#also the weird thing turning this into a feminist issue

[doberbutts]

I saw someone claim that the reason some trans men turn to talking about transandrophobia (with of course the underlying implication that that's a bad thing) is because they're former terfs who have had their terfy social circles turn against them after coming out as transmasc and that's why they now believe that "men are oppressed" and so on.

I find this to be an odd rationalization that I don't really buy, but do you know if this is actually a common lived experience?

I mean. I have yet to poll every single trans masc talking about whatever word of the day we're calling our problems? I am literally Just Some Guy and I am also very much not the trans masc police.

But I don't think it's that common. I also don't think this was asked in good faith, but I'm answering it like it was anyway. It's just not really an appropriate thing to ask someone, and especially not when you consider that it doesn't really matter either way.

Like, yeah, any former beliefs you may have had may influence the way you theorize in the current moment, that's not an untrue statement. It's also really toeing the line on the same logic that terfs use that say trans women will never be rid of their "male socialization". It's pretty much the gender swapped version of "trans women that talk about transmisogyny are actually former incels" which is also just not an appropriate thing to say to or about someone.

Personally I don't think it's that weird that transgender people of any and all genders are positioned well to discuss the ways gendered oppression hurts us. Many trans people have experiences with being treated as multiple genders, sometimes simultaneously, and mostly to harm us. Discussing the ways that gender can be both sword and shield is often just a discussion of lived experiences. No radical beliefs necessary.

I also personally don't think that it's very prison abolition website of you to imply that someone having problematic beliefs, behavior, or social groupings in the past means everything they think of is now tainted beyond repair. I thought we wanted rehabilitation, not forever punishment?

I never called myself a terf, and the singular friend I had that did become a terf was kicked out of our mutual friend group for their shitty beliefs and was never invited back. I've always rejected radical feminism in all of its forms because I don't think it's kind or fair to blame entire demographics for systemic issues, nor do I think entire demographics are somehow incapable of causing harm along systemic lines just because they also experience that systemic oppression.

I may not have known the correct words for the label at the time, but I have always been a black, intersectional feminist. From the time I learned what "transgender" was, I have always been trans-friendly. Even before I figured myself out. So this rational not only doesn't work with me, but it also is pretty offensive all around.

[honeyjars-sims]

2.2 Cool Girl

Johnny: What’s going on? You seem a little stressed.

Chantal: I’m itching. It’s that stupid lube.

Johnny: Uh, ok, that’s a little more information than I needed.

Chantal: I didn’t put it there. I had to write some reviews for some of SNOOT’s sexual health products, so I tested one of the lubes on my wrist to see if it seemed ok. But now my skin is all inflamed.

Johnny: Gross, are you allergic to it or something?

Chantal: I don’t know. I don’t usually have sensitive skin, and this seems different somehow. It’s almost like a burn.

Johnny: Weird! What’s in that stuff anyway?

Chantal: Here’s the bottle. I should’ve known Ambrose would be putting weird shit in her products.

Johnny: [reading on his phone] Uh oh. Looks like you’re not the only one having this problem. Listen to this review: “They should call this Satan’s Lube because my cooch is burning like hellfire.”

Chantal: Are you serious? Let me see! Oh, God. [reading] “This stuff gave me a bad chemical burn. My sex life is ruined!” What the hell? This is terrible! I can’t put my name on a positive review of something like this. I’ve gotta call my boss.

Johnny: Did they post your review already? 

Chantal: No, I sent it in for approval a little bit ago. Hopefully he sees where I’m coming from.

Johnny: Writing reviews for the company you work for seems sketchy anyhow. Have you asked your boss about doing something different?

Chantal: Not yet. He’s been pretty receptive to my ideas so far, but I don’t want to be too pushy.

Johnny: You don’t want to be pushy? You spent our entire childhood telling all of our teachers that their classroom management skills sucked and explaining how to run their classrooms for maximum efficiency.

Chantal: Well, this is different. If I play my cards right, I could be at this company for a long time. I want to make an impression, but I also have to know my place.

Johnny: Wait, your boss isn’t the guy that you have a thing with, right?

Chantal: I don't have a thing with him. We’re keeping it professional. Why does that matter anyway?

Johnny: I don’t know. I just hope you’re not doing the “cool girl” thing where you’re being overly agreeable so a guy will like you. That’s some dumb shit that Mom would tell you to do.

Chantal: That’s not what I’m doing. I just want to be a good employee. Besides, I don’t think being agreeable is a bad thing. A lot of guys get intimidated when they see how driven I am. Maybe I need a softer approach.

Johnny: That’s because those guys think they’re “alphas” and can’t stand the idea of a woman being independent and successful. You don't want that type of guy anyway.

Chantal: Oh, I didn’t realize I was talking to the World’s Best Male Feminist. You’re reading way too much into this. All I’m saying is it’s good to have a little balance. Why don't you go hang out with your girlfriend or something?

Johnny: Ok, I’ll go see my girlfriend that I respect as my equal. I hope playing it cool with your very professional boss works out for you.

Chantal: Oh, don’t worry, it will. Jackass!

Johnny: Love you, sis!

Chantal: Love you more, bubs!

[Chantal calls Nico]

Chantal: Hi Nico, I’m sorry to bother you, but I need to talk about my latest review.

Nico: Sure, Chantal. I just got it approved for publishing. What’s up?

Chantal: Well, I and a lot of other people experienced some unpleasant skin issues after using the Come Together couples lube set. I just figured Ambrose would want to look into the issue before any positive reviews are published. It wouldn’t be a good look for the company if something turns out to be wrong with the product, you know?

Nico: You’re right about that! Thanks for letting me know, Chantal. I’ll reach out to Ambrose so she can find out what’s going on and I’ll make sure the review doesn’t get published. Good looking out!

Chantal: Anytime!

Previous | Beginning of story | Beginning of chapter | Next

#they fight but they love each other #ts4 #the sims #sims 4 #ts4 story #simblr #sims storytelling #sims story #simlit #ts4 stories #stksafeharbor #sh:chapter2 #sh:chantal #sh:johnny #sh:nico #safeharborstory

[hang-on-lil-tomato]

Article From 2022.

just to remind folks about putting showrunners on a pedestal.

Joss Whedon was a god back in the day. Buffy, angel, and Firefly, Serenity, as well as his amazing work on various superhero franchises when they also ruled the world. we thought he was a “male feminist” who cared about women’s issues and LGBTQIA representation. It certainly was reflected in his work.

but that was on camera. Behind the scenes it was a whole different story.

his downfall was deep. He lost so many fans, and we moved on. He also lost his status in Hollywood and in the profession. He can sit on his piles of money, and I’m betting he’ll make a comeback eventually.

moral of the story: showrunners may be good at many things. But they all have feet of clay. They’re only human, and we don’t see the BTS while they’re collecting their praises.

the deep disappointment I feel at Izzy’s bizarre and ill timed, tone deaf death brings home to me how expectations can be dashed,

it’s supposed to be a frickin COMEDY, at least that’s how it was sold to us. (Would max give them a bigger budget if they told them it was a drama with comedic elements? Which is what it often turns out to be.).

not saying David or Taika or any of the higher ups on OFMD will turn out to be a Joss Whedon. Just saying what we see on the surface isn’t what’s really going on.

so, just to manage expectations and bring some sad reality into our fun.

