#and societal systems of oppression

[pinkbirddiaries]

The omegaverse is place where you can discuss all sorts of societal issues from women’s right to sexual orientation and autonomy in a safe way. You can even use it to discuss fertility issues or systemic oppression. But some of y’all aren’t ready for that discussion because all you see is sex. And sure it can be used to write smut but everything can be used that way. So, let’s be open minded.

[aq2003]

i'm listening to this video essay "why i stopped being anti woke" and while i don't agree with all of the sentiment in it it's making me realize how incredibly fragile cishet white men can be lmao like they get so scared when they have to reckon with the fact that they hold societal power and that maybe minorities have a right to complain about the inequalities they face

[cherry-rose-sunset]

my grandma dropped lore that her brother (my great uncle i guess??) was a greaser in the 60’s and um that’s literally so fucking cool???

[night-dark-woods]

vagueposting but if a label feels exhausting or restrictive instead of freeing and like coming home then maybe its just not for you!!!!!!!!!! not everything is for everyone and just because its not for you doesnt make it bad!!!

[arachnerd-8-legs]

im getting real sick of 'intelligence'

who decided reading books and writing counted as intelligence? who decided that getting high scores on a strict, unfeeling system meant you were better than everybody? who decided that people should be turned into numbers, tie their worth in society into numbers, to compare people on a scale that ultimately does not matter, so that the people who didn't dump everything to perform for it are berated and the people who did end up with nothing?

who decided not reading or writing was a lack of intelligence? who decided that living differently to them was a sign of lower 'societal worth' than those who conformed?

[dullahandyke]

Got out of bed at 1am to look thru my college papers and make sure I can do my scifi presentation on the construct of criminality as presented in akudama drive (answer is yes I can)

[obstinaterixatrix]

this is a generalization but for the most part I think what is vital for understanding the romance genre and romance tropes is that it’s a fantasy genre. it’s romantic fantasy. (set aside specific subgenres/subversions etc for a moment). and it’s fantasy that needs to be contextualized by societal ideas about romantic relationships, whether the fantasy is about reinforcing them or subverting them. I personally think that because of genre/subject is a fantasy in context of a society that is oppressive/hostile to the core audience (speaking generally, women), the fantasies naturally center power in most narratives. You can say the same about a lot of other genre fiction, but I do think the romance genre is distinct in terms of having a core audience of women and being dominated by women. (I’m also speaking specifically about novels—I don’t have evidence to back this but, but I do get the impression that a lot of romantic movies have a more even split of male directors/writers…?) but anyway, I think it’s a really interesting mirror… even the really shitty ones can be read from the perspective of ‘what cultural relational shorthands are they using to convey a romantic fantasy and how are they failing’ lol

[ciaraattong]

"For the Strong Women": Dark & Cold's Poignant Commentary on Women in Society

Dedicated explicitly to the "Strong Women", my debut novel, Dark & Cold portrays multiple female characters presented in connected circumstances that mirror the experiences and issues faced by women in society today. Despite the fictional landscape of the story, many of the illustrations of female presence and power are representative of the very diverse means with which women in our society navigate a complex, continually perpetuated patriarchal system. The following is a comprehensive (but by no means all-encompassing) breakdown of SIX prominent Dark & Cold women, their roles in society, significant personal experiences, ultimate fates, systematic gendered strengths and limitations, relationships with power, and outcomes or consequences of asserting autonomy.

1. Princess Ericia Charlotte Avington

Ericia stands at the center of Dark & Cold, her life a harrowing testament to the realities of abuse, loss, and survival within a patriarchal monarchy. After witnessing her mother’s suffering and losing her to the machinations of power, Ericia is thrust into queenship-not as a sovereign, but as her father’s puppet, her every move controlled and her voice suppressed. Her body and spirit are scarred by relentless physical and psychological abuse, and her value is repeatedly reduced to that of a political commodity, bartered in alliances with Rowan and Henry. Ericia’s understanding of love, marriage, and trust is deeply shaped by her family’s dysfunction and the traumatic loss of nurturing figures like Marie, leaving her wary of intimacy yet quietly yearning for genuine connection. Her platonic bond with Avie offers rare moments of light, while her romantic entanglements are fraught with manipulation and the ever-present threat of being used. Despite these overwhelming adversities, Ericia’s resilience and empathy shine through; she refuses to let cruelty define her, and her gradual journey toward reclaiming agency and voice is a powerful feminist narrative. Her story interrogates the objectification and silencing of women, the cost of enforced silence, and the hope for healing and autonomy-a reflection of the struggle for selfhood and dignity that resonates far beyond the palace walls.

