#divest from patriarchy

[magdalene-spirit]

Meeting the Madwoman: An Inner Challenge for Feminine Spirit by Linda Schierse

It is we who have severed ourselves from the old ways of the great Mother & the natural agrarian & egalitarian order of Naure.

That is to live with Nature, in a felt participation & sense of belonging within the great circle / circuit of flow, where energy circulates & so there is enough for the needs of everyone in the community.

A way of living that is not in opposition to Nature but in deep magical sympathy with the natural laws / laws of Nature (the essences, the Shakti's, the Matrika's, the principles, the Gods/Goddesses, the forces, the planetary intelligences etc.).

In whichever way we personify the high laws, there can only be harmony when we are deeply tuned in, to hear & see, with deepest intuition how to balance ourselves & our culture within the greater ecosystem in which we are embedded- not separate from.

When we are in a state of listening & reverence, we remember how to go about life so that we are provided for.

When wealth accumulation starts we withhold energy from the great flow which then disturbs a delicate balance & elsewhere things start to collapse.

The paradox we are in is that we can almost no longer return to the natural order, & when we have sufficiently cut ourselves off from it we are also destined to die off along with it.

Cut off from the great flow a system becomes artificial, a machine & must be sustained by siphoning & directing energy from elsewhere where it flows naturally, towards it- patriarchy & late capitalism is a beast, a wealth-making machine, that is destined to collapse, like any parasite must die, when the host can't give anymore.

But Nature is perpetually regenerative, seasonal & self-sustaining & once the parasite is expelled, She will grow & birth & flourish.

As much as we wish, no-one can entirely leave patriarchy for the forest, & we fear that if we just walk away we will be homeless on the streets.

Now, this very fear is our inner work, our meditation, our complicity, our inertia, our stuckness— how to find a way of living, within the modern landscape, that is true for us-& to free ourselves from materialism.

[angelsaxis]

this women's history month, this site should acknowledge that women exist! everyone should divest from "Im just a girl" "pink job/blue job" jokes. no more girl math! no girl boss feminism! read the combahee river collective's statement. if a post asks you who your favorite woman is, whether real or fictional, don't talk about a man and say "he's like a woman to me. he's a mother, a wife." shush! hush up!! instead, give a trans woman money this month. give a Black woman money. stop policing lesbian sexuality. leave bi women alone if you're not gonna support them. understand that the patriarchy needs to be dismantled in its entirety, without exception. gender roles are wholly unnecessary to have smooth-running, functioning, fair society.

[drizne]

Excerpt from the speech "Remembering the Witches", from Andrea Dworkin's "Our Blood"

"Men tell us that they too are "oppressed". They tell us that they are often in their individual lives victimized by women -- by mothers, wives and "girlfriends". They tell us that women provoke acts of violence through our carnality, or malice, or avarice, or vanity, or stupidity. They tell us that their violence originates in us and that we are responsible for it. They tell us that their lives are full of pain, and that we are its source. They tell us that as mothers we injure them irreparably, as wives we castrate them, as lovers we steal from them semen, youth and manhood -- and never, never, as mothers, wives, or lovers do we ever give them enough.

And what are we to think? Because if we being to piece together all of the instances of violence -- the rapes, the assaults, the cripplings, the killings, the mass slaughters; if we read their novels, poems, political and philosophical tracts and see that they think of us today what the Inquisitors thought of us yesterday; if we realize that historically gynocide is not some mistake, some accidental excess, some dreadful fluke, but is instead the logical consequence of what they believe to be our god-given or biological natures; then we must finally understand that under patriarchy gynocide is the ongoing reality of life lived by women. And then we must look to each other -- for the courage to bear it and for the courage to change it.