I don’t expect a 3rd season. Max seems to be all about sabotaging the show. I’ve lived through this many times. The marketing is a hot mess. The long time before announcement was weird. Using the fisherman scene as a teaser isn’t exactly a sell point for general audiences.

As good at most of OFMD is, I can’t help but feel seriously let down by a bummer ending. It’s a GREAT show marred by that glaring misstep.

#ofmd #our flag means death #ofmd s2 spoilers #ofmd s2 #disappointed #showrunners #the izcourse #izzy #izzy hands #David Jenkins #ofmd season 2 #joss whedon #fall from grace

[the-blissful-one]

The Barbie Movie

So there has been a few days since the premiere, I have a few thoughts. Spoiler alert, for anyone who hasn't watched it. Also, long post alert!

I really liked the movie. It was funny and witty, and they way they just did things was really smart. I think it was smart to go with actors that are in the 30-40 age range instead of people in their twenties. It wouldn't have been the same and since this was a movie for adults mainly....it just made us relate to the characters more.

It was funny to see the intentional bad editing when Ken crashes into the waves and flips in the air. It really set the universe that these are just dolls that get played with...and that explains the sometimes weird movements and positions.

I also think it was great that the movie was more of a satire-movie of other movie tropes and Barbie itself. Had they taken themselves "serious", it wouldn't have been as funny or enjoyable. Like the chasing scene in the offices. It's clearly a hit to chasing scenes in other movies where they can literally reach other, but it has to look intense and hard. Plus when a movie or a tv-show is self aware, It's immdielty a ten points for me (as long as they dont oversue it).

What my problem with the movie was...or perhaps something I would have done differently is the speech of the mother about what women have to do to look attractive. I think the movie could have gone without it, but then I do think it would be a "backlash" of why they didn't talk about it. I think it would have been fine if they touched onto the issues, but the speech was a little too long and just weird to point out that it was only on women.

It was also a speech only about looks. Like feminism in the west (especially in the states) have taken a turn for the worse. We still need feminism in other parts of the world, where women need rights. Right to talk, right to wear what they want and not get beaten when they don't wear a head piece, where they can be independent and doesn't get promised away. Where newborn girls don't get killed just because they are a girl.

And the movie decided to point it light toward beauty standards. Why not point out real feminist problems and situations. It was just so shallow. I don't deny that men have put a lot of these standard in place, but women have too. I think now days, in the west at leas- women put more pressure on women. And women also put pressure on men. Why touch on the topic and not cover the whole problem???

It was very radical tiktok feminism in the move. If that is a way to explain it. I thought it was little unnatural how the teenager just unloaded onto Barbie when they fist met. I think it was because when my friends and I grew up and played with the dolls, they were just dolls with cool clothing and funny houses. It was just play. We knew we didn't look like that, but we didn't care. I think the whole barbie promotes bad beauty standards did comes from adults watching themselves not look like Babrie and then projected that. I am glad we have Barbies in different shapes and sizes, but acknowledging were it the dissatisfaction with the doll came from wouldn't have taken anything away from the message.

Through the movie, we see different types of Barbies, one in a wheelchair, one obese, all of them in different professions. Which I think it's fine and Barbie has all of these sides with her. But the Ken's were all like Calvin Klein models, had all six pack, were tall and just conventional attractive and the movie only shines a light on how women have too look to be attractive to be "respected".

Like, the pressure on boys to look a attractive, is immensely high. I think it's just as high as on women, just in a different direction. It doesn't need to be a competition on who has it worse. That is why i think the speech-scene was executed badly. She talked about that women have too look like this, but not too much, they have to be good at this, but not too got. Which are true, but when you have half of the cast already as a "victim" to beauty standards; it was just weird.

That kind of also falls into my next point. I have already seen that the obese barbie have gotten some backlash. I think it's fine that they had both her and the barbie in the wheelchair. But I think this was also executed badly too. If they wanted to sell the message that Barbie could look and be like anyone. Why only have one doll that has that body type or those physical handicaps. It just kind of stuck out like a sore thumb in a way. And it also just got highlighted because all of the Kens looked like models. Why not have an obese Ken. Or a Ken in a wheelchair. Or more than just one obese barbie. Why not have a few and let them to their thing as background characters- and then we see that Barbie can be anyone. We just see that they included those character because they had to. I think if it wasn't for the raise of the (toxic) body positivity movement now; they wouldn't have included an so overweight barbie. They kind of just did it because they felt like they needed to. I do hate when movies and tv-shows only have certain kind of character because they want woke-points instead of just telling a good story.

Another thing I turned my nose up at was when Barbie wanted to apologise for how she had treated Ken. She was met with resistance from the others (the mother, daughter and some of the others dolls). This is was I mean with the tiktok- feminism. It pushes the agenda that women can't do anything wrong and that self reflection aren't important. That women cant do anything wrong so why apologise when you have treated someone badly. They wanted to push that a women can do anything and are strong and powerful; but apologising to a man is a big NO NO. Like WTF. That is just childish. I'm glad that Barbie did apologise either way, but that message is just wrong. Growing up, also means that you need to see when you are the bad guy in someone else's story and then take action to fix whatever that is. Not say i'm perfect and then expect everyone else to not get hurt by you.

I did like that all of the Kens came together and was just all bros with each other at the end of the movie. That they weren't scared to hold hands and give a lil kiss during the Ken-song. It was nice. I did like the Kens as characters. It did really go well with the climax of the movie where both Barbie and Ken discovered that they could grown without being "defined" by each other...especially for Ken. I still wish they ended up together as close friends or something. I think we can still show characters growing and evolving, while they still chose to be surrounded by people who love and care for them. We see this tope in American movies a lot, where the protagonist decide to be alone and go out on adventure alone because that is apparently the only way to show independence. Not that independent is something you can be regardless of who you chooses to spend your time with. Did that makes sense...??? It's more on how it's shown in media that steers the characters action.

Overall, it was a very fun movie to watch and I will definitely watch it again. I just think a few things could have been though over twice or executed better. It was refreshing to see that most of the production just wanted to put out a good piece out there with a kind of tongue in cheek and self awake humour. I'm glad it wasn't anything more than that, but still tackled a few topics that both young and older adults can understand and relate to. Plus, it can be enjoyed by both poeple who had barbie dear to their hearts and people that doesn't relate too much towards the doll...and if people have a good time watching it; that is all that matters.

You are Kenough!

Nobody cares about my meaning, but at least this is my two cents on it. Enjoy your day and thanks for reading .