2. Queen Olivia Avington

Queen Olivia is a figure of quiet dignity and tragic endurance, her life marked by profound loss and unending suffering. Plagued by miscarriages that strain her marriage and become a source of blame, Olivia endures escalating emotional, psychological, and sexual abuse from King Charles. Yet, she remains gentle and gracious, advocating for the marginalized- particularly the Callie family, those stripped of power and wrongfully punished by the kingdom’s corruption. Olivia’s nurturing presence as a mother and queen stands in stark contrast to the violence she endures in private. Even as she is manipulated, framed for treason, and faces her unjust death, Olivia refuses to betray her values or those she loves, meeting her fate with remarkable courage. Her resilience, moral clarity, and advocacy for the voiceless make her a quietly radical figure, embodying the strength that can exist beneath outward gentleness. Olivia’s story is a powerful commentary on the intersection of gender, motherhood, societal expectations, and the enduring strength of women who survive and resist within oppressive systems. She is a testament to the cost of enforced silence and the dangers of unchecked patriarchal power, her fate a sobering reminder of the sacrifices made by women who dare to care.

3. Marie Callie

Marie’s journey is one of resilience, loyalty, and ultimate sacrifice. A migrant from Lystotia and lifelong member of the Callie family in Vynier, she rises from humble beginnings to become a surrogate mother and protector to Ericia. Marie’s unwavering love and courage place her in direct danger; she is executed by King Charles specifically because she knows about -and is a witness to- his abuse of Olivia and Ericia. Her knowledge and willingness to protect Ericia make her a threat to the king’s power and secrets, and her death is both a punishment and a warning to others. Losing Marie leaves Ericia deeply scarred, instilling both a fear of trusting adults and a longing for genuine connection. Her story underscores the vulnerability of women who challenge or threaten corrupt authority, especially those who are outsiders or “othered.” The trauma of losing Marie shapes Ericia’s outlook on motherly and womanly figures and her ability to trust from a young age. Marie’s legacy is a stark reminder of the precariousness of women’s roles in patriarchal societies, and the tragic consequences for those who dare to stand against injustice.

4. Avie Archer

Avie, Ericia’s lady-in-waiting and best friend, is a beacon of hope and emotional strength in the midst of palace darkness. Serving the princess directly, Avie is uniquely positioned to observe the underlying political issues while maintaining a positive, grounding presence for Ericia. She weaponizes innocence and naivety, using intelligence and emotional awareness to support Ericia and offer realistic, healthy companionship and a sense of normalcy and hope. Avie’s romantic relationship with a Montien soldier, Carter, challenges social and gender norms, as she navigates the risks and societal judgments of crossing class and national boundaries. Her ability to balance friendship and duty, optimism and realism, makes her a lifeline for Ericia. Avie’s character is a testament to the power of female friendship, the importance of emotional labor, and the subtle forms of resistance women employ in restrictive societies. Her story invites reflection on feminist theories of agency, intersectionality, and the value of “soft” strength, as well as the societal implications of women’s choices in love and loyalty. Through Avie, I explore the complexities of women’s roles in both public and private spheres, and the ways in which emotional intelligence can be wielded as a form of quiet power.

5. Princess May Wright

Princess May of Lystotia is a master of social maneuvering, her intelligence, wit, and charisma matched only by her ability to wield her royal status to project strength and maintain her family’s reputation. She often displays mistrust and superiority, particularly toward Ericia, and feels closely attached to Henry. Her relationship with Rowan is complex, marked by both sibling loyalty and rivalry. May’s agency and freedom to make her own decisions set her apart, marked by her position as royal daughter while notably not the heir to the throne. Her choices sometimes expose her to the consequences of gendered expectations and social scrutiny. Her journey explores the double-edged sword of female agency: while she wields power and autonomy, she is not immune to the repercussions of defying societal norms. May’s intelligence and ability to navigate court life are both her shield and her burden, challenging simplistic notions of female power. Her fate and choices prompt readers to consider the costs of freedom and the persistent barriers women face, even at the highest levels of society. May’s character is a nuanced exploration of the complexities of female agency, reputation, and the social costs of autonomy.

