yo, re: "that post abt how incels are just poor lonely men", if you're talking about the roadhogsbellyperson, he is very clearly Not defending incels? like idk if ur just hearing about the post second-hand but he stated, verbatim, "the problem with incels isn't that they want to have sex with beautiful women the problem is they view women as non-human". no part of that is defending incels or saying that incels are lonely and misunderstood or whatever. the post is just saying that wanting to have sex isn't somehow inherently evil and that sexual desire isn't evil and that people shouldn't be labeled "incels" simply for having a libido. in addition to this really puritanical attitude towards sex, the post was made to address the fact that there's this belief that anyone who interacts with sex workers is an "incel" or whatever, and that this mindset should be critiqued because demonizing those who purchase sex workers' labor and/or services is really just demonizing sex work itself. which is swerf rhetoric. idk how that post has gotten interpreted in such severe bad faith.
it's because he reblogged an addition which literally verbatim says incels are just lonely men whose only crime is making bad posts and then proceeding to say that people who try to pay for sex are actually worse than incels. which kind of undermines his whole thing. I feel like we're having a very colour-by-numbers conversion here because you can be making a fine, if pretty bland, point that wanting to have sex isn't a bad thing, but you can go about making the point in a way which is misogynistic (and incompetent). I was mad about the addition + the way he spoke to women (including SWs) who responded.
5 notes
·
View notes
Voltron was such a good show at first, it was literally one of my favourites. A part of me always wonders what would come of it if we didn't have all the fucking shipping drama because 1. Romance was not even a central plot element of this show about GIANT ROBOTS IN SPACE, 2. The character dynamics would have been so much better handled if there wasn't constant stress over people interpreting minor interactions as shipping-fuel. Like, if none of the big drama happened, we'd probably end up with a wonderful 10/10 show, but instead we got a show that starts off as 10/10 but ends up as 3/10 with an ending that makes me so fucking angry it's unbelievable.
4 notes
·
View notes
After that argument w my mum, and watching music videos of female pop stars in the early 00’s including P!nks Stupid Girls thinking about internalised misogyny but also where she was coming from with that song was right it as an outrage of how the world is set up for women to be praised for acting one day, but it was cruelly misdirected to women not understanding other women instead of the social pressures that reduce and push women to a stereotype - how unfair it was so many girls and women got made fun of and mocked by that song and video once again women having to answer for and appease too many people at once and thinking about how I criticise women a lot but because I want better for us, because I’m so concerned with women and womens issues and how much I love and care about women I think I’m realising womens relationships to other women or at least in my experience and with feminism is we have such high stakes in our relationships with each other that we are hardest to each other and most frustrated with each other because of it. Because we require more from each other since we don’t share the burden of gender oppression with men, in other women we are forced to see a reflection of ourselves, in ideas and portrayals of womanhood also. Women are not hardest on themselves, we are hardest on each other (?)
Does anyone know any essays or writers who have similar outlines and discussed a similar train of thought? I’d really like to read around this
5 notes
·
View notes
The thing about JD Vances 'cat lady comment' that gets a little obscured by 'you have angered the cat ladies' is that when asked about it he clarified.
And doubled down.
That it wasn't about cat ladies, but the fact that that they are childless, and the sense that someone who has no children cannot possibly have a stake in the future of this country.
I found out this year that I cannot have children. Not on purpose, not by accident, not by science and not by miracle. There is a fibroid the size of a grapefruit in my uterus that has given my reproductive organs so much trauma that there's no possibility of carrying a child to term. The only way to remove it is with a hysterectomy.
For me, this decision was easy. But when my gynecologist spoke to me about it, they gave me a box of tissues, expecting it to take a lot more emotional bargaining. They were surprised that the decision was so easy for me.
I don't want children. I never have. I never 'wanted them someday.' I will probably not adopt.
But I understand how many people do- and why the news of infertility would make someone upset.
When assigning a value to someone based on their status of parenthood, you are including people who want, desperately, to have children but for whatever reason cannot.
To say that I, or anyone without children, could be apathetic about the future of the country is saying the quiet part out loud. Perhaps he was unconcerned until he had children of his own. But the thing is, you don't have to have a family legacy in order to want good things for the future.
You just have to have a heart.
Which I've got.
4K notes
·
View notes