The struggle of women, the feminist struggle, is not a struggle for more money per hour, or for equal rights under male law, or for more women legislators who will operate within the confines of male law. These are all emergency measures, designed to safe women's lives, as many as possible, now, today. But these reforms will not stem the tide of gynocide; these reforms will not end the relentless violence perpetrated by the gender class men against the gender class women. These reforms will not stop the increasing rape epidemic in this country, or the wife-beating epidemic in England. They will not stop the sterilizations of black and poor white women who are the victims of male doctors who hate female carnality. These reforms will not empty mental institutions of women put into them by male relatives who hate them for rebelling against the limits of the female role, or against the conditions of female servitude. They will not empty prisons filled with women who, in order to survive, whored; or who, after being raped, killed the rapist; or who, while being beaten, killed the man who was killing them. These reforms will not stop men from living off exploited female domestic labor, nor will these reforms stop men from reinforcing male identity by psychologically victimizing women in so-called "love" relationships.

And no personal accommodation within the system of patriarchy will stop this relentless gynocide. Under patriarchy, no woman is safe to live her life, or to love, or to mother children. Under patriarchy, every woman is a victim, past, present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's daughter is a victim, past, present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman.

Before we can live and love, we will have to hone ourselves into a revolutionary sisterhood. That means that we must stop supporting the men who oppress us; that we must refuse to feed and clothe and clean up after them; that we must refuse to let them take their sustenance from our lives. That means that we will have to divest ourselves of the identity we have been trained to as females -- that we will have to divest ourselves of all traces of the masochism we have been told is synonymous with being female. That means that we will have to attack and destroy every institution, law, philosophy, religion, custom, and habit of this patriarchy that feeds on our "dirty" blood, that is build on our "trivial" labor."

[thatsladyfaggottoyou]

increasingly i find that we are not all faggots in the eyes of the state--and this isn't to say that we, as the queer community, should in any way divest ourselves from reaching out to one another and locking arms as tightly as we can. Rather, this is to try to illuminate why transandrophobia fundamentally differs from transmisogyny.

Amabs are viewed from a structural position as those who both A. should embrace the power dynamic created by patriarchal power structures and B. have a duty to cultivate future generations within said structures. Being transfem when you are amab bucks both points and is therefor treated as a threat because it is difficult from the outside to comprehend why someone might want access to fewer power structures unless it was to have access to different types of power. Because of this, transmisogyny often focuses on trans women/fems being a threat, because this is the only lens of why existent power structures have for transfems' existence.

Afabs are viewed from a structural position as those who both A. should be willing incubators for amabs (whom the patriarchy calls 'men,' and it bears mentioning that this analysis does not include intersex individuals because if they cannot be surgically coerced into either afab or amab then patriarchy's solution to them is the obvious solution: removal. Death.) and B. have a duty to caretake future and past generations within patriarchal structures. Afab trans men/mascs have failed their assigned roles as silent procreationists, but where this differs is in the perception of fault: these are no longer threats, because to admit an afab might threaten Men within the patriarchy is tantamount to an admission that the hierarchies which are built and maintained in service to the patriarchy are flimsy and breakable. Afab trans men/mascs must then be shamed for deigning to think their interests, words, or even presence within mens' spaces is wanted or warranted.

In short: amab trans people are faggots in the eyes of the state (dangerous to permitted spaces for those who are lower in hierarchy within the patriarchy) and afab trans people are broken incubators in the eyes of the state (dangerous to the perception of enforceable hierarchies within the patriarchy).

[glittertimes]

“Another example is with the “child-free” movement. Child-free living is often framed as a feminist reclamation of our bodies or an ethical choice not to bring more children into the world. Whilst everyone should have reproductive autonomy, there is no such thing as child free living because children exist everywhere in all our communities, within which adults in particular have a responsibility of care. Parenting is community care, and community care is parenting. They are one in the same and therefore everybody -regardless of age- should be working on their parenting skills. The linguistic framing of “child-free” is also problematic: young people are not some harmful or oppressive force to be liberated from. Children need to be free from the adults, not the other way around! And most people discussing or practicing I have outlined do nothing like most people, to support youth. Any so-called liberatory framework that affirms adult power and agency without simultaneously identifying the oppression of young people and fighting for our power too, is just ageist.

- Innocence and Corruption: An Abolitionist Understanding of Youth Oppression by Aiyana Goodfellow

This is something that’s always bothered me about people who advocate for being child free but I didn’t know how to put it into words!

I totally understand the frustration with the pressure to get married and start a family! No one should be forced to have children if it’s something they don’t want, and I get wanting to divest from discussions about children altogether bc of those pressures.

