I wish people would understand that I don't have a gender; I have a sex. I am not agender, or any of that other stuff, because I don't subscribe to the belief system that makes agender possible. I am not cisgendered because I hate the gender that comes with being a woman, and I would never choose to identity with that. The use of cis just makes victim blaming easier. It suggests that women who don't transition choose the gender stereotypes that come with being of the female sex. My clothes and personality are not some big statement. They are just me existing as a women who likes certain things. I hate hyperindividualism.
in domestic violence cases, males tend to get less time in prison because they murder their female partners with their bare hands; females on average don’t have the same strength and use weapons in self-defence which contributes to longer sentences (https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/feb/13/justice-is-failing-women-forced-to-kill-male-abusers-to-stay-alive). women should never be imprisoned for murdering their abusers or rapists. let Valérie Bacot demonstrate our expectations of battered women in the justice system.
there is really nothing "artistic" about putting foundation on your face to even out your skin tone, concealer under your eyes to hide your natural colouring, black gunk on your eyelashes to make them look longer, etc. and you cannot convince me there is anything creative about trying to make yourself look the exact same as anyone else. if you want to put bright red glitter on your eyelids that's your business but we all know that very few people are doing extravagant makeup looks on a daily basis. the vast majority of makeup is about ridding yourself of all imperfections and looking the same as everyone else, often at the expense of your skin, eyes, money, and time.
makeup is fundamentally about preying on women's insecurities and convincing us that our natural faces are not good enough. why don't the vast majority of men want to participate in this fun artistic practice? why are their bare faces considered acceptable at formal events, job interviews, workplaces, auditions, etc.? there is something inherently demeaning about the fact that an entire sex is expected to paint their faces to be deemed societally acceptable. men have convinced us that our natural faces are too ugly and offensive to be seen without a coat of paint on. it is insulting, demeaning, and the furthest possible thing from empowering.
and the other thing is that wearing makeup does not exist in a vacuum. when you buy another $50 foundation, you are lining the pockets of men who have built careers of off women's insecurities. when you fret about "putting on your face" before leaving the house, your daughters, nieces, cousins, friends, etc. all see that and internalize those messages as well. they are learning that their faces are also too offensive to be seen in public, and they will in turn teach that message to the women in their lives.
the rise of social media is the biggest evidence of this: for the first time, girls as young as 10 and 11 are buying and wearing makeup to school. and not only are they wearing makeup, they are GOOD at makeup. they have barely hit puberty but they've internalized everything they see online that tells them their bare faces are not good enough.
i'm tired of pretending this isn't insulting. our looks are not the most important thing women have to offer.
'The most terrible thing about pornography is that it tells male truth. The most insidious thing about pornography is that it tells male truth as if it were universal truth. Those depictions of women in chains being tortured are supposed to represent our deepest erotic aspirations. And some of us believe it, don't we? The most important thing about pornography is that the values in it are the common values of men. This is the crucial fact that both the male Right and the male Left, in their differing but mutually reinforcing ways, want to keep hidden from women. The male Right wants to hide the pornography, and the male Left wants to hide its meaning. Both want access to pornography so that men can be encouraged and energized by it. The Right wants secret access; the Left wants public access. But whether we see the pornography or not, the values expressed in it are the values expressed in the acts of rape and wife-beating, in the legal system, in religion, in art and literature, in systemic economic discrimination against women, in the moribund academies, and by the good and wise and kind and enlightened in all of these fields and areas.
Pornography is not a genre of expression seperate and different from the rest of life; it is a genre of expression fully in harmony with any culture in which it flourishes. This is so whether it is legal or illegal. And, in either case, pornography functions to perpetuate male supremacy and crimes of violence against women because it conditions, trains, educates, and inspires men to despise women, to use women, to hurt women. Pornography exists because men despise women, and men despise women in part because pornography exists.'
so i work in a restaurant and i do one thing that pisses of men so often, that they cant get me in trouble for, is adressing the ladies theyre with first. a couple will walk up to me and i look at the woman and ask her how many in the party, and the male will just look so surprised i didnt ask him
Trans women have not only expressed a want for uterus implant a functioning vagina implant too? Which dead women is signing her organ donations to be put towards this?! absolutely insane how trans women are more likely to freeze sperm if a they could steal a women's uterus!
I am listening to Sylvia Plath and my coworker called her a terf. Now idk if she is I really don’t care because she died in 1963 but he said I shouldn’t be listening to her because she’s a terf? Are we not supposed to listen to classics because someone in the 60s had controversial opinions? She’s dead she can’t hurt anyone anymore. Her books are literally classics. Like I just don’t get the whole cancel all art by controversial people.