#barbie movie #barbie #barbie 2023 #ken #barbie & ken #barbie x ken #you are kenough #i am kenough

[16-jarrah]

barbie movie was kinda bad to be honest.

if you're super attached and sentimental abt this movie you might not wanna read this bc i don't really pull punches with this one. but here is my first impressions rant lmao. i might come back to it when i've collected my thoughts more and let it stew a little (and maybe see it a second time just by myself at home?)

the way the movie ended was really bad and it left a sour taste in my mouth (📌), but even from just earlier in the movie i already felt like smth was off. and i mean, it's not like i wasn't excited for it even if i tried to avoid a lot of the stuff to not overhype myself (and i usually like going in blind anyway). but even as the movie started i already got the feeling of, oh this is what kind of movie it's gonna be. and for the most part it proves that initial assumption right.

and by "this" i meant like.. a really shallow preachy "feminist" tone. y'know, those kinds of movies/shows that pretend like they're going to say something meaningful about a mature topic but they end up just being shallow and mostly filled with platitudes and such. it's just kinda weird cz i expected more. but it felt like the movie was just using every character as a direct mouthpiece to the audience, and it could still work i guess if they actually had something to say. i think the movie was kind of a mess. i don't know what kind of lesson i was supposed to take away from it at the end, especially when they just start word vomiting at you. at some parts of the movie i wanted to turn my brain off but i still paid attention in case it was gonna pick itself up but like, it really didn't.

i think the rest of the movie was ok. the cinematography was enjoyable still, but the writing was just. so shallow that i couldn't bring myself to fully say i had a blast watching it. it felt like it was more interested in going through a checklist/outline of feminist things to say without being interested in elaborating any of it. it felt like they had too much they wanted to talk about that it just felt scattershot; i feel like it would've had stronger writing if they had just picked a topic to focus on and spent more time with it. they had the chance to explore something more—heck, they had this pretty diverse cast, why exactly did it still need to be focused on "stereotypical barbie" if they really wanted to explore something else? plenty of movies have been successful with an ensemble cast... it wouldn't fix their issue of splitting themselves amongst multiple things they wanted to talk about, but it could help with the focus. maybe have one barbie deal with one topic or throughline then another barbie with another topic, etc. idk. i also found it weird to make a snarky comment about how "if the movie wanted to make a point about barbie not needing to be [conventionally pretty] then they shouldn't have cast margot robbie for this" and like?? you're right lmao. you don't get to be cheeky by saying "guess we were wrong about this one :9 shrug". if they weren't interested in addressing this issue then they shouldn't have just called attention to it in the first place. it just makes it worse. feels like saying "ha! you can't criticize us for this decision because we already did it first."

i also have a problem with the thing near the end of "how about normal barbie? barbie doesn't need to be extraordinary! why can't she just be a regular person?" umm. the point of barbie wasn't to make women feel like they should be extraordinary to be accepted?? the point of barbie is that anyone can BE barbie. you ARE barbie no matter what kind of path you choose. it's kinda like spider-man in a sense that, "anyone can be under the mask." ANYONE can be barbie. i feel like the movie made a strawman out of misconstruing the original intent behind the "empowerment" of barbie. the point of multiple versions of barbie and the different playsets and shit comes from the appeal that she can be ANYTHING you want her to be. who are you fighting against, movie?? that type of misogyny where women should excel otherwise they don't matter certainly exist in the real world but like, i feel like it's a bit disingenuous to pretend it's what the barbie franchise wanted to convey as well. (i am by no means a barbie toyline history expert so i'm open to be corrected on this.)

and the whole... storyline with ken/the kens?? like i get what they're trying to do, have "the boys get a taste of their own medicine", but it's just. It's Just Weird. what did they wanna accomplish with it? i feel like this movie suffers from a shallow understanding of how sexism and misogyny and toxic masculinity actually works... like "oh teehee what if men were the ones oppressed by women instead and women were the ones oppressing men?" but they didn't do anything interesting with it, they just switched sexes and that's it. it's still the same except you just switched the men and women label now. (and the movie has a very black and white view of sex and gender. but that's another point to discuss entirely.)

what makes it worse is that the kens rise to power because they craved more appreciation from the barbies, but then they get knocked down a peg by the barbies and they "lose" like they "deserve". like, what is THIS meant to convey if we try to use it as a parallel for real world feminism, if kens = RL women and barbies = RL men?? that women shouldn't demand to be seen and appreciated more by men and that if they try to take on equal footing and power they should get pushed back down the hierarchy or something??? like WHAT??? and even if you could argue that the kens lost because of their egos/pride/toxic masculinity, it still feels off. because yes, there is a certain "masculine brand" of being too prideful but like. anyone is susceptible to getting too egotistical for their own good. idk??? the way they just handle it is so messy. it's not even like, ambiguous in the "open for interpretation, there are multiple readings of this possible that all try to say something different" kinda way. it's ambiguous in the messy, "we don't know what we wanna say" kind of way.

another thing i wanna talk abt is the teenager character. and the mom character too. i feel like they could've done more with them tbh. they hardly feel like actual characters—the mom got more than her daughter, but the daughter is so stereotypically rebellious "i hate feminine stuff" teenager. so much of this movie feels like telling instead of showing. the mom feels undervalued and depressed and she's struggling. yeah, but so what? we don't actually SEE any of that. even if you can argue that the movie tries to tackle stiff happening IRL so it doesn't need to show any of that any more, that's just bull. you still have to establish the setting in your movie's universe and you still have to do actual character work for your characters even if they're meant to represent real people. ESPECIALLY if they're meant to represent real people. like yeah, we do get some flashbacks of her daughter not appreciating her near the start, but that's it. they're just flashes. and that wasn't her only problem that she mentioned. why didn't we have the mom try to pitch ideas to the executives early on, have that be her introduction scene? have the executives belittle her ideas bc they're misogynistic chauvinist asses? like yeah, from context clues of the whole boardroom being men we can see the irony there and we can tell they don't value women enough to give them positions that high up the ladder. but still, implying the lack of something is not as good as actually demonstrating the lack of something. i feel like it wouldn't have been that hard to include at least one scene of the mom pitching her ideas, and then cut to her scribbling sadly on the desk like she was when she was introduced cz they didn't listen to her.

the sentiment of "they hardly feel like actual characters" extends to the rest of the cast, too. like, i wouldn't expect something substantial and be disappointed if they weren't marketing themselves like "all barbies are important :) this is an ensemble movie :)" like no... not really. none of the other characters matter that much and they didn't get a lot of actual distinguishing features aside from their actual job titles. which just feels reductive lmao. maybe that's the point. maybe they're all just meant to be bit characters. but it just adds to the shallowness of the movie i feel like. just bc the point is they're bit characters doesn't give it a free pass for not going anywhere w any of them. i saw someone say they felt like all the other barbies and kens were mostly just there as set dressing and you know what? that's undeniably true. which AGAIN i maybe wouldn't have as much of a problem with if it weren't for how they marketed this movie.

the previous paragraph also ties into what i mentioned earlier abt the quip they had abt casting margot robbie (and by extension, ryan gosling) as the lead(s). like... why did the lead HAVE to be the "stereotypical barbie"? why did the white, blonde, presumably cishet* barbie (and ken) HAVE to be the leads? hell, the mom and daughter characters are women of color and they don't even do anything with them (aside from some jokes abt how the white dad sucks and is very inconsequential?). i'm just saying... it feels like the diversity casting (not just when it comes to being people of color but also in other areas, like having a barbie in a wheelchair and a pregnant "barbie" (even though she's not barbie) and whatnot) of the other barbies and kens was just that. Token Diversity. fodder for The Typical White Leads. idk. i'll say this again but if they didn't advertise themselves the way they did with all those barbie and ken posters making it sound like they were actually gonna give a shit about any of the other colorful cast of characters then maybe i wouldn't be this harsh with them. this didn't feel like an ensemble movie to me at all.