6. Gaya Archer

Gaya, lady-in-waiting and closest friend to Queen Olivia, is a figure of resilience, emotional intelligence, and quiet strength. As both confidante and servant, Gaya is privy to the abuse and corruption within the palace, skillfully balancing loyalty and boundaries. Her worry for her daughter Avie, who also serves the royal family, adds another layer of emotional complexity to her life. Gaya’s ability to witness and survive the palace’s darkest moments, while maintaining her sense of duty and compassion, is a testament to her strength. Her association with Seth and her navigation of gender and class dynamics further complicate her experience, highlighting the difficult choices women must make in patriarchal and class-stratified societies in order to survive. Gaya’s story brings to light the often-invisible labor and emotional toll borne by women in service roles. Her perspective enriches the novel’s exploration of intersectionality, class, and the limits of agency, emphasizing that the struggle for dignity and justice transcends rank and title. Gaya’s resilience and discretion, her ability to separate personal loyalty from duty, and her sacrifices for the safety of those she loves, make her an unsung pillar within the palace and a mirror for the struggles of working-class women everywhere.

Through these six women-Ericia, Olivia, Marie, Avie, May, and Gaya-Dark & Cold offers a powerful, multifaceted exploration of women’s lives under patriarchy. Each character’s journey is marked by trauma, endurance, agency, sacrifice, and solidarity, revealing core messages of the novel: that women’s lives are shaped by both personal and structural forces; that resilience and compassion are forms of power; and that the pursuit of justice, autonomy, and healing is both necessary and possible, even in the darkest of circumstances. This body of literature is my tribute to the strong women -real and fictional- who continue to resist, survive, and inspire change.

Purchase Dark & Cold Here.

[trendynewsnow]

Exploring Oppression and Identity in Emanuel Pârvu's 'Three Kilometres to the End of the World'

Exploring the Depths of Oppression in Emanuel Pârvu’s Three Kilometres to the End of the World The poignant film Three Kilometres to the End of the World, directed by Emanuel Pârvu, has made waves in the film industry, capturing the coveted Queer Palm at this year’s Cannes Film Festival. It has also been chosen to represent Romania in the race for Best International Feature Film at the upcoming…

[treety-of-the-ents]

Just wanted to add that a doctor definitely has more power over firing you as a patient in USA than you do in firing them. Even if you somehow have insurance, it has to let you switch providers - and potentially facilities - when there is a shortage of providers in basically all specialties, you might only have access to the one shifty hospital in your small town, and there could be a wait list a mile long to even reschedule something that needs to be done yesterday so you don’t die. This isn’t buying a luxury good like a skydiving trip (which I would definitely want to make sure training, equipment and procedure were all sound if I somehow could afford / desire to do that). This is you going in for care which you might already have waited until it was critical to get because you couldn’t afford to go beforehand. The insurance is not on your side. The law may be, but it doesn’t help if you’re dead / don’t have money to pursue compensatory justice. And pare that with the lost time and energy from getting the original appointment scheduled and having the means to go to it and take time off for recovery or whatever else costs so many more spoons while disabled and in a minority group (Queer in my case).

The anti-mask brain rot is penetrating the hospital system in a terrifying fashion.

Masks are necessary for accessing central lines, and more and more nurses are starting to have issues with wearing a mask during STERILE PROTOCOL.

These lines are going right into our hearts and nurses are throwing tantrums about having to cover up their faces for 5 minutes.

This has not happened at my infusion center personally but I have mutuals and friends who have had to beg their nurses to put on the mask that literally comes in the sterile access kit.