But the child free movement focuses so much on adult freedom and fulfillment when there’s so much being left out about how children suffer from patriarchy and capitalist expectations as well!

Your life can be fulfilling without children or raising a family, but we can’t blame all of adults’ problems or lack of fulfillment on children when the real thing we should blame is patriarchy and capitalism. Which again, children do not benefit from, they’re just as oppressed (if not more so!) as adults under these systems!

[dipperdesperado]

No Mercy for the Developers of No Mercy

Content warning: discussions of sexual assault, nudity in itch.io link

We got a lot of shit to figure out as it pertains to cultural depictions of sex, and what qualifies as kinks and fetishes. I just came across this game called No Mercy, and it shook me to my core--I can't believe (or, better yet, I don't want to believe) that anyone would want this. While it may not be mainstream, it represents issues in our culture and cultural production that we need to uproot.

As of April 10th, No Mercy, a 3d pornographic visual novel created by Zerat Games, is no longer buyable on Steam, following backlash from UK official Peter Kyle and Collective Shout, a sex exploitation advocacy group.

No Mercy is a game that features incest and sexual assault among other acts the developers label as "kinks"/"fetishes". This is problematic for a multitude of reasons. However, the main one to highlight for our purposes is that there is nothing redeemable about uplifting ideations that support unequal/hierarchical power dynamics.

There is nothing to be gained by simulating one of the most violent things that can be done to someone. If our cultural products act as mirrors for our ideas of the world, what are we reflecting by uplifting things like this?

To change the landscape and create safe spaces for marginalized gender folks, we need to create a culture of accountability. Part of this is not allowing this shit to slide anymore. that means that we have to learn to center targets and victims of these abusive dynamics and cultures.

We can see that we're a long ways off from this. The game is still up on itch.io and SubscribeStar, and we can look at the comments on itch to see just how upstanding this game's fans are. Many commenters claim a fight against censorship (just ctrl+F the word on that page). Sigh.

There needs to be structures created by communities of creators and "consumers" to prevent this kind of shit from happening. There's no reason that this kind of game should exist.

This is not a call for authoritarian crackdowns on freedom of expression, or to say that we should have full restrictions on depicting certain deplorable acts (though I've never encountered a text where sexual assault did something more for the story than any other harmful act).

The fact is that we live under patriarchy, and as such, have to attend to power dynamics with a (trans)feminist lens. This means that our ideas (and the cultural products that we make based on them) are not "neutral"-- they are shaped by and shape society. Backing into narratives around "personal choice" conveniently forget that we exist within relation to the world around us, and that relation comes with dependencies and impacts.

Accountability is needed in these situations. We have to build communities of care that prevent people who, through isolation and individualism, create these reactionary projects in their little enclaves of the internet. I have a sneaking suspicion that, were Zerat Games in an abolitionist community of care, this game wouldn't exist.

Those communities of care and accountability could start with transformative justice pods that federate to encompass more people, along with the ability to respond to harm in ways that center victims. People should be able to choose restorative or retributive responses based on the needs and desires of those who are harmed.

I was horrified to see the fact that this game exists. I have such high hopes for the medium that I love, but as long as people are even able to think that they can get away with this shit, we will continue to be unbelievably cooked as a space. We have to do better, divest from the games industry, and take anti-(trans)feminist abuses seriously.

[raisedbythetv89]

I have no idea if this helps but if you struggle with self worth or don’t see yourself as having inherent value just for being you exactly as you are without doing anything for anybody or being “productive” please know you have been conditioned to believe that because people who can’t see their value can never understand when they’re being taken advantage of because you can’t believe you’re being used if you don’t believe in your usefulness.

White supremacy, the patriarchy, and capitalism ALL benefit greatly from us being desperate to prove our worthiness and value and they demonize loving yourself and knowing your worth by calling you egotistical, selfish and entitled.

Look at how much they’re panicking at declining birth rates yet continue to divest in education. They don’t want the current population wise, educated, and loving themselves. They want fresh bodies full of self loathing and desperation they can use and abuse for their own selfish gains.