*(bc i don't think this movie was made with any genuine queer intentions behind it lmao. and ik people latch onto the aroace "coding" of the characters and like. if you're aroace and you like it then power to you. but i think this is more of a "technicality"/"by semantics" type of """coding""" so i honestly don't think it counts, speaking as someone who's some flavour of aroace)

idk i feel like I'M word vomiting now too. maybe i'm picking on this movie too much. but tbh it's just. eh. it just feels shallow. it's a shallow nothing movie tbh. it just feels like a movie filled with quips without any interest in exploring any of the topics they bring up. i wanna list specific examples but tbh it's hard to remember them because of just how overloaded it is, like they just keep shooting talking points at you but there's no meat to any of them. i wouldn't be this harsh on this movie if it didn't hype itself up so much. like, i WANTED to like it coming it. i WAS excited for it ever since it was announced, even though i wasn't a super fan and wasn't buzzing about it as much as most people were online. because it had a lot of potential behind it, but it ended up just. being a mess.

📌 i think it's funny that the ending (as in the last scene of the movie) left most people confused, but the most interesting thing abt it is the takeaway i got from my cis mlm cousin where he's like, "oh barbie chose to be a mother at the end and she's pregnant and that's why she ended up at the gynecologist". like. I Guess??? that can be your take??? but it's a weird scene to end your movie on.

like idk what i'm supposed to feel about it. she's a real human now because she has genitalia?? the genitalia was the last crowning step for her to achieve the "human" status? that's kind of reductive. she's a real woman now because she has a vagina?? that's just straight up transphobic. like. what am i supposed to get as my takeaway here with the last scene??

#guys i tried REALLY HARD to like this movie while i was watching it but i haven't felt this disappointed at a movie in a long while #and i didn't even come in with any expectations really. i just expected it to be ABOUT something and be insightful in some way bc of how #it marketed itself. hashtag feminism #op #barbie movie spoilers #barbie 2023 spoilers #barbieposting

[sapphsorrows]

“Closeted” bookish radfem-adjacent waayyy too into the YA booktwitters side and at one side I do respect Xiran Jay Zhao as like she does call some shit out that needs to be. Like the review bullshit she should be angry about.

But she is setting herself up for failure this way and it will bitr back. Like I have seen this mental superiority call out persona before. There was another “nonbinary” author Rin Chupeco who made a reputation of not being scared and calling out and being Woke, who than got “cancelled” for a take about use of slurs in historical books. Like the thing is everyone has one controversial opinion or did one shitty thing and when that comes out the payback will be bigger than when you… ironically what they say JK Rowing should do… shut up. Especially if you are so loud i wonder what you are overcompensating for and what you have in your own closet like all these peoples are probably the behind your back bullies they call other people out for. I think she did get close to being “cancelled” once as people got weirded out how she talked about her main poly ship. Like her book is YA, older-YA i think the main character are like 19 so technically adult but the border of it and she kept making if I don’t confuse her for someone else sexual jokes/comments about her main character and their poly relationship while they are barely adult and in the YA space which freaked people out. But i might confuse her for someone else and it led to nothing but i have it vaguely into my mind.

Also she is WAY TOO DEEP into gender brainrot like she is nonbinary with a statement “look everyone can be nonbinary if i could be a wizard with a beard i would but i am Not don’t invalidate” as she is like… 100% a woman to everyone who hasn’t heard her say she is nonbinary. I haven’t read her book yet but i’ve seen a passages going around from one of her books in which she is like “oh gender feelings” and it’s a excerpt of if i remember the mc wanting to rip of her breast as that’s the reason she is discriminated in the society she lives in and i’m just like “girlie that’s just sexism… you are describing an opressed persons reaction to oppression not magic gender feelings”.

And her book too is about sexism. I got an arc of it and I remember that she used the word SEX based opression in there to describe the foodbinding she refers to in the novel… not sure that made it to the final edition. But the fact that’s featured already. Also i need to still read it but i’ve heard her first book for being feminist, has barely any woman nevermind positive woman other than the mc. Like they just aren’t there or otherwise “submissive”. She has tweeted that book two has side characters lesbian and is going to go deeper into class solidarity and that it was on purpose the MC thought about woman that way as a deliberate character flaw but that we will see.

As last one beef i do have with her that she once tweeted about a “girls in the turning competitive world are using puberty blockers THAT IS THE ISSUE RADFEMS SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON AND A CRIME NOT POOR TRANS KID USING THEM” (turning like with trampolines if i have translated it wrong) while I’m just like… that’s such gender brainrot for me. As according to your logic teenagers can decide if they want puberty. While it’s a scandal and probably pressured by the coaches… according to Gender Logic this falls under body autonomy right? Maybe these teens ALSO have very intense feelings that they want to not age who are you to judge that their feelings are from pressure but no that is the wrong way to do it and dangerous compared to the pure totally-not-affected-by society trans kid feelings. Like it felt like such a double standard the fact that they could feel it was wrong in one situation but not the other was baffling.

.

#i do think she'll eventually get cancelled for things she's cancelled others for #live by the sword die by the sword

[autolenaphilia]

Misandry is not real part 2

Transandrophobia bloggers turning into outright misandry believers seems to be a thing. This is another example. Like they say that "transmisandry/transphobia" doesn't imply the existence of misandry/androphobia, but apparently it does. I literally found this via a link from the same blogger's "transandrophobia faq". This blogger just calls it antimasculism instead.

This is literally just the concept of misandry rebranded, as ey admits farther down:

"It exists as an alternative term to “misandry”, which has been heavily co-opted by anti-feminists, from it’s original use by pro-feminist men to describe the ways in which the patriarchy and gender roles harm men."

So yeah, antimasculism literally trying to make the concept of misandry palatable by re-branding. And it's use for feminist theory is doubtful, because as defined here it's hopelessly vague.

"Men and masculine people" refers to anyone who identifies as a man or with masculinity; see the concept of masculine of center"

Like this is literally the justly mocked "women and femmes" but masc, lol. Antimasculism is apparently a kind of oppression that affects cis men, trans men, non-binary people, gnc women, which is a wide net of people with different positions in the patriarchy and issues. Hell you don't even need to be masculine to be affected, "it also affects non-men and non-masculine people."

It's simultaneously vague and yet essentializing, positioning anyone "masculine" as having the same interests, affected by the same oppression.

The lens of there being some bias against men and masculinity in a patriarchy is weird and I don't think holds any water.

The examples of "antimasculism" this text brings up describe real problems but I don't think they are best explained by some kind of oppression against masculinity and men. It describes things that are already accounted for by basic feminist theory, and the analytical lenses of patriarchy and (trans)misogyny.

For example it mentions butchphobia as a form of antimasculism. But describing it as part of a general "antimasculist" oppression doesn't make much sense. Butch women's masculinity is disdained, but that's not because masculinity in general is seen as bad. That oppression is instead grounded in the patriarchal expectation that women should be feminine, marry men and have children. This is why butch lesbians are especially hated by our society (especially trans butch lesbians), and why trans women are exiled from womanhood because we don't have wombs. This is basic (trans)misogyny and the gender essentialism that upholds it.

The other examples of antimasculism are even weirder, lumping some very disparate things together. "Transandrophobia" is of course also "antimasculism".But it adds even more shit to the list.

For example, it sees men feeling limited by the masculine gender role and forced into "toxic, patriarchal masculinity" is also "antimasculism". The post lists things like "Masculine people being seen as inherently violent, unable to be soft or caring" and "Masculine people being pressured to not discuss their emotions or issues, or show any vulnerability except for specific circumstances/relationships" as antimasculism. It also has "Gender non-conformity from men and masculine people being heavily criticized (often accompanied by accusations of predatory behavior)" as an example of antimasculism (you might have alarm bells ringing about what is included in the antimasculism concept going off right now, and you are right, but we'll get to that later).