[cryiling]

i saw an instagram reel of someone talking about his experience as a gnc individual. he was like "yeah i'm afab and i dress very fem and i've never experienced gender dysphoria in my body but i use he/him pronouns." and i was like wow that's so fire you're so real for that. and then i opened the comments (rookie mistake, won't happen again) and holy shit, the transphobia was RANCID. so many people saying shit like "white women want to be oppressed so badly," "so you're cis," "maybe i'm not woke enough for this"

holy fuck yall. we can acknowledge that yes, thin and white/white-passing trans individuals face less systemic and societal barriers. yes, cis-passing and non-physically-transitioned gnc folk may experience less stigma and oppression in their day-to-day lives. but hello, we can still acknowledge that someone's gender is still valid?? we should still respect their identity ??

trans/gnc individuals don't need to match your stereotypes in order for their identity to still be valid. trans/gnc people don't need to look a certain way, experience dysphoria, or physically transition in order to still be valid. external appearance does not equal internal gender identity. these things can exist and change independently of one another.

so yeah. maybe the problem really is that you're not "woke" enough to have this conversation. but then again, yall can't even accept that cis heteroromantic asexual men are queer too, so. maybe you're just not a queer ally in general.

[catboybiologist]

I absolutely agree that transmasculine people face different problems than transfeminine people, hmm I wonder if we could come up with a word to specifically describe the transphobic issues that transmasculine people have to deal with, perhaps something including the word trans and, like, a greek syllable meaning masculine, or something

surely such a word would be seen as a good thing to have at ones disposal to talk about one's own oppression

hmmm

This is a bad faith ask, but I guess it's as good a place as any for a ramble. I hope it's coherent.

First off, I feel like my blog is getting lumped into a lot of other blogs as a "trans woman who talks about transmisogyny" and points are being ascribed to me that I never really said. I respect them a lot, and I follow them. But I'm an individual person with my own nuanced opinions on the topic.

Also, yes, this will largely be a nitpicky terminology post. It's a a rambling societal analysis from someone with a STEM background. Don't call this "infighting". To be blunt, if you get riled up by this, that's on you.

Here's what you need to understand: transmisogyny is not called transmisogyny because it's transphobia affecting trans women. Transmisogyny is called transmisogyny because it's the manifestation of existing misogynist biases and talking points, applied to trans women. Creating the term "transandrophobia" as an equal foil to it is implying existing, pervasive androphobia against cis men.

Per the original use of the terminology (I'm literally just poorly summarizing Whipping Girl here, which is basically transfeminism for dummies), transmisogyny exists because of two related, but distinct deeply ingrained biases of misogyny:

One, the societal belief that male/man and female/woman are separate categories with a MASSIVE, uncrossable rift between them, and are intrinsically different as completely separate biological or theological categories (this is termed oppositional sexism)

Two, with respect to these two categories, men and masculinity are superior to women and femininity.

Transgender women assault both of these points to create a massive reflexive disgust reaction in a misogynist. One, they break down the barriers between men and women. And two, they provide examples of somebody "choosing" womanhood, and being uplifted and empowered by it. The first point is something we share with trans men, but let's hold on to that point for a moment.

As I've said before, transmisogyny then manifests as a property of this reaction. The second point leaves people scrambling to think of "alternate explanations" for a trans woman's transition- leading to false accusations about why trans women want access to women's spaces, that trans women are fetishists, and that trans women want to "cheat" in women's sports.

Does this mean that trans men don't have unique struggles, or that we shouldn't fight for transmasc's struggles? Of course not. However, these struggles are not an emergent property of a societal hatred of men.

Instead, a lot of what trans men face feels to me like repackaged misogyny. THIS IS NOT SAYING THAT TRANS MEN ARE NOT MEN, OR THAT ALL TRANSMASCS ARE ACTUALLY WOMEN. This is an acknowledgement that misogyny is a system of biases that aims to create a patriarchy. Those biases have the goal of male superiority, and oftentimes, hit trans men as well- because a system that needs to tell men that they're "biologically superior" is one that can never allow an "inferior" person to put themselves in that category.

Eg: trans men are often forced into positions where they're treated as women, often violently. This is to maintain the separation of men and women, and to assert men as superior. Trans men are affected by reproductive health regulations written to suppress women, sexual violence intended to suppress women, etc.