Learning to love yourself, allow yourself rest, and recognize your inherent worth are some of the most radical acts of activism you can do because you’re removing yourself completely from the systems of oppression we seek to overthrow.

And sometimes learning to love yourself starts by doing it out of spite to the systems ruining our lives and the lives of generations of ancestors before us. Do your ancestors proud, fuck this system and become their worst nightmare by embracing your inherent value and worthiness for love and good things literally just for existing on this planet.

[myplasticadversary]

@bugpoasting It occurs to me that f/f JohnAndYoko would likely have a strong current of *political lesbianism* going on with it, like "yeah we're attracted to each other and stuff but more importantly we're Divesting From Patriarchy!"

[catgirlforeskin]

do u think there's a way for trans men to meaningfully divest themselves from manhood and form something new that does not hold power over and shows respect to womanhood? I feel like manhood is an inherently unethical thing to choice into at this point. As in, I feel like while trans women threaten patricarchy and form a radical world with their transitions, transmasculine transition only rlly serves to gain power over women and divest from womanhood. Maybe that's insane of me but I just find it so hard to have respect for trans men at this point, and I'm saying this as someone who is at this point on T to alleviate dysphoria. Idk like I'm not under any illusion that tme people can somehow transition out of being tme and into being tma but I guess I mean "Is there a way to transition that will remove the element of benefit from transmisogyny?" Because I don't think men can ever truly stop benefiting from sexism and transmisogyny. and i don't want to transition into a gender that gives me power over trans women. Like some sort of transfem subservient gender that specifically finds it's social role in serving or creating a power structure which centers transfeminine ppl. Sorry I think i had too much Adderall today

I think we’re a few steps away from recreating a political eunuch class here. I’m willing to bear the cross of being the emperor advised by them in the upcoming heavenly war against patriarchy

Serious answer here is I don’t think it’s something we can identity chess our way out of, it’s something that requires political organizing. I think if every man on earth decided to be non-binary tomorrow it probably wouldn’t change too much, it takes conscious learning and action. Which is to say anyone can be on our side in this struggle, as I also try to be on the side of opposing oppression that I’m not personally affected by

[colorisbyshe]

I do have an issue with the "why are y'all criticizing the barbie movie while you're silent about movies for ~boys and men" argument not just because... people aren't silent about those films, maybe you just aren't following the right people (or the people you follow are so divested from the ~films from men they just ignore them entirely, idk) but also because... are those films... claiming to be feminist?

I never got the argument of "Why do you criticize *thing made to empower women* so much more?" that pops up all the fucking time. Like, obviously I'm more critical of a thing claiming to help me because... if it doesn't actually help me (and potentially even HARMS me), that needs to be highlighted so future ventures to empower me... actually DO empower me?

The same way if I go swimming, if we're just swimming in bathing suits, I'm not inspecting the suit fabric, but if you hand me a raggedy life jacket and tell me it'll protect me from the strong currents... I'm gonna... inspect the life jacket. Because if it doesn't do the job it claims it does, I'm fucked.

Like, yes, all film should probably be held up to critical inspection on some level because with or without intent it can harm (or enact positive change!) BUT if something EXPLICITLY exists to ~fight the patriarchy man, I'm gonna ask "Hey, does this... actually fight the patriarchy?"

You can like the barbie film. You can even get warm and fuzzy feelings from it. But other people, ESPECIALLY other women, are allowed to question if a. the empowerment... actually empowers and b. if it does at a cost to the women it doesn't empower.

Criticism of a thing you like doesn't have to make you like it less (although it certainly can and SHOULD in some cases) but it will help you understand it more. That's a good thing!

[askgothamshitty]

What are your thoughts on the Korean 4b movement? To me personally I’m curious about possible outcomes positives or negatives . Do you think this types of movement are possible to replicate in the United States? I’m am from Latin America I believe those types of movements are not possible here because the Latino society is very male centered and a lot of the things we have to divest from the list are very important for latinas ex: marriage.

I wish there were more sources on the movement in English so I could learn more, but from what I do know, I’m totally supportive of it. I think it’s great that women are realizing that they don’t have to center men in their lives and seeking alternative paths to the date/marry/have kids one that’s forced upon us.