I have expressed my doubts about the term toxic masculinity before, but that's not that relevant. But there are so many problems with this framing. Like, this kind of pressure to adhere to the uncomfortable parts of masculinity usually isn't directed at "masculine people" in general, but men in particular.

But the bigger question is: Isn't this the opposite of antimasculism? It's people, but especially men being oppressed for not being masculine, or feeling uncomfortable with aspects of masculinity. They are not oppressed for being masculine, but for being unmasculine or feminine.

It's a sign of how over-stuffed the concept of antimasculism is. It sees gnc women and gnc men being oppressed and tries to explain this in terms of some bias against masculinity. It's not masculinity, but gender nonconformity that is the basis of oppression here.

All while basic feminist theory explains this as men being expected to be masculine and women are expected to be feminine, in order to reproduce the patriarchal system. Women are expected to be feminine and be mothers, and men are expected as part of hegemonic masculinity to use violence to control women (cis or trans) and various other dissenters such as gay or otherwise gnc men.

Another example the text uses shows the basic problem with the idea of antimasculism. "Black and brown masculinity being seen as extra threatening and dangerous, and being seen as lesser than white masculinity." Isn't this explained better by racism rather than some bias against men and masculinity? Because you know, white masculine men don't experience this, which they logically would if it was some oppression against manhood and masculinity.

And this shows the basic problem with any idea of misandry/antimasculism. Yes, men are oppressed. But it is not on the basis of them being male. It is due to things like racism (especially anti-black racism), homophobia, transphobia or ableism. Some men are unfairly and disproportionally seen as physically and sexually threatening to (white) women. But it is black men and mentally ill or otherwise neurodivergent men. (I discuss how autistic men are targeted by mainstream incel discourse in this post)

It's not men in general, which would be the case of antimasculism/misandry was real. It's instead certain men who are oppressed and viewed with suspicion and disdain, due to transphobia, homophobia, ableism and racism. And the oppression of other "masculine people" are better explained by (trans)misogyny (in the case of butch women, cis or trans, or butch transfems in general) or transphobia and nbphobia.

But I'm not done yet, because that's not all the oppression that is thoughtlessly included in "antimasculism". Remember those alarm bells I talked about earlier? They were justified:

"Transfeminine people and others perceived as men also have antimasculism used against them, due to their perceived proximity to masculinity."

Of course we fucking get "transmisogyny is actually misandry" too. i have written extensively about this in a previous post. But I'll explain it again. I have been critical up to this point, but genuinely dispassionate, but this is personal and makes me rage.

When you stop seeing us transfems as oppressed by misogyny and instead affected by your antimasculism/misandry concept of oppression towards men, because we are misgendered as men, you are essentially continuing that misgendering and transmisogyny that you claim to just describe.

It is a rhetoric that lumps in transfems with men and claim we suffer from the same oppression.

It does this by boiling down transmisogyny to how people perceive and interpersonal interactions with transfems, instead of a systemic oppression that makes us an oppressed class that has little in common with cis men (which we would have to be for this misandry/antimasculism framing to make any sense).

It gives transmisogynists too much credit, takes them at their word instead of looking at the effects of their actions. And their transmisogyny only hurts transfems. Men are not harmed by their actions. Men are not being shut out from public spaces by being denied the use of the bathroom or changing rooms, transfems are.

It might be phrased in terms of safeguarding "real women" from "predatory men", but that only means transfems. Like transmisogynists like Posie Parker are fine with men going into women's bathrooms with guns if they are there to kill trans women.

When transmisogynist of the radfem type talk about "men" or "males" in negative terms, they often mean transfems. Like how else can you read your average "gender critical" blog when it's 99% explicit transmisogyny about how trans women are bad, interspersed with the occasional general statement that "men are trash". In the context of the blog it's clear that the "men" the blogger hates are transfems.

A lot of people who are against terfs base their idea of them on stereotypes of man-hating rabid unshaven feminists from 50 years ago. But I have written elsewhere that the real problem with "terfs" is not that they hate men, but that they hate women.

The whole thing about trans women being "perceived as men" also ignores how transmisogyny often takes the form of a violent degendering. We are seen as failures both at being men and women, trash in human form, an "it" that it is fine to do violence against.

Transfems are not treated like cis men and claiming that is itself misgendering. Seeing our oppression as being due to us being "perceived as men" is calling us men with extra steps. We are not hated for any perceived maleness, but for our womanhood and femininity.

Fuck your attempts to convince people misandry is real, whether you call it that or not. And especially fuck your attempts to explain transmisogyny with it.

#my writings #misandry is not real #transmisogyny

[papirouge]

There’s something about every alpha masculinity account that screams “fed” to me. I really think these account are fake and ran by the fbi to monitor men online and who would be likely to commit mass violence. Other times it’s bots.

But really, look at how they cry about how men are gods on earth for women to forcibly worship them (idolatry God will strike down every man who calls himself the lord) and the need to protect children from leftist but will welcome Kevin spacey and man who preyed upon children openly all because they don’t believe in “cancel culture” unless it’s them. This is such a insidious agenda happening and it requires a lot of attention from Christians to avoid this.

That's an interesting theory

I also heart the one saying that the incel movement was incepted by old scrote trying to make younger men look as stupid & insane as possible so that women of their age be repulsed by them and instead consider dating older men on the basis they won't be as unhinged. It would make sense if older redpiller weren't as much demented as the younger ones. And it's not like they were good concealing their "opinions" those scrote are unable to have a normam conversation with a women not involving sex, breeding, female's "role" or some other redpill bs

These old scrote are much more cunning and calculating than they will admit. Andrew Tate proudly admits he has no issue lying and deceptive tactics with the girls he's trafficking so why his fans think he wouldn't do the same to them? 🤔

Now to come back to your theory, I definitely think the redpill movement is indeed a psy-op to divide society. What irks me so bad is that so called 'free thinker' media wil have no issue seeing this when it comes to race, and call the BLM movement "divisive" and breeding hate among society, but will say absolutely nothing about redpiller and their visceral hate against women. I'm thinking about Vigilant Citizen especially.. it's been a while I realized dude was shady but I realized he was definitely full of shit when he made an entire article to dunk on Barbie and its feminist propaganda that will destroy society🙄 (btw I didn't forget he never approved my comment on that article calling him out lmao Mind you, he's one of those whiny people asking for more fReEdoM oF sPeEch/truthers are cEnsOreD, but is unable to apply that freedom of speech on his own website🤡). Meanwhile he has yet to address the redpill movement and the well documented femicide attacks/shootings perpetuated by men who explicitly expressed their hatred against women. Is that enough to finally call the redpiller/mra movement "divisive" too?

VC loves making articles pointing out the occult symbolism anywhere he can, so...why didn't he say shit about Andrew Tate Russian guru who happens to be a black warlock? Or Tate xitter handle being COBRA Tate? If you look into it, dude has whole thing going on with snakes... What about his weird triangular hand symbol too. VC would've a field day making an article developing the theory that Tate is actually a plant seeking to breed chaos and gender wars - it would have made a lot of sense bc there's a lot of shady shit going on with Tate and how he's being wk'ed by the Conservative right when he's a British pimp living in Romania. Also wasn't his dad CIA? Reaaal shady shit going on... But VC won't cover that shit bc he's of his bias.. but don't worry he'll make a 567th article about celebrities hiding one eye and the awful LBGT+ propaganda because lf *checks notes* rainbow on a note book🙃

You'd think the way these people talk about feminism women were out there turning society upside down, hounding & harassing men....but nope. IDK for being so dangerous & radical, feminists seem to be very quiet 🤔 there's a reason those men have to look into movies and video games to claim oppression. The so called oppression they get from women doesn't translate IRL.

