radkindoffeminist

[radkindoffeminist]

Fuck is a PRAT

TERFs 🤝 PRATs

"Identifying as transgender is no different from identifying as transrace or transabled!"

.

[radkindoffeminist]

[radkindoffeminist]

I found that when I changed my sexuality on Tinder from bisexual to lesbian, that the number of men appearing on my supposedly women only feed dropped significantly. Like the creeps are still there, but there weren’t nearly as many as before.

If Tinder sees that you’re bisexual but you had your preferences set to women only, they will still try to show you men. I would always recommend just setting your sexuality on there to lesbian. Or deleting Tinder because it’s an awful app and online dating sucks.

(And before anyone comes after me for saying I’m a lesbian when I’m bi - I kept my listed sexuality hidden and had 🩷💜💙 in my bio so no one other than Tinder itself thought I was a lesbian.)

Like fuck I'm on tinder ofc I know about the male oriented bisexuals they're fucking everywhere and they're really annoying. Maybe some of them are literally bicurious straight girls. Unicorn hunters are super annoying and the ones who straight up *hide* the fact that they're looking for a 3rd are actively being predators. I would NEVER justify that or say that taking precautions to protect yourself from that is a problem.

But if you genuinely think judging all bisexuals as being centered around men isn't an issue and then you ALSO turn around and call older bisexuals in lesbian community spaces names when they label themselves differently because they're NOT male oriented and DON'T want to be "open to men" in their sex lives then what the fuck do you actually want us to do?

[radkindoffeminist]

Trans women are men. Hope this helps.

I'm a radical feminist in that I'm rad, and support women's rights. ALL women's rights. INCLUDING TRANS WOMEN.

[radkindoffeminist]

It really bothers me when people say like ‘you shouldn’t do this to kids… unless you’re in poverty, then it’s understandable’. Like, yes, I get where they’re coming from in the sense that it’s different to treat kids a certain way because you cannot afford anything else and treating kids a certain way because it’s a lifestyle choice or whatever but can we stop acting like something that can be harmful to kids is not harmful when done in poverty? Can we recognise that something is bad for children and will continue to be bad regardless of if it’s done by choice or necessity? Can we actually for once acknowledge that children who are brought up in poverty are often traumatised from it?

The sorts of things that I see most commonly talked about and what I’m mostly referring to is like people who live in fancy caravans/motorhomes with minimal space and being like ‘there’s no privacy which is bad for kids… but understandable if you can’t afford anything more’ or sometimes I see it with food restrictions where they’ll say that it’s bad to limit something but okay if you can’t afford otherwise. Another I saw was about parents spending time with kids and being like ‘but it’s fine if parents need to work like 12 hours a day to keep up with expenses’ - like I get that’s what they need to do to keep the house over their head and food on the table, but it doesn’t mean that never having their parents around isn’t going to affect the children and their relationship?

I just feel the whole ‘everyone is entitled to and deserves to have children if they want to’ mentality seeping into these conversations sometimes and people seem to forget that children are people too and this stuff will affect them even if they recognise that it’s done out of necessity.

#very specific to it’s okay when you can’t afford it but not when you can’t

[radkindoffeminist]

Thoughts on separatism?

No

[radkindoffeminist]

🩷💜💙

🩷💜💙

[radkindoffeminist]

I wrote one comment copying what people had been saying to a woman on a different video-that she thought the world centred around her and that she was a Karen, and it got removed automatically. Still unsure what exactly triggered it because I doubt it was Karen. Nuts, maybe?

An incomplete list of things I’ve said on TikTok which have gotten my comments removed/reported (normally automatically)

Dummy

Dumb

Stupid

Idiot

‘Men are awful’

‘I hate men’

Pretty sure that homophobe/homophobic got me reported? Not being homophobic, just the word

I have no clue what specifically caused this constant auto report but I basically got reported for insulting straight people. Basically, a guy was arguing that all gay people are hyper-consumerists and specifically gay men because they take PrEP so they can keep going on Grindr and sleeping with random dudes. I responded with the same thing about straight people, but with birth control and Tinder. Every comment got blocked. Didn’t matter if I said str8 or BC or whatever, it got banned. No clue why. So insulting gay men over multiple comments was completely fine, but one response about straight people was not okay?