I don’t think separatism like this should be the full spectrum of feminist activism, I think there needs to be direct struggle against patriarchy of some kind. But it’s a good start for facilitating feminist consciousness and establishing solidarity among women. It’s also a great sign that radical feminism has not lost its appeal.

I do agree with you, though, that this might not be something that can work everywhere, in the same way. What one area finds effective in the fight against misogyny may be different than what another area finds effective, due to differences in culture, demographics, etc. But I think separatism should still be promoted as an option for the women who can partake in it, even if they are a minority. It’s important for a feminist movement to have alternatives to heterosexuality.

[papirouge]

You mentioned that you were all for black women divesting, and it reminded me of something I've stumbled upon once. I was lurking on FDS and found this woman who always was making very wise or funny comments on threads. So I clicked on her profile and started reading the comments she left on other subs. She was a black woman, and she made a thread in this subreddit that was speciafically for black women and their issues and discussions. It was about how she went to a party, and she mentioned that she was dating an asian man, and that the people there questioned her and were pretty critical of her deciding to date an asian man over a black one. She obviously made that post looking for support, but most comments were literally like "those people at your party were pretty rude, but you shoud examine why you prefer to date asian men over black men". Like it was so weird. I don't get it. Like it's fine if you prefer black men and decide not to date outside of your race, but why would you judge other women for not doing the same? Like if he loves her, and she's happy, why would you care she's with an asian man?? Plus the way she described him he was very much a high value man (and she herself a very high value woman). I also remember her mentioning in other comments even her family wasn't very happy with her dating a korean guy (specially her grandmother), but ultimately came to accept it, kind of...

If she landed on a Black female sub I am not surprised they found "questionable" she was dating an Asian man because many Black women are unfortunately stuck in the "race loyalty" shit. Like women of other communities, they naturally cling to their community male for protection, but this cannot work like for Black men....

Black men started to go after White women to climb the career ladder. Black men in the USA are known to have never built any (economical) structure of significance for their community, like you'd expect from a decent patriarchy (that's basically one of the perk of patriarchy - men building structure for their community). That's why they cling to White women in a way to suck up to White men who hold the real power. It's very embarrassing when you really think of it and show how WEAK Black men are.... lol

Generational trauma overturned the gender dynamics, that's why Black men are the one to move as hypergamist - not Black women (who are statistically more prone to marry down than any other demographic). Because of baby mama culture and wide widespread single motherhood, Black women had to leverage their masculinity (being the main provider of the household instead of being provided for), which is precisely what Black men reproach to them to elevate other non Black women (more feminine, light-hearted, etc.) . And that's pretty is ironic because Black men are equally responsible for the problem is single motherhood in the Black community.... But Black men refuse to acknowledge is and will instead accuse White supremacy LOL

Black men are typically those to be like "what do you bring to the table?" to a Black woman (they are usually more forgetting with non Black ones), forgetting that they, as men, are supposed to be the providers... It wouldn't be a problem if they didn't consider themselves as masculine and...."traditional" LOL They'll call themselves "Black king" but behave like peasants, expecting to be hand-fed stuff by women they date... Such behavior is so repulsive and that's precisely one of the reason why I can't bring myself finding Black men attractive LOL (it's a different story in Africa because men are still traditional and will naturally provide for their spouse though).

Even still to this day, dating a White woman is still a social achievement status for Black men. Most famous/rich Black men (in the West) are mated with non Black women - especially in the sports world.. (I mean look at the new gen of NBA players who are all mixed lmao).