#answered

[antiloreolympus]

10 Anti LO Asks

(Note: All of these asks are before episode 206 (Season 2 finale) so some may be dated.) 1. The wild part to me about the "Persephone got approved Underworld citizenship" is it took what, a week at most? Even if you want to use IRL Royal examples, someone like Megan Markle would (if she had kept up the process) still need two YEARS to get approved of it at minimum which includes a lot of paperwork and staying in the country for prolonged time, but Persephone gets it in a few days with no process? Is there really nothing Persephone doesn't get handed to her on a silver platter?

2. "How to be a woke misogynistic :Add white before woman" I think this anon was tryna call antis misogynistic?? Which like. Some of the "criticism" ive seen is just people using lo as an excuse to be misogynistic against rs but most of it is genuine idk what they're going on abt 😭

3. ya know for claiming to be a "loving and supportive fandom with no drama" lo fans are by far the most cruel set of bullies i've ever seen, and I've been in a LOT of intense fandoms. and I can't even handwave these fans as just dumb kids, many of them are adult women who made a mid webcomic their entire world and would rather get a power high off the harassment and bullying of others who dare no obsess over what they do while still thinking they're "feminists". it's so weird 💀

4. Lol I love that the person typed that 'regular' people just drop it and move on when they dislike something. Apparently you're no longer a regular person for disliking and discussing a piece of media 😔

Anyway, LO can bite it. It's misogynistic and an insult to Greek culture among many other glaring flaws. The giant red flag of an age gap and power dynamic between them is one hell of a thing to defend y'all, and it's also a hell of a thing to praise 1 character for cheating but cheer on another character for doing the exact same thing 🙃🙃🙃

Also it's incredibly funny to me how LO stans are so so aggressive and condescending to us about disliking it when we're just minding our own business?? We ain't talking to you nor do we go out of our way to mess with your tags (tumblr is tumblr, y'know) unlike a few of y'all that I've seen specifically use the anti tag to start shit like a bunch of brats. We'll continue minding our own business talking about LO with both non-fans and fans who actually want to have a discussion instead of mindlessly praising it, and y'all should mind your own business. 

5. This comic loves to claim it’s pro sexuality, pro kink, and pro female empowerment AND anti purity culture yet loves nothing more than framing sex outsides of Hades as bad, loves to push Purity culture to make Persephone look like the best woman ever, loves tearing other women down for not being the “right” type of woman, and consistently shames others’ consenting sex lives as gross and weird despite the whole comic being an obvious stretched out mess of Rachel’s office setting DDLG kink. Like??

6. I mean I get why LO Hera doesnt murder babies and all but it is an issue RS rides off "I'm not trying to be accurate!" when she makes Hades the "perfect" guy and Hera and Persephone the most desirable/amazing with zero flaws but then turns around and goes "oh well I'm being accurate!" to make Zeus be super mega awful and just make up stuff to pin on Apollo, Leto, and Thetis like?? you can't have it both ways?? Like she obvs picks and chooses who gets to be whitewashed and who doesnt.

7. Go figure LO fans to make Netflix all but closing down their entire animation department and laying off hundreds of people to STILL make it all about LO. I have countless friends who lost their jobs all en-masse with no warning and a neutered severance plan (NF purposely made it be four WEEKS instead of four MONTHS), the majority of them and their productions by BIPOC and/or LGBTQ+ creators and they're only worried over well-off and employed Rachel? Fuck off. I'm so upset over this.

8. Completely and utterly disappointed at LO being nominated for an Eisner again. I think Webtoon has the power to just nominate it every year and ignore all of their other series.

9. Listen we all know every award is just marketing and we know damn well Webtoons just pumps the with money to nominate LO but we know damn well they're giving way more money to pump up their brand now because the Batman comic is so lazily made yet was ALSO nominated for best webcomic and they're like "one of our BIGGEST HITS big ethel energy is being printed!" despite it being one of their most hated series that is lampooned for bad art and writing. anyway they need to be taxed more.

10. HXP is such boring, basic mythology shipping. Get back to me when they give Isis x Osiris and Dionysus x Ariadne the respect they deserve.

#anti lo #anti lore olympus #lo critical #lore olympus critical

[happysadyoyo]

Text transcription since this person’s theme is objectively terrible:

happysadyoyo (AKA me):  Women give men the space to talk about their issues in feminist spaces challenge.

REDACTED: op is a transandrophobia/misandry truther, which should have been obvious from the content of the post

REDACTED 2′s tags:  #HELLOOOOOOOOOOOOOO DHSHDHFHJSJDJ #men NEED space in women's spaces or they die #also what the fuck is with transandrophobia truthers acting like its transphobic to consider a trans man......a man #like. be in men's spaces. what's the problem here.

What’s funny is they’re both basically proving my point here and also making some new ones for me that I find funny. Let’s try to go through them. 

It’s incredibly common to belittle and/or outright ignore male victims of things like domestic or sexual violence. There’s also far fewer shelters willing to host a man. You would think people would think about this considering how common it is to turn trans women away from shelters under the basis that they make the women there feel “unsafe.” 

Men are just as much victims of the patriarchy as women. It’s bioessentialist to say otherwise and, once again, hurts trans women in the process. 

Man it sure is weird how arguments barring men from having conversations in feminist spaces 

Oh here’s a random post talking about how MRAs actually make some good points even as they completely the wrong way about it.

And another.  And another. And another. Here’s a really interesting read about why someone who has done so much for women has become an editor on an MRA website. An interesting excerpt:

Pizzey didn’t fall out with feminism only because she disliked other feminists. There was also a fundamental political disagreement: She thought that the mainstream women’s movement treated men as the enemy, that women’s own capacity for violence was being understated...

I made my original post without regarding if a man is cis or trans. Interesting that 2 decided I was talking about trans men in particular. 

Not all, nor would I assume a majority, of trans masculine/male folks “pass” as men and thus they can be barred from the few male resources available. 

Trans men and masculine folks face unique situations that has more common ground with “women’s” issues than men: reproductive care, sexual harassment, misogyny, etc.

Finally, the fact that I specifically say give men space in feminist spaces to talk about their issues has once again gone unnoticed. It’s really funny, whenever I see backlash against this post that they’re assuming I’m trying to take away from women, like there’s only a finite amount of internet and we must parcel it out carefully lest the dirty men take too much. 

And the fact of the matter is, men do die without a space to talk about the things they face. Like. It’s that simple. They do die. And if we want them to feel welcome within feminism and not be led astray by the misogynistic MRA’s and manosphere, then maybe giving them some focus might be good actually? 

#transandrophobia #transphobia #feminism #feminist #transmisogyny

[radicalcoffeeclub]

Honestly I believe conservative women have more in common with us than we think. After scouring through some tradwife blogs I find many of them have been abused by porn addicted men or the sex industry. Mainstream feminism denies these problems so naturally they won't turn to feminism for support. I find I actually agree with these women on most issues (except abortion of course lol)

This is an interesting ask because you present yourself as though you're a radfem ("more in common with us") yet you out yourself when you say you agree with tradwife bloggers on most issues.

