmisogyny, at its crossroads, should take the path in which it simply describes the transphobia primarily experienced by trans women. This manifesto will use that definition henceforth.

Transandrophobia describes the transphobia primarily experienced by trans men. While trans men do experience an intersection of transphobia and misogyny, they also experience an intersection of transphobia and a hatred of men or masculinity. Arguably, much of what is called transmisogyny for the experiences of trans women is also partially an intersection of transphobia and a hatred of men or masculinity. The ideal word for the concept is sadly marred by disingenuous cis men, but to use 'misandry' here tentatively is not an endorsement of any kind of MRA-style politics, but a convenient shorthand for a kind of hatred of men or masculinity which has a significance in (and only in) the context of transphobia. As alluded to, the term transandrophobia is the most popular term presently for the transphobia primarily experienced by trans men. Earlier terms did include 'transmisandry', which, aside from one academic usage in the context of an intersection of transphobia and racism (5), has not enjoyed much usage due to knee-jerk rejection of the term's suffix. In short, 'misandry' in this solely trans context conveys the transphobia rooted in a hatred of men or masculinity.

Exorsexism describes the transphobia primarily experienced by nonbinary people, which, like transmisogyny and transandrophobia, can contain elements of misogyny, 'misandry' and discrimination based on existing outside of binary sex or gender (henceforth 'misandrogyny'). Like transandrophobia, other terms exist for exorsexism, such as ceterophobia or simply 'nonbinaryphobia'. The most high frequency term is exorsexism and this manifesto will use this term for clarity and consistency.

The three transphobias (as has been touched on somewhat already) intersect, interconnect and intermeld into each other, much like the 3 arrows in the recycle symbol. Hence, in the transunitist symbol, it is transmisogyny, transandrophobia and exorsexism feeding into each other. They are the 'arms' of transphobia. This metaphor comes with some important tenets to transunitism theory:

You cannot dismantle transphobia as a whole by only focusing on one arm of transphobia. E.g. eradicating transmisogyny, for instance, will not bring about the eradication of transandrophobia and exorsexism. Eradicating transmisogyny is a noble goal, but it can't be achieved in isolation. It is interconnected to other two transphobias. By working on eradicating them all, transphobia can truly be fought in all of its forms. Relating back to the recycle symbol, only doing one 'R' will technically help, however, it will have more impact if one strives to do all three. Just recycling is helpful, but reusing will extend the lives of items that would have only been recycled, and reducing your consumption altogether would prevent some waste altogether. The same is true of transphobia- all arms must be tackled to achieve greater trans liberation.

The three arms of transphobia are not exclusively experienced by their main target. E.g. Transandrophobia is the transphobia usually experienced by trans men, but a nonbinary person could be targeted with it for resembling a trans man. The same goes for anyone resembling a trans woman being targeted with transmisogyny (e.g. gender nonconforming cis men) or anyone who is perceived as nonbinary (exorsexism). When helpful terminology is gatekept because the victim of the bigotry doesn't belong to the main group targeted by it, nobody benefits. It is useful to defer to the main targets of a bigotry as authorities on it, but space must be held for all victims of bigotry. Not just some. E.g. Many Sikh men have reported being the victims of islamophobia because bigots had mistaken them for muslim men. While not the main targets, they are equally victims of islamophobia as the muslims who are targeted with it.

All trans groups experience a mixture of misogyny, 'misandry' and misandrogyny- the levels of which vary from group to group. Trans women may experience misogyny (such as unwanted sexualisation for being female and trans), however, they may often experience 'misandry' (such as the vitriol some transphobes espouse which accuses trans women of being 'violent males) and misandrogyny (such as transphobic rhetoric which centers around a trans person's appearance being androgynous and thus not easily sortable into male or female categories . This may result in slurs like 'heshe' being used). Trans men, on the other hand, may experience 'misandry' (such as accusations they are going to transition into -'violent men'), misogyny (such as insinuations trans men are being led astray and that they are incapable of thinking for themselves) and a similar kind of misandrogyny trans women may face. Nonbinary people may experience misandrogyny (such as being forcibly put into a male or female category against their wishes, especially in a medical setting), misogyny (such as rhetoric which claims being nonbinary is a social contagion amongst those assigned female at birth) or 'misandry' (such as rhetoric that claims those assigned male at birth who are nonbinary are identifying as such in order to be predatory). In short, every kind of trans person experiences a mix of misogyny, 'misandry' and misandrogyny. It differs from group to group as well as from person to person.

These tenets are foundational to transunitism. A synthesis of transunitism theory and transfeminism results in what the transunitism movement stands for.

It is my hope that through transunitism theory, we will create a trans community that includes all, aids all and fights for all.