Some of these mechanisms often also affect trans women. Particularly sexual violence and sexualization.

And some don't. Some are genuinely unique to transmascs. And if you want to use the word "transandrophobia" to describe all of them in one go, then sure I guess. It's not a huge deal, but you have to acknowledge that we're talking about something almost entirely different at that point. But, if you're portraying trans androphobia as the genuine one-to-one equal of transmisogyny, with the same roots and same usage, you're also saying that societal androphobia exists. Which, to be frank, it does not- as a societal force. I'm sure you have a cousin or a great aunt that genuinely believes in some kind of matriarchal state, but c'mon. They're not mainstream in any political movement, no, not even TERFs.

Talking about transmisogyny isn't about erasing trans men's issues, it's about recognizing the misogynist roots of transphobia to more accurately hold fast against it, find solidarity with other feminists, and restructure communication to people outside of our movements.

And yeah, I am going to uplift trans men, and talk about issues affecting them. Saying I don't is ascribing a lot of things to me that I'm not saying.

This is the dignified part of my response. I'm typing my more irate, hysterical thoughts here, but I genuinely hope this opens some respectful discussion.

Part 2 of this post will be what I'm mad about, and what my frustration is.

[transandrobroism]

i am not being needlessly alarmist when i say that popular feminism has become extremely radfem-esque and that the normalisation of negative stereotypes towards men needs to be resisted. like. i clearly remember when feminists were derided as "man-hating feminazis" and the main counter-argument to that went something like "we don't hate men, feminism is for everyone, patriarchy harms men too and our goal is to dismantle that oppressive system, this will benefit everyone including men, men can and should be feminists because feminism is a movement for gender equality"

in fact the major rebuttal to men forming "men's rights" movements was always that the issues these groups identified were the negative impacts of the patriarchy on men. they didn't need a separate group because feminism was for everyone and feminist thought and theorising already accounted for the ways patriarchy harms men. which is true! many of the societal issues faced by men stem from white supremacist patriarchy and restrictive gender roles and traditionally feminism has given thought and time to those issues. feminism is for everyone and it is concerned with men's struggles under patriarchy alongside women's.

but somewhere in the last few decades that attitude fell by the wayside and now popular online feminism is this radfem-flavored "all men are bad forever" thing. now mocking, belittling, or hating men is #feminist #praxis. it's feminist to make jokes about #killallmen. it's feminist to view masculinity as inherently bad and dangerous. it's feminist to talk about the men in your life like they're animals who need to be house trained, or emotionally stunted children who need to be babied and distracted.

it's this idea of flipping patriarchy on its head and saying that actually women are the Superior Gender, women deserve to run the world and make all the decisions, and actually it's men who are the Inferior Gender who can't be trusted or left unsupervised.

these attitudes will always have the most severe negative impact on marginalised men. i don't know how we got here but it's past time we circled back around to "feminism is for everyone".

[the-chaos-crew]

100% agree

I often add those quips, not because I truly believe it, but because no one will listen to me unless I add some half hearted disclaimer. it's useless to appeal to the bad actors, yes, but there's also some well intentioned actors who initially will disagree with what I have to say. so I add my little disclaimers so they stay for a little longer, in the hopes I can provide a different point of view without being immediately disregarded

I don't add those quips when talking to cis men because we share similar experiences as men

I've been around a lot of cis men in my life, all have shared stories of them facing sexism and oppression, and I have my own stories of such too. I hate downplaying our experiences as men, but currently it's the only way to be heard by those who haven't experienced it

hopefully soon I won't have to tip toe around the mere idea that yes, men are disadvantaged in our society, just as anyone else

On cis men, trans men, and oppression.

Lately I've seen a lot of posts about what words to use to talk about trans men's oppression. I'm not gonna address that debate here. I've been speaking about men's issues since obama's first term, i've long gotten tired of this debate. (Apparently anti-masculinism and anti-transmasculinism are the problematic/misogynistic ones now and emasculation and transemasculation are the new politically correct ways to talk about men/trans men's oppression)

What I do want to talk about how ever is the trend in far too many of such posts to include some quip affirming that `of course, I would never claim cis men are oppressed` or trying to rewrite the term misandry to say it explicitly doesn't include "oppression" which is something they imply only happens to non-cismens. I used to ignore such quips, I understand where they are coming from, but after the election I've decided there is no more room for such divisive language that can only serve to alienate potential allies.