Black women naturally grew some resentment but also some sort of desperation, because Black men got cocky and started dunking on them as some sort of twisted way to get acceptance from the whites (the whole fetishism with "snow bunny" etc) and started telling them that no other men would want them. For so long Black women got stuck clinging to their men out who rejected them for a come up, but it's fortunately changing, and Black men are seething lol

Unlike Black men who leveraged their apparent masculinity to atrtact women from all races ("tall dark and chocolate"), what's new is that millennial and zoomer Black women are openly stating they are open to dating non Black menand are learning to leverage asset to attract all kind of women. That's why Black feminity channels are popping. And also that's why Black men are shook and go even harder to clown us saying "White men don't want us" (as if there was only White beside them lol), calling us undesirable and desperate for daring to *gasp* open their options.... Of course, when they take their passport to go to whole another country abroad it totally not desperation.... 👀

Black men feel threatened because that's the first time a significant amount of Black women decide to leverage their feminity to attract men who will appreciate them regardless of their race- and not solely focus on Black men. They say that White men don't like Black women but the truth is....Black women never really bothered trying to date outside their race. It's just a gaslighting technique to scare us off from flaring better than in the relationship with bums. That's why they hate Serena Williams btw. Whenever they find out a Black woman is coupled with a non Black man they'll be like "hm, she definitely gives off those vibes...." hm ok, and what vibes do Black men constantly dating non Black women have? 🤔

Of course, there will always be "Black love" mules who will side with Black men and shame us for dating non Black men... They're the same flock who defend Tory Lanez and other predators.... You can't save everyone at this point.

If you're interested in the discourse surround IR dating for Black women, I highly recommend you Chrissie's channel. She has an entire playlist dedicated to it which is 👩🏾‍🍳💋

[stripedroseandsketchpads]

I think it’s important to be able to recognize that even people who are the primary material beneficiaries of harmful, oppressive systems can suffer detriments (usually social/emotional), simply because not all harm is caused by oppression.

There are absolutely issues with people using comments like this to shut down/derail discussions of harm caused by oppression which has benefitted them in ways that it has harmed the other people talking, in a kind of “Well I have problems too!” way or to alleviate feelings of personal guilt from having reaped material benefits which they didn’t choose to. At worst it can turn into denying their privilege exists or trying to reverse-uno and claim oppressed people are actually better off than them

But if people are talking about their own experiences independent of that, not talking over someone else, there’s no need to reflexively shut it down as long as they’re not incorporating some kind of falsehood (eg, blaming marginalized people for their situation, which is unfortunately kind of common). It’s useful experiential knowledge to contribute and may be an entree for others who are frankly not super interested in caring about the people oppressed by that social system initially to be able to critically examine it too.

So it would be beneficial to work on recognizing when someone is not weaponizing their experience of privilege-not-without-harm even if I understand why a lot of us have knee-jerk negative reactions because we often see it in a context of trying to derail/shut us down. It can be that but it’s not inherently so, and I think that’s the point of emotional hangup for a lot of folks in addition to just hearing complaints about a life that sounds ideal to us from the outside looking and finding it grating.

An example I see a ton which sometimes—though not always—trips into these pitfalls is (almost always cis) men talking about genuine problems they’ve had which are caused by patriarchy; I truly don’t think it’s a bad thing to talk about those issues! A lot of them have corollaries to emotional harms women are also experiencing under patriarchy which can be dismantled concurrently. For example, how standards for sexual behavior which expect men to be aggressive and violent but emotionally detached will really fuck up guys who want to just fucking be nice to their female partners, sometimes to the point of leaving them with a deep discomfort/shame around sex itself, and how them not having that pressure—in addition to women not be expected to submit to aggression and domination—would objectively also benefit women and result in them being treated with more respect and compassion. At the same time, those emotionally damaged men still make more money on average at their jobs than women, and reap other material benefits from patriarchy which aren’t related to that particular form of emotional harm, born not of oppression but of the demands society puts on men to oppress, when that is in fact not a natural inclination. And when those discussions go really sour is when that topic is brought up as a ‘gotcha’ to feminists (or women in general) talking about that material aspect; the worst excesses of that are the subset of MRAs who manage to loop all the way back around into thinking women are “privileged” to be “allowed to express their emotions” or some such crap. That is, when they turn a point of relation (that corollary of emotional harms which sort of compliment each other) into a point of competition or antagonism.

At the end of the day though, I think that if it’s not in a context of antagonism, if it’s just sharing an experience in and of itself, though, shutting down discussions about that emotional harm can also help naturalize the idea that men should enjoy and actively choose to partake in the oppression of women, rather than being used as an entry point to demonstrate how it is actually deeply unnatural to do things this way. If men encourage each other to divest from patriarchy where it is possible to do so, and to heal themselves for the benefit of everyone (including but not solely themselves), everyone benefits.