This same coworker called Stephen king an alt right conservative who supports trump (which isn’t right and my proof is his Twitter account) so idk if I should listen to this coworker???
@nunyabizni do you know if Sylvia was a terf? I googled and nothing came up!
Book people do you know? Also what’s everyone’s opinions on consuming art and media by controversial people?
I’m still going to read Sylvia Plath her book is great! The bell jar is well written!
When did we stop acknowledging that dressing male children up as girls is deeply disturbing to them and is one form severe psychological abuse can take. Until very recently crossdressing your male child has been understood as severe psychological abuse. It's no coincidence that in the narrative of many serial rapists and killers feminization was a form of abuse they suffered. And now these gender fetishists are doing it to kids and we're supposed to clap and give woke points for these classic child abusers.
That we understand feminization as violent and cruel to boys but consider that emotional abuse fitting for girls is a different discussion for a different post on a different day.
I was at a swimming carnival the other day for my school and a lot of girls were wearing bikinis which had very revealing cuts. Now, before I begin, if you think that this post is going to shame these girls for wearing these bikinis, you are wrong. Me criticising a structural issue does not equate to thinking that the girls that wear them should be shamed.
I started talking to another teacher about the bikini bottoms and how revealing they were and the topic moved onto more feminist ideas. And I argued that they were a form of oppression because they were so revealing. As the conversation continued my colleague asked "what if the girls are confident in what they are wearing?" I always get a little thrown when I am asked this. I responded with "who benefits and who designed these bikinis." She conceded the point.
But I keep coming back to it in my mind "what if these girls feel confident?" And you know what, who cares. Who cares if these girls feel confident in these revealing bikinis? Oppression isn't individual, it's collective. I feel like the argument always comes back to this. Women's confidence. Not all the girls who were wearing these bikinis were confident. I saw several of them swap shirts with boys or wear a towel around their waist to hide them. I also saw several girls having to adjust them because they kept getting wedgies.
"What if she feels confident?" Women and girls feeling confident in their bikinis is great and all but it doesn't stop them from being a form of objectification. It doesn't stop making their bodies more available for men to view. It doesn't erase the fact that many girls feel pressured into wearing these bikinis because that is what is advertised to them. Sometimes these bikinis are the only ones available, so girls and women just have to settle for them.
Know what the boys were wearing? Boardshorts down to the knees. That was the main type of swimmers they boys wore at the carnival. The second type were the swim bottoms. But these are not comparable because the two pairs I saw both covered the boys' butts. It was interesting because the teacher asked me why wearing budgie smugglers was seen as less acceptable than what the girls were wearing. At the time I didn't have an answer but now I do. It's less acceptable because we are so desensitised to the objectification of women and girls bodies. We are constantly bombarded with images of women's naked or half naked forms. We are used to it by now. Men simply don't get the same treatment therefore when they do wear budgie smugglers it's something to gawk at or make a statement of.
Women and girls' confidence doesn't negate oppression. Oppression and misogyny doesn't happen on an individual scale, it's something that women as a class experience. Some women would have been content with not having the vote. Didn't stop it from being a systemic way to prevent women from participating in politics and how countries are run. Some women would have been confident being housewives. But, that didn't negate the fact that they were deterred from higher education and the workforce to do their so called duty to their husband and children. Something which is still going on to this day. As sad as this is, some women feel confident that thier husband's and boyfriends love them. This doesn't negate the fact that 1 in 6 Australian women will experience Domestic Violence. That 2 out of 5 female murder victims were killed by thier intimate partner. Some women feel confident in revealing clothes. This confidence doesn't stop them from simultaneously being objectified by men and also being shamed for being a slut or whore. Feeling confident while wearing makeup doesn't erase the fact that a woman is more likely to get a job if she is wearing makeup.
Confidence is not as good a clap back as people seem to think.
Have you ever thought about how much like the beginning of "The Handmaids Tale" America was before Second Wave Feminists? My mom had to have her father authorize her to have a bank account, an attorney she worked for had to cosign her first credit card. My mom was only able to divorce her much older, alcoholic husband, a professor of history at Northwestern because he cheated on her repeatedly with students.
That dystopia was the world my mom was born into and she like others decided it was unacceptable.
And what's really galling about that is Liberal Feminists take it all for granted all the while saying second wave/radical feminists are not "real" feminists, are bad feminists, and that they/we never accomplished anything.