Every trans man following my blog knows what its like to see people post bullshit arguments online about how not oppressed trans men are. They understand the feelings of invalidation that can come from seeing such arguments gain traction. So why are some of you so fucking eager to cast that same hurt upon cis men?

I once saw somebody on tumblr helpfully point out that in order for a group to be considered a marginalized group, they need to meet only one criteria: that the group's unique concerns or issues are treated as insignificant or unimportant.

Men qualify 100% on this metric. Men's unique issues are commonly derided as a mockery to even bother considering. To that point that trans men can't even talk about their own oppression without being expected to separate their language from cis men first to avoid accidentally advocating for cis men too.

So yes, men are marginalized, men are oppressed, and all of the trans men in my mutuals and byond should spend less time trying to build unity with these detractors who will always hate the mere concept of advocacy for men's issues, and more time building unity with cis men, who can empathize with trans men on quite a few parts of misandry and androphobia both trans and cis men face but won't want to be allys with trans men if they see trans men throwing them under the bus by adding a quip in their please-let-me-talk-about-my-oppression-using-language-i-choose post about how of course cis men aren't oppressed" in some lame attempt to appeal to bad faith actors who were always going to have an issue with any form of advocacy for men.

No amount of equivocation or self flagellation will work. You can't appease them because there is no logic. They will always have a new bone to pick. All you can do by catering to it is allow them to exert undue control over how you talk about your own fucking oppression which they will without fail use to frustrate and subtly suppress such conversations.

[aeolianblues]

in the best case scenario my asexuality is a ticking time bomb that will have to be dealt with family-wise sooner or later. In today’s society it’s just not a normal accepted thing to simply be by yourself your whole life. Especially as people start breaking off into the family structure and friends who were once your community and support system become a smaller presence in your life because spouses and kids take precedence— I don’t know any ace people who haven’t worried at some point about dying alone. You don’t simply ‘have a housemate friend’ you live with where e.g. there is someone there for you if you have a sudden emergency. What if you can’t move? What if you’re ill and can’t get out of bed? I’m glad our worlds are better connected today, but the chances that you’ll be with someone safe and known if that happens are smaller than if you’ve got your own family, right? Or is the bleak best case scenario that an ace person has an emergency while at work?

Aces are a pretty small % of the population in general. To say you’ll find another ace person and cohabit is a really small chance. As most people start to move in with their partners, single people, ace people kind of find themselves either priced out of housing options unless rich, or being forced to find other strangers in unusual living circumstances.

I don’t know. I just feel like you are left more on your own in a societal structure that prioritises two-parent-and-children households. Or more generally, that sets you up for marital and couples living rather than necessarily community living, at least in the west.

So what I’m saying is that maybe ‘oppression’ isn’t the word to bring to the advocacy table. It is saying that maybe the thing to remember is that ‘oppression’ won’t look the same for everyone. It’s a reminder that comparing the weight of apples and watermelons doesn’t even make sense.

(This isn’t even aimed at the shortsighted people that think pride is all about labels and being ‘in’ the club. This post is aimed at people that remember pride is a political struggle to improve the lives of people left behind by our current norms. It’s why e.g. disability activists also calling their advocacy disability pride is instantly understood by most.)

It’s why ‘[x] queer group is so not oppressed’ is the emptiest and most wasteful statement you could make in the context of queer rights advocacy.

[uptownthots]

sooooo many misandry or transandrophobia arguments fall apart because they rely so heavily on the vague concept of a faceless “”Society”” void of purpose or identity. When we talk about the patriarch or white supremacy or like any oppressive system we understand that there are specific demographics of people who benefit systematically from these things, and we understand that the reason these things are systematic is because said demographics had the power to create these systems in the first place

Misandry/transandrophobia relies on isolating “men’s issues” and examining them in a contextless box that exists outside the reality of the world we live in—there are no real world records of non-men creating a society that discriminated against men until a hatred of men and masculinity became societally universal. Literally an ideology based on straight up unreality lol