[radkindoffeminist]

Which radfems are treating suicide like a trivial thing? Because I have seen radfems who are arseholes and make death threats on a daily basis, but trivialising suicide? I didn’t think anyone went so low

I hate how radfems talk about trans suicide rates because they treat it like such a trivial thing. Like we just kill ourselves for the trend, because we just wanted to guilt trip people, or just because we didn't "get our way". It has the same energy as people who think it's "the easy way out" because it just completely ignores how serious ending your life is, how hard it is, how much of a dark place you have to be in, how real it is.

[radkindoffeminist]

[radkindoffeminist]

Proof?

JK Rowling is a holocaust denier

JK Rowling is a holocaust denier

JK Rowling is a holocaust denier

JK Rowling is a holocaust denier

JK Rowling is a holocaust denier

JK Rowling is a holocaust denier

[radkindoffeminist]

Obviously. They don’t hate themselves LMAO

I genuinely think that trans activists hate terfs more than pedophiles

[radkindoffeminist]

What were you expecting them to say? Like, you think people are gonna waste time responding to your stupid ask?

I'm just gonna repost this because apparently reblogs don't show up in the tags and this person is a clown

[radkindoffeminist]

The wording I was looking for on that last point was that the arguments presented blame women for their lower pay rather than looking at society wide issues:

They’ll say ‘women go into lower paid fields’ not ‘women are socialised from a young age to not go into higher paid fields like computer science and finance/accounting as well as being actively pushed out of these industries resulting in them ended up in industries with lower pay on average like teaching, nursing, care, housekeeping, etc’

They’ll say ‘women take more time off to look after their kids/are less likely to work overtime because of children’ and not ‘the burden of childcare is placed so heavily on women that it significantly affects their working hours whereas because men are not expected to carry the same burden, they are more likely to work overtime and less likely to take sick leave to take care of children’.

They’ll say ‘women take breaks in their careers for children/pregnancy’ and not ‘between natural limitations (women are the only ones who can get pregnant and have to take time off to recover from it) and the societal expectations of women to look after their children, women are more likely to have breaks in their career than men which then disadvantage them in their career progression and salary’.

They’ll say ‘women are less likely to be a manger/senior’ and not ‘between the career setbacks they face from pregnancy and leave for giving birth, working reduced hours/being out more to look after children, and misogyny in the workplace, women are less likely to be promoted and therefore earn less than men’.

Words are important. Understanding the difference between something passively happening to women and explaining the deep misogyny behind all of these points is important.

It really annoys me when misogynists bring up the whole ‘why wouldn’t everyone just hire women if they can get away with paying everyone less’ because this is such a simplistic take on a complicated issue and doesn’t factor in the following

1) Places already do this anyway. And then they enforce pay secrecy so women are unable to talk about their wages

2) It’s not always about who is cheapest to hire - it is also about who is going to produce the better quality of work and who is going to fit into the team better. In a team dominated by men, who did they think is going to fit into the team better? Another man. In a team full of misogynists who devalue women’s work, who did they believe will do better quality work? A man. Yesterday, I was watching a video where a woman said that she met another woman who was in charge of a team and openly admitted that she would not hire a woman to be part of this team because it would cause too many issues because of sexual harassment claims. These are things people will consider when hiring.

3) It’s simplifying the issue down to ‘all women are paid less than all men in all fields across all levels’ which isn’t true. Some of the pay differences are as a result of women in the same fields doing the same jobs as men but paid less (point 1), but a lot of it comes down the the following two things:

Women are less likely to be promoted than their male colleagues which is the result of many factors including inherent misogyny (thinking women shouldn’t be in leadership, thinking their work is lower quality, etc), women being ‘less dedicated’ due to family commitments, and taking longer to have similar experience to male colleagues due to time off on maternity/raising children

Fields that are dominated by women are lower paid overall, even when comparing to jobs with a similar educational requirement. Teaching and nursing are both jobs which require degrees yet are some of the lowest paid public sector jobs. Female dominated cleaning jobs (eg: housekeeping) are lower paid than similar male-dominated jobs (eg: janitor). Labour seen as ‘women’s work’ is devalued and therefore paid less

4) Whenever we discuss these other factors, like mat leave and taking care of the children, it’s always seen as an ‘explanation’ for why women are paid less, rather than part of larger socio-economic issues leading to women being paid less. Literally saw so many things when I was younger about how it’s only like 2p/£1 rather than 23p/£1 or whatever because once you factored in all of these things above you’d find men and women in similar roles in similar fields are actually paid pretty evenly, without recognising how those reasons themselves are part of the problem. Women are pushed towards lower paid fields from a young age (teaching, nursing, care work, etc). Women are the ones who take months off on maternity leave while men might take two weeks. Women are the ones taking career breaks to look after the kids. Women are the ones working part time or flexible hours so they can look after their children. All of these things have negative impact on women’s income and they stem from misogyny. They shouldn’t be ignored in gender pay gays discussions or used to explain why the gender pay gays isn’t ‘real’.