Thank you for reading.

Luke, 01/01/2023

References:

Koyama, Emi. The Transfeminist Manifesto, 2001 & 2003 p. 2-4

Koyama, Emi. The Transfeminist Manifesto, 2001 & 2003 p. 1

Koyama, Emi. The Transfeminist Manifesto, 2001 & 2003 p. 10

Bettcher, Talia, Trans Feminism: Recent Philosophical Developments, 2017, p.2

Martino, Wayne, Omercajic, Kenan, A trans pedagogy of refusal: interrogating cisgenderism, the limits of antinormativity and trans necropolitics. Pedagogy, Culture & Society. 29, 2021, p.679

[33446699]

200 idols list :

Saw posts about the "200 names list dropping tomorrow".no hate or criticism to the people posting about that as they only did to raise awareness,I am making this post just to clear some points so that the confusion is cleared

The Burning sun case is different

The Nth room case 2019 is different

Taeil NCT case is different

The Nth room case 2024 / which is about Telegram deepfake porn using AI is different

There is no list coming tomorrow ,no 200 celebrities are involved in 2024 nth room case ,the list or post which is circulating on Tiktok is from 2019 nth room cases where 200 high profile individuals were involved,from celebrities to political figures etc and it's totally different from this recent case

I am not defending these alleged 200 idols / celebrities list but that Tiktok post is made by a random person on Tiktok and there are no articles or any news about it ,even there is nothing about this list on korean feminist side of twitter too ,who are trying to raise this issue and trying to bring justice to the telegram deepfake victims ,also some people are merging these different cases ,with some other dropping name of random idols ( I am not protecting any idol but with no proof kindly don't put name of idols In serious cases like SA)

Sadly , telegram doesn't leak identities of people involving in these crimes nor Korean police is allowed to give any information about identities of people In the rooms too so even if it was true ,we wouldnot be able to get a list ,and also the list was supposed to release from few years ago but it didn't released since it has all the high profile people apart from celebrities

We should stand with ,support and protect the victims in every case but accusing lists of idols of sexually assaulting someone is a serious offence ,please don't trust the 200 alleged idols list as it's not only incorrect information spread by people but it's also on old nth room case ,also it can affect the reputation of idols who aren't involved in SA cases and diverting attention from actual victims of telegram deepfake and other serious cases

Please don't use idols or groups for fanwars and we shouldn't get involved in fanwars,and if any list ever comes we should support the right people but until then don't make random lists of idols or group and support victims of SA cases which are already existing

[enlitment]

top 5 frev women?

Thanks for the ask! Oh, this one's going to be tough as well. But let's see...

Lucile Desmoulins

Much more than a pair of fine eyes, Lucile was, like her husband, heavily invested in politics. She shared Camille's convictions and is even reported to have defended him in front of others. She did pay the price for her loyalty in the end, when she was only my age (though it should be noted that the whole Germinal/Indulgent business is much more complex to be accurately presented in this short overview of course).

I also really like her writing! Her 'advice' to Marie Antoinette is definitely quite something. Go read it if you haven't! Her diary is also at times quite relatable. ("I feel that I am born to live far from men. The more I examine them, the more I seek to understand them, the more I see that one should flee from them.”)

Bonus - my favourite quote of hers on women's place in society:

To hear [men] speak, we are celestial beings, nothing is equal to us. Ah! may they deify us less and leave us free!

2. Simone Évrard

I have to confess I was sleeping on Simone for the longest time, but she is such an interesting figure! She continued to be so supportive of Marat even when times were incredibly tough for him. I'm convinced he wouldn't be able to achieve half as much as he did if it weren't for her. She then went on to defend his legacy long after his death, despite the fact that it caused quite a few problems for her. I find her incredibly inspiring!

3. Charlotte Robespierre

Listen, I'm always going to appreciate a single lady who made it her life's mission to try and take charge of the narrative.

In all seriousness, I'm still not quite sure how her mind worked, but I find her incredibly interesting. Especially the way she seemed to be so protective or Maximilien (re: Éléonore?), both during his life and after his death. She also seemed to have been so strong-willed, much like her brother, perhaps even more so. The fact that she accompanied Augustin to suppress the revolt in Nice is still kind of mind-blowing to me. And the fact that she was supposedly going to marry Fouché at one point? One of my favourite historical what-ifs, honestly. Just imagine!

(That said, my knowledge of her is quite lacking. If anyone can recommend a good biography on Charlotte, I'd be really thankful!)

4. Olympe de Gouges

Okay, here's a controversial one!

Obligatory 'am not a Girondist!', but I feel that I still have to give her some credit for her feminist ideas. Yes, her feminism was centred on upper-class women, but I still see her contributions as an important first step. Déclaration des droits de la Femme et de la Citoyenne is one of the most crucial documents in the history of feminism in my opinion.