I will agree with you on one thing which is that conservative women are victimised by men, porn, and the patriarchy just like all other women are. Them ironically siding with the perpetrator doesn't protect them. I can also relate with mainstream feminism denying these issues, which is actually what eventually helped me discover radical feminism by driving me to read books about feminism, and I believe other women have the mental capacity to do that as well.

What conservative women have in common with feminist women is that we are all women living and suffering in a patriarchal society. However, that's where the common ground ends. I will try and reach out my hand to them, to persuade them to jump ship into women's liberation. But I will never jump into their ship just to be in a bigger crowd, and if radfems did that, there wouldn't be a radfem ship anymore at all. Conservatives make weird appeals such as these asks to persuade radicals to be okay with their ideas, yet conservatives will never be okay with radical ideas and will begin to drown and stomp them out as soon as their infiltration is successful. You give them a finger and they take the whole hand. That's why it's important to not give conservatives, racists, and other right-wing bullshit a voice in our radfem online spaces and that we continue addressing these issues when they surface.

If conservative women want community with radfems so bad, you're gonna have to critically address your conservative views and drop them. If you don't want women's liberation, if you don't believe in women's full humanity in all its manifestations, you aren't with us. That's it.

#I got this ask a while ago idk if this is the late egalitarian-princess as well or some other poor fool

[we-pay-for-everything]

Love you for giving us a space to vent about the issues with sp*ke/sp*ffy where we won’t get bullied💕

Have you seen the rush of people trying to portray spike as ‘woke’ and a feminist and stuff? It’s so weird, cause I feel like his misogyny is actually like an integral part of his character, and also cause Angel is right there?? Like Angel actually can admire women’s strength without fetishising them, and can deal with romantic feelings without becoming a sex-pest. And race-wise we’re shown that even back in 60s Angel wasn’t bigoted, whereas Spikes interactions with the Chinese slayer and Niki/Robin… aren’t exactly racist, but they kind of live in the neighbourhood. Like as an Asian girl, Spike’s “sorry, love, I don’t speak Chinese.” Quip as he killed her always made me uncomfortable, but granted I know that may be more of an issue with the writers and the overall lack of diversity on the show than Spike himself.

Sorry for the thought dump!

Ah, thank you! My blog is Bangel friendly and anti-Spike/Spuffy always! Spike and Spuffy shippers are welcome as long as it's not to tell me how wrong I am in my opinions lmao.

Apart from the few blogs I follow, I don't see fandom discourse, but you said doesn't surprise me. I remember reading things like that years ago. Somehow Spike is the cool, progressive rebel, and an ally to women, despite one of his greatest joys in life being killing slayers who are always women. I mean, I don't even see Spike killing slayers as misogyny per se since he was evil and slayers were his mortal enemy, but even with a soul he didn't do a single thing that could be considered feminist. He literally only cared about Buffy and isolated her from everyone else, such as her fellow female slayers/potentials.

Even if we can excuse Spike's actions as him being a soulless demon and not necessarily a misogynist, killing slayers (of color), creating the perfect, mindless Buffy robot to fuck and stroke his ego, turning Buffy against her friends, etc. are all misogynist and racist actions. Like you said though, they probably reflect the writers' misogyny and bigotry even more than Spike's.

I don't think we have enough evidence to call Angel a feminist, but he was infinitely better to women than Spike: he didn't mind that Buffy was stronger than him, he didn't underestimate women, he didn't vilify or sexualize women, he had female friends, etc.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and for loving my blog! <3

#ask #btvs #ats #anti spike #anti spuffy #angel #thanks for the ask!

[ooops-i-arted]

despite my issues with the show, i don't mind its visuals... at least most of the time. when filoni actually gives a damn and puts in the effort, it can turn out decent looking. but it does piss me off when i see the cheap looking costumes for hera and sabine and how underwhelming their adaptation is. i'm also not sold on the writing and directing for these characters. the weird jedi training subplot for sabine makes no sense and seems to only exist so ahsoka can have a student. why didn't filoni just create a new character then? the search for ezra should have been about the rebels characters and their relationships, but they need to take a backseat to this dull interpretation of ahsoka because they were thrown into her story.

why did filoni even bother having sabine, hera and ezra here unless he knew how popular they were already in the fandom and needed to give people more reasons to watch the show about his favorite oc? like did he feel that ahsoka and a cast of new characters were not enough to carry her own show, so now rebels are included just to be carelessly handled? its really disappointing.

even for ahsoka herself, i don't think the show did a good job of handling her own arc or internal conflict. the "lesson" from her reunion with anakin did not feel satisfying or earned given the lack of build up.

The Sabine thing confuses me completely, because if Sabine ever wanted to be a Jedi, why wouldn't she talk to Kanan or Ezra about it? Didn't she train with the Darksaber, so she'd have a chance to ask? If Ahsoka HAS to have an apprentice to continue her ~legacy~ or whatever, why not Ezra? He's still fairly young and could probably benefit from more training. Jacen Syndulla is RIGHT THERE and if he has latent Force powers, he probably should start learning to control them. Or (and this makes me want to vomit for the record) why not unite the storylines like Feloni clearly wants to do and have her train Grogu? Which will then be another stupid iT's pOeTrY iT rHymEs moment since Yoda trained Dooku & Obi-Wan so it comes full circle by another member of his species joining the sKyWaLkEr LiNeAgE. (Sorry to those of your in the fandom who enjoy it, I hate that stupid lineage thing. It just feels like forcing biological structure when the Jedi are very Found Family-coded and don't need to follow it.)

Honestly I think the answer is Filoni Thought It Was Cool. Anakin is the coolest, so he gets to be Ahsoka's teacher and have a flashback. It's cool to show off Hayden Christensen even though Kenobi did it first. It's cool when Gandalf is "reborn" as The White so Ahsoka does it too. Master & apprentice relationships are cool, Ahsoka needs to be Cool and have her own apprentice, shove the nearest character at her and make it a girl character so we can get Feminist Points. Just like Boba and Mando S3 got derailed by Filoni getting distracted by the newest, shiniest TCW character he could shove in. Because it'd be Cool.

#anti ahsoka show #anti ahsoka #anti filoni #if you don't have anything nice to say about ahsoka come sit by me lmao #asks anon

[angie-j-kay]

Okay, here are my takes from Barbenheimer, and the messages the movies seem to be pushing:

Spoilers under the cut.

Oppenheimer:

If you're autistic, have anxiety, or are generally sensitive to loud scary noises, be warned that this might set you off. This was very much a horror movie, disguised as a historical thing. Also, Christopher Nolan music is Christopher Nolany. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.

The great horror wasn't that the people involved were monsters, it was that they were just people. ANYONE handed enough fear and desperation risks becoming this. Yes, even you.

If the monster feels really, really bad about it after, is he still a monster? (Answer: YES, but you still paid to see this movie so now you're culpable too.)

A discussion of how responsible scientists are for what the powerful and cruel do with their inventions.

Ian Malcolm in the first Jurassic Park movie was right. "You were so preoccupied with whether or not you could, you didn't stop and think if you should!"

Hey, it's that actor I had such a crush on when I was 14 and wow, he got old, and OH SHIT I'M OLD TOO... It doesn't matter which actor I'm talking about, MOST of them were that actor to someone or other.

Florence Pugh has nice tits, and Robert Downey Jr. should play more villains. Also, David Krumholz is slowly turning into Alfred Molina.