[radkindoffeminist]

your profile description is disgusting. "british"? fucking gross

This is the funniest anon I have ever received 😂😂😂

[radkindoffeminist]

there is a huge difference between criticizing an institution and criticizing individual behavior. i can criticize the makeup industry without criticizing the 14 year old girl who uses concealer because she’s self-conscious about her acne; i can criticize the plastic surgery industry without vilifying the woman who decided to get a nose job after two decades of pointed comments and bullying. it is intellectually dishonest to respond to an institutional criticism as if it were a personal attack; on the flip side, it is cruel and unnecessary to leverage personal attacks in the name of institutional criticism

if i see one (1) more person respond to a perfectly reasonable beauty-industry-critical sentiment with “but i personally enjoy eyeshadow. why are you attacking people who like eyeshadow :(” or “exactly, all women who wear makeup are miserable and brainwashed” i am going to climb a tree and bite the top of it

[radkindoffeminist]

It really annoys me when misogynists bring up the whole ‘why wouldn’t everyone just hire women if they can get away with paying everyone less’ because this is such a simplistic take on a complicated issue and doesn’t factor in the following

1) Places already do this anyway. And then they enforce pay secrecy so women are unable to talk about their wages

2) It’s not always about who is cheapest to hire - it is also about who is going to produce the better quality of work and who is going to fit into the team better. In a team dominated by men, who did they think is going to fit into the team better? Another man. In a team full of misogynists who devalue women’s work, who did they believe will do better quality work? A man. Yesterday, I was watching a video where a woman said that she met another woman who was in charge of a team and openly admitted that she would not hire a woman to be part of this team because it would cause too many issues because of sexual harassment claims. These are things people will consider when hiring.

3) It’s simplifying the issue down to ‘all women are paid less than all men in all fields across all levels’ which isn’t true. Some of the pay differences are as a result of women in the same fields doing the same jobs as men but paid less (point 1), but a lot of it comes down the the following two things:

Women are less likely to be promoted than their male colleagues which is the result of many factors including inherent misogyny (thinking women shouldn’t be in leadership, thinking their work is lower quality, etc), women being ‘less dedicated’ due to family commitments, and taking longer to have similar experience to male colleagues due to time off on maternity/raising children

Fields that are dominated by women are lower paid overall, even when comparing to jobs with a similar educational requirement. Teaching and nursing are both jobs which require degrees yet are some of the lowest paid public sector jobs. Female dominated cleaning jobs (eg: housekeeping) are lower paid than similar male-dominated jobs (eg: janitor). Labour seen as ‘women’s work’ is devalued and therefore paid less

4) Whenever we discuss these other factors, like mat leave and taking care of the children, it’s always seen as an ‘explanation’ for why women are paid less, rather than part of larger socio-economic issues leading to women being paid less. Literally saw so many things when I was younger about how it’s only like 2p/£1 rather than 23p/£1 or whatever because once you factored in all of these things above you’d find men and women in similar roles in similar fields are actually paid pretty evenly, without recognising how those reasons themselves are part of the problem. Women are pushed towards lower paid fields from a young age (teaching, nursing, care work, etc). Women are the ones who take months off on maternity leave while men might take two weeks. Women are the ones taking career breaks to look after the kids. Women are the ones working part time or flexible hours so they can look after their children. All of these things have negative impact on women’s income and they stem from misogyny. They shouldn’t be ignored in gender pay gays discussions or used to explain why the gender pay gays isn’t ‘real’.

#I will scream at anyone who says it’s supply and demand #that’s such obvious bullshit #supply and demand in labour markets is broken #there have been massive shortages in nursing teaching and care for YEARS #supply and demand would have doubled their salaries #but has that happened?