Saying that a certain group of people is too privileged to complain about the way that things are is its own sort of defense of the status quo

[ranocchiowo]

Wait, so before I follow you, you /don't/ think transandrophobia is real? Can I ask what'd you call it then? I'm genuinely asking because one of my transmasc friends does believe in it, and I've seen them experience it. Like I've seen them experience misogyny, too, obviously, but I dunno, the transandrophobia they experienced was definitely different from that. So I just wanna know why you don't believe in it and what would be a better word for it basically. Apologies for asking for education. Thank you for your time.

i answered an ask about this a few years ago which can be found here but tldr: terms like transmisogyny exist because of the intersection of both transphobia and misogyny, which forms a form of oppression greater than the sum of its parts. for a term like transandrophobia to exist that would imply that androphobia or misandry is a) real and b) widespread, neither of which is true

the concept of forming a word specifically for the oppression of transmascs is inherently flawed because we use these words as expressions of structures of power. 'transmisogyny' is an important word to describe the relations of power trans women and transfeminine people experience in relation to everyone else. there are no groups of people who have power over specifically trans men/transmasc people and no one else. all people who have power over trans men/transmascs have power over all trans people and the tools to discuss that dynamic are already encapsulated in the word transphobia. this doesnt mean that we don't experience misogyny, all trans people experience misogyny and transphobia to some degree (structural and situational!) but transmisogny isnt just a word shoving transphobia and misogyny together, its something separate and again greater than the sum of its parts

if that last part is confusing id recommend reading whipping girl by julia serano as a jumping off point to understanding transmisogny, then venture into anarchist transfeminist gender abolition

usually when transmascs describe something as transandrophobia, it can usually be categorised as one of three things: 1) transphobia (infantilisation - definitely common for many trans women and therefore not solely for transmacs; invisibility vs hypervisibility - both are epistemic violence against trans people, but a lot of transmascs posit that hypervisibility is a privilege/preferable compared to invisibility, completely ignoring how transmisogynistic caricatures are used to depict transfemininity as something to laugh at or commit violence against, and our life experiences being misrepresented or ignored is something that all trans people experience in different areas, for example the lack of non-bioessentialist sex-ed or lack of accurate and easily accessible information on hrt), 2) misogyny (pretty self explanatory, people utilise misogyny against transmascs because of transphobia - transphobia and misogyny feed into one another all the time, and this goes for all trans people (and even cis gay men and men who dont perform masculinity in the "correct" way) and because a lot of men face misdirected misogyny, saying trans men experience misogyny is not misgendering, 3) (im not implying that your friend is doing this at all, its just a worrying trend among transmascs who claim the term transandrophobia) weaponising bioessentialist ideas about agab in order to paint (trans) women as aggressors when they try to speak up about transmisogny within the trans community, which is why transmascs who use this term have been described as mens rights activists, because they are men speaking over women. all men benefit from upholding the patriarchy, which means (some) men who are otherwise oppressed (trans men, black men, gay men, etc.) will weaponise that oppression, as well as misogyny, against women around them in those same oppressed groups.

i cant speak on your friends specific experiences but its fairly common for trans people who havent taken the time to fully divest from bioessentialism to fall back on bioessentialist defences of their gender when confronted with misogyny and transphobia. when a lot of trans men experience misogyny being perceived as women, there is a gut reaction of being "cheated" out of manhood, which can feel different from misogyny when they assumed they were women. its still misogyny even with this, though, and transphobia

[allyouhavetodo]

Cope

I remember someone suggested blogging as a way to like “resist” and cope with our current political climate. And do y’all remember when I used to post on here everyday? Back when times were good. Well, I can’t promise to do that. But I did feel inspired to talk about how I ended up, against all odds, watching and enjoy the Super Bowl this year.

Some of y’all may remember that I got really into hockey in about ~2013 and that I got really out of hockey in 2017 because by then both my teams had betrayed me. The Chicago Blackhawks by not doing anything(?) to address sexual assault allegations against one of their players and the Pittsburgh Penguins for visiting the Trump White House after their Stanley Cup win.