Spoiler alert: BOOM.

Men suck.

Barbie: This one's gonna get me SO MUCH HATE, because y'all love Barbie, but I'm gonna do it anyway.

They told me it was an empowering movie for women and girls to watch. I went through the whole thing, and was rather insulted by this claim. Yeah, the idea of "women can be whatever we want" was repeated over and over, but the actual movie showed very little of that. Only the DOLLS got to be what they wanted, not the "Real Women."

Barbie not having a vagina is played for laughs, and the first thing that happens when she becomes a Real Woman (Yes, this is a plot point.) is... going to the gynecologist, with her new vagina and uterus. The Mattel board meeting actually had a man ask "I'm a man with no power, does that make me a woman?" How Tumblr hasn't caught the transphobia there is beyond me.

Ha ha, pregnant Midge! Loved that!

Feminism is important, because the patriarchy hurts... Ken. And the other Kens. Look, I get that this plot point was aimed SOLELY at the men who were watching this movie, trying to force them to imagine the role reversal and see how awful it is, but it doesn't change the fact that the main plot point of a supposedly feminist movie was clearly targeted at men. Like... come on.

Why is Will Ferrel here? You could have replaced him with a broken lamp in the corner and the movie would have been just fine.

I can't think of a single time that Barbie invited Ken's company. He pursued her, and she tolerated him because that was just sort of her role and she felt she had to. He respected none of her boundaries, just constantly tried to push past them. Then when he went full incel to the point of violence (Yes, I count brainwashing and enslavement as violence and you should too.) and she defeated him, he threw a screaming, public, self-hatred tantrum until SHE was apologising to HIM and consoling HIM, just a few minutes of screen time after a rant about how unfair it is that women are held responsible for men's bad behavior.

Ruth - "I can't let you become a real woman without you understanding what that means." Ruth - shows a montage of babies and motherhood, with some random crap tacked on the end in hopes that we won't notice that.

Being vocally angry about the patriarchy, racism, and enforced femininity is for dumb, angry teenagers with daddy issues who don't know anything about anything, and growing up into REAL feminism involves pink dresses.

The Velveteen Rabbit walked so that Weird Barbie could somersault while doing the splits.

I did cry when Barbie saw the old woman for the first time and called her beautiful. That was nice.

The boy bands of the early 2000s are finally explained.

The only way out of the patriarchy is by women talking to each other and working together, then... men saying they're sorry and totally promising never to do that again. Because that always works.

I mean, the movie wasn't terrible. It just wasn't made for feminists. It was made to get men angry enough to go see the movie so they'd have something to make angry podcasts about, in hopes that a few of them would start to think about what garbage they're spewing. Also, to sell toys, Hummers and Birkenstocks.

Also, I'm not sure this was Greta Gerwig's fault. This whole thing reeks of studio meddling.

OH, and men suck.

#barbenheimer #you're not gonna like this #hot take probably #HOW did I like Oppenheimer better? #feminism #tw transphobia #angie says trans rights not whatever the hell this shit was

[strange-aether]

Feminism that fixates on the whole... “wombyn are special spiritual beings because they can birth new beings” thing is weird and gross. That’s nasty, leave me out of it. Those ideas do not and will never represent me, and honestly they repulse me as an afab person.

That fixation on reproduction as a central idea of feminism ignores the needs of prepubescent girls, people who have had to have a hysterectomy for medical reasons, or otherwise have a condition that has either made them infertile or has made it risky for them to give birth, or people who just don’t fucking ever want to go through pregnancy.

Trying to turn “women deserve rights, because they are baby-machines” into feminism just doesn’t work. That’s some handmaid’s tale shit.

Reproductive rights, reproductive healh, and reproductive justice? Yeah, certainly. It’s important for every human being on the planet, regardless of gametes. If someone wants an abortion, a vasectomy, to hire a surrogate, to use donor gametes, have their tubes tied, buy condoms, have a hysterectomy, receive quality prenatal care, go on birth control... all of that is important human rights.

Reproductive rights are not just a feminist issue. While many (not all, but many) reproductive rights issues disproportionately affect women, it’s also a disability issue, and in many places there is a racial disparity in reproductive healthcare. And guess what? It’s also a trans issue. In many places, trans people are not allowed to medically or legally transition until they have undergone sterilization procedures. Trans reproductive rights matter.

So you can take your “blah blah wombyn blah blah baby-machines” bullshit and shove it. If you don’t care about the reproductive rights of every human being, you don’t care about reproductive rights.

#feminism #trans rights #disability rights #reproductive rights #reproductive justice

[katnissgirlsmakedo]

1, 4, 8, 18, 19 <333 a lot but I love the way you hate 🫂

1) the character everyone gets wrong

i already said arthur but since you didn’t specify a fandom i will use this space to complain about the shadowhunter chronicles <3 nobody on earth understands my girl isabelle lightwood it’s sick and twisted. i can’t even think about how bad the tv show fumbled her it makes me so angry i want to start screaming. like. congratulations everyone you fell for the femme fatale front she was putting up… even the people who were supposed to be writing her and understanding her character it’s ridiculous like none of that is what cassie wrote and i read…

4) what was the last straw that made you finally block that annoying person?

again i already answered this but one time i blocked someone because their icon looked really weird and they spam liked and it freaked me out seeing their icon so much. me when i’m so normal and nice i guess.

8) common fandom opinion that everyone is wrong about

WHEN BBC MERLIN FANS. actually i could finish this answer right there couldn’t i… no i’ll finish for real. when bbc merlin fans are like ohhhh why did the show do (insert widely known story beat from centuries of legends) like girl it was ALWAYS going to happen that way that’s the point….. mordred was always going to turn on arthur, morgana was always going to become evil, etc. yes there are issues with HOW the show did that stuff (meaning they did it in such stupid ways it’s laughable) but that’s the story… it’s BEEN set come on…

18) it's absolutely criminal that the fandom has been sleeping on...

can i say that i think all fandoms (on tumblr) really sleep on straight ships or is that an insane thing to say. like sometimes i don’t care if that man was homoerotic with his pal and it’s insane that you care more about that than his awesomely written relationship with his girlfriend/ex fiancée/some kind of love interest. ok this is about izombie this is about liv and major. i don’t care about major and ravi!!!!!!! major and liv are literally endgame grow up!!!! but no this is also true for every fandom ever. the way people ignore a man’s canonical female love interest if he has even one ounce of gay tension with some other dude in the show is ridiculous idk

19) you're mad/ashamed/horrified you actually kind of like...

i guess i’m supposed to say ben barnes shadow and bone here or whatever. but i’m not actually mad about it because i’m a born apologist and knew this would happen. but i feel like i’m supposed to not like him. or i’m supposed to like him but righteous fandom people think it’s activism to not like him and therefore they would hate me sooo much because i formulate my own opinions with nuance and depth or whatever. also rumplestiltskin once upon a time. robert carlyle you got to me man… i could write essay length posts about that character actually don’t get me started. also i finished this question, saved the draft, and then another ask reminded me of the wilds, so i should also add that in hindsight i’m very embarrassed about the way i acted about the wilds season 2…. like i can’t believe you all let me act like that about men. in the feminist lord of the flies show…. why was i allowed to do that seriously that was sick….

#luv u tee 🫶🫶🫶🫂🫂 #asks #lonesomedotmp3 #ask game