I also appreciate the fact that while classist, her feminism was much less 'white-only' than that of a lot of women that came after her (case in point a lot of the Seneca Falls suffragettes in 19th century America). Again, not all of her views on slavery probably stand up to the test of time, but I will always appreciate anyone in the 18th century who expresses abolitionists sentiments, which she did.

She is also the author of many of my favourite french revolution era quotes:

"A woman has the right to mount the scaffold. She must possess equally the right to mount the rostrum."

She has a point and honestly? Well said.

(Side note - also kind of obsessed with her address to Robespierre. "I suggest we should bathe together in the Seine but to entirely depurgate you of those blemishes with which you have smeared yourself since 10th June, we should attach sixteen or twenty-four pound cannon balls to our feet , and together race into the flood ….")

That said, the narrative that she was executed for her feminist views is both incorrect and extremely tiring.

5. Pauline Léon

How can I not mention the leader of female Sans-culottes herself? To counter de Gouges, let me mention another French revolutionary feminist that is - in a lot of ways - an antithesis to Olympe, since she was: a) a radical republican b) a member of the working class.

She seemed to have been incredibly courageous and always managed to find herself right in the centre of the action (Bastille, Champ de Mars...). There are unfortunately not that many resources on her as on some of the other female figures, but I think her story is incredibly important. More so for the fact that she was one of female revolutionary figures we know at least something about that wasfrom a working class - as opposed to upper class - background.

My favourite fact about her is that she wanted to establish all-female militia group to defend the country against counter-revolutionaries. Not going to lie, it was a wild proposal, but it would be kind of amazing to see it happen.

(It was not easy to find her portrait, but this should be her I hope?)

[androgynealienfemme]

""The Androgynous Imperative"

Almost against my will, the early seventies turned me into a "lesbian feminist." Feminism tore apart my butch identity. A former Catholic, I could smell heresy before I heard it. Feminism was heretical to "the gay world." Feminism struck to the core. Feminism said "A lesbian is the rage of all women condensed to the point of an explosion." I had no idea what this meant, but I knew it wasn't Websters. I came to embrace and love lesbian-feminism, because I knew those weirdos were right. Innately I'd always felt lesbianism was more than sexual behavior. Lesbianism embodied a political rage, an ornery one. The new blasphemy attacked my trappings as well as my core. Feminism eliminated dirty dancing: leading my partner was "heterosexist"; bumping and grinding was plain ol "sexist". The Lesbian-Feminists said it was wrong for femmes to wear makeup, patriarchal to indulge in monogamy, and "male identified" (a mortal sin) for butches to wear ties. In fact, the Lesbian-Feminists insisted there was no such thing as butch-femme. It was a "heterosexual copout." (By then I knew that anything heterosexual was anathema). These frizzy-headed, unshaven interlopers decreed that "womyn" who acted like men (butches) or like girls (femmes) were not even lesbians! Feminism's only analysis of "butch" was as synonymous with "male"- which meant thoroughly politically incorrect. I didn't have a political analysis to explain my butch self, so I gave myself up to "the larger struggle" -- It wasn't too hard to adopt the uniform of my faith. I already had hiking boots, 501s, and several denim jackets. (All I needed was a few political buttons on my chest). This has not been my everyday outfit, but I had to admit, denim wore well for the decade. It was cheaper than replenishing my tie and suspender collection. So on the outside, I became an instant androgyne.

-- One might as well ask: Why would a self respecting, adamant butch dyke ever buy such crap? Wasn't I settled in my identity, clear about who was a lesbian and who was not, happy in my bed and in my head? -- Obviously not.”

"Butches, Lies, and Feminism" by Jeanne Cordova, The Persistent Desire, (edited by Joan Nestle) (1992)

[frodho-slaggins]

Also it is patentedly incorrect to write a character as a morally cogent and politically literate feminist and have her blame her boyfriend for getting literally unambiguously raped without narratively unpacking it. I think there's room for Annie to feel betrayed or even for her to fuck up in the way she did in the show (by treating this as an infidelity) and for hughie to respond as tho he has something to apologize for (although its clearly not his fault) because ppl are allowed to be hypocritical in their politics, misinformed, blindspots, momentarily blinded by stress etc but only if the framing recognizes the reality that hughie was raped and should be treated with that in mind from a narrative perspective. He's clearly traumatized by it. It's rlly goddamn obviously not even a little bit his fault. It would have been very interesting for Annie to respond this way with the narrative understanding that she is essentially victimblaming but instead it's not intentional just another character writing fuckup. Kripke learn how to write about gender challenge.