Rich, white men will always (especially those of the jockish persuasion) will always eventually disappoint you. Even the foreign ones. They’re always going to ultimately dance with the ones who brang them (patriarchy, white supremacy, and capitalism).

But, anyway, when I told one of my friends I was no longer following hockey and why, she said that the White House thing wasn’t fair of me. That that’s just what sports teams DO, you can’t expect them to raise feathers and make political statements by refusing something that just expected for sports teams to do when they win.

And I thought, you know, that’s probably right. But for the reasons stated above re rich white men, it was probably best for my psyche to divest myself from the whitest most expensive sport around.

AND THEN shortly before this years Super Bowl, I learned that the Philadelphia Eagles REFUSED to go to the White House after they last won the Super Bowl in 2018. And, thus, I had a reason to live and to care about this game. You CAN say “fuck that” and refuse a bigot’s invitation. I can’t believe I gaslit myself that way. (Also the Chiefs team is full of politically backwards dumb shits and even their least backwards dumb shit gave the “political” rich white guy answer when asked about playing with Trump. So that’s double reason to want the Eagles to win and the Chiefs to lose.)

Needless to say, I found the Chiefs getting blown out quite delightful. And I hope our president dies mad about it.

[faithfullyfem]

FEMME is standing in the rain, kneeling in the dirt, holding the earth in my hands. It’s my growing faith. It’s eating flowers.

FEMME is desire. It’s feeding my hunger. For food. For friends. For country music. For non-fiction. For what I personally find pleasurable. FEMME is being a goddess and loving knowledge and coming to the table. It’s finding God in femme sisterhood and the butch gaze. Femme is bread and wine and grace. It’s loving my fat body, showing it love by showing it off.

FEMME is inspiration and life and the death of death. It’s Jesus challenging me to serve my people and it’s Resurrection and getting out of bed. It’s make-up and candles and Sabbath. It’s making love, not war. It’s loving trans folks more than I hate terfs. It’s doing my part to divest from harmful systems because of the love in my big femme heart.

FEMME MAGIC is believing in myself. It’s the practice of loving my own voice as I speak my own name. It’s believing in self-care, in self-love, and in the power of NO. No to patriarchy. No to bigotry. Still, femme is YES. Yes to empathy and enthusiasm and saying back off.

FEMME BEAUTY is stretchmarks on my skin and my heart. It’s also laughter and hope and setting boundaries with people that threaten my well-being.

FEMME ART is cutting off all my hair and letting it grow out again. It’s performance. It’s big gorgeous eyebrows and making peace with body hair because guess what? Sometimes femme is being hairy and proud of it and that’s wonderful.

FEMME HONOUR is sewing on my femme badge, making magic happen by making femme friends. It’s self-preservation. It’s breaking free from shame and choosing community. It’s finding that I am welcome to be who and what I am. FEMME. 

Femme is CELEBRATION. It’s being unapologetically myself and letting others be themselves, too. It’s witnessing my community with awe. It’s FIREWORKS. It’s worshiping the ground butches walk on. It’s seeing butches loving butches and femmes loving femmes and loving them forever. For me, it’s badass butch and fierce, fabulous femme, united in the struggle, in the glory.

Femme is GLORIOUS. It’s also gentle and wholesome and healthy. Femme is healing from trauma and believing survivors. Femme is standing with your sisters, always. Always. FEMME stands alone. FEMME is everything.

Femme is everything God has ever promised me. It’s tiny mustard seeds sprouting in the cracks of my own soul. FEMME is watering the cracks.

Femme is thank you, thank you, thank you. To my fellow femmes, you model grace and guts and anger and forgiveness and your own gorgeous selves, reminding me that being femme is miraculous and holy and also smokin’ hot!!!

FEMME is taking up space. It’s honouring the space that others take up. It’s warm hospitality and writing self-love letters. Femme is generous and it’s all food is good food and femme is LOVELY. 

Surviving the ugliness of hatred and dehumanization? Doing it beautifully? Knowing you matter, knowing it in your bones???

FEMME

Femme is amen, hallelujah, hello forever. It’s an eternity I want to be a part of.