|
Dixon Chisholm posted:avoid the noid lmfao
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2023 01:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
Platystemon posted:Also her left hand
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2023 12:57
|
|
|
So what shall it be? Do you join the Unity, or do you die here? Join! Die! Join! Die!
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 03:37
|
|
|
Seaman reboot concept art looking great
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 04:28
|
|
|
Actually only trans women are women Cis women are a type of potato
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 23:03
|
|
|
broke: TERF woke: CERF
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 23:05
|
|
|
Trans people had to put in the work to prove their gender. Cis people could be anything and just haven't changed the default settings.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2023 23:18
|
|
|
She pretty much figures out from first principles that the TERF argument boils down to TERFs viewing literally everything through their own personal experiences being the only valid ones. And a Pratchett quote comes to mind; 'As soon as you treat people as things to be measured, they don't measure up.' There's a reason the transvestigators all immediately go off the deep end. There's no way they can't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 06:43
|
|
|
terf ideology fairly logically spins off from identity politics because if youre going to take the position that only women are oppressed then of course youre going to have to start nitpicking what a woman is
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 07:16
|
|
|
Ash Crimson posted:We're at pussy phrenology, people Following on from the above, she's now going horny on main over cops involved in the latest shooting https://twitter.com/KEBrightbill/status/1641162439323529216?s=20 Disturbingly, she's also a fan of abusing corpses https://twitter.com/roguelib/status/1640610195561762817?s=20 absolutely unhinged stuff
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 08:08
|
|
|
She did this one earlier.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 08:14
|
|
|
her "advocacy" is going to get cis women assaulted and killed because cis men seem to think being with someone they suspect is a trans woman is enough justification to use violence
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 08:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1641261748962447361quote:Women’s rights activists slammed the conscription exemption idea as only benefiting men, claiming that the problem was not the low birthrate but discrimination. when i mention identity politics being a naturally toxic influence on feminism that terfness is just an extension of this is the kind of crap im talking about
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 23:10
|
|
|
could it be that men being forced to waste two years of their lives being tortured by a nationalist male hierarchy encourages them to identify with a misogynist culture that makes them insensitive to the needs of women? no men just intrinsically hate women and deserve to suffer
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 23:16
|
|
|
Wombyn
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 23:26
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:terf ideology fairly logically spins off from identity politics because if youre going to take the position that only women are oppressed then of course youre going to have to start nitpicking what a woman is I admit that this doesn't map to their views on trans men. That seems to spiral off into pure alien abduction/Pizzagate style narratives where an alien conspiracy is torturing and mutilating people for reasons that are unfathomable (but always come down to sexual sadism).
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2023 23:33
|
|
|
Posting Rowling content in the Rowling thread https://twitter.com/tragicbirdapp/status/1641865976613330945
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 12:11
|
|
|
Which is which?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 12:20
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/JewishWorker/status/1641897723187142656?t=UUkJKsGRhxHr6Hid68iZAA&s=19
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2023 13:15
|
|
|
broke: women suffering under oppressive beauty standards woke: https://twitter.com/gyude_moore/status/1648475420445261824 men suffering under oppressive beauty standards
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2023 07:28
|
|
|
A new issue of The Don’t Buy List went out to paid subscribers earlier this week and in it, I briefly touched on 81-year-old Martha Stewart's Sports Illustrated cover. My general takeaway: It doesn't count as “celebrating an aging woman” if you're celebrating her for still looking young and fuckable. (I’ve written about this before. A lot. Over and over.) When I posted my POV on Notes, though, I got some interesting, ignorant, and absolutely unhinged feedback that turned my 11s into deep, deep wells of concern for the future of feminism. To clarify why Stewart’s SI cover is not radical — not bad, not upsetting, not a disaster for the political advancement of women or anything, but also not a triumph for anyone other than Stewart herself — here are those responses + my replies. “There's something to be said for keeping your fuckable going for as long as it can go, don’t you think?” No. (Especially when defined by Sports Illustrated standards — as continuously molding and remolding the face and body to meet the Western beauty ideal, a process that siphons participants’ time, money, energy, and headspace; poses significant risk to their physical bodies; and contributes to appearance-related anxiety, depression, dysmorphia, disordered eating, self-harm, and worse. No, I do not think there is anything to be said for keeping that process going as long as it can go!) ”We are an unabashedly uncomplicated and utterly predictable species variant, we males. Thus the solution comes down to a rather simple equation: Hit That > Not Hit That.” LOL PLEASE. I am not in any way referring to the male response to this image. I’m referring to its ageism masquerading as age inclusivity. I'm referring to the way it’s being championed as feminist and empowering and exciting, and what that means for women and beauty culture. (My analysis: Nothing new, nothing good.)  ”It’s okay for me to think something like ‘Wow, I’m impressed at how physically attractive Martha Stewart continues to be, given her age,’ right?” As an individual, it’s fine for you to think anyone is attractive at any age for any reason, I guess. As a society, it is immoral to uphold a narrow, impossible physical ideal as “beauty” and then punish women — socially, financially, and/or politically — who don’t comply. I am almost always talking about the latter. “A more impressive triumph might be a woman of the same age appearing on a magazine cover and being celebrated because of her expertise and achievement rather than her physical appearance.” I mean, I’m fine with anyone being on the cover of any magazine and being celebrated for any reason, so long as we tell the truth about it: Here, Stewart is being celebrated for remaining conventionally attractive well into her old age thanks to significant cosmetic intervention and investment. We need to stop pretending this kind of thing is revolutionary. I’d be very into this cover if the headline read something like, “Octogenarian Illustrates How Submission To Beauty Standards Is Always Sexually Appealing To Those Who Have Been Conditioned To Find Women Who Comply With The Patriarchy’s Aesthetic Demands Attractive (Even If They Don’t Realize That’s Influencing Who They Find Attractive & Why)!” “Your post has raised the question for me of how much fuckability is permissible for us gals as we get older? Where is the personal and collective set point around how juicy and vital we’re allowed to be? I’m 61 ½, and people routinely tell me I look 40. Never got work done, have never done much except live a happy life, and yet … is it okay to be hot and fuckable as a genuinely happy person?” Of course?? Lol. I do think it’s important for us, individually and collectively, to shift the focus from looking fuckable to doing the actual loving (if that’s what you want to do) though. One is aestheticizing life and one is experiencing it. Like… Wrinkly, fat, disabled, average old people with age spots and dentures gently caress too!  “She is a complicated character who is forever pushing boundaries, and maybe this was something on her list she needed to check off?” Sure! That's the impact of this cover for her as a person, on an individual level, which is uninteresting to me. I'm interested in the cover’s collective impact on beauty culture, ageism, sexism, etc. (Which is: It does not change the conditions of those oppressive systems for the better and in fact, strengthens those oppressive systems. And again: Not every action a public figure takes has to materially change beauty culture for the better!! That’s not my issue here. My issue is that Martha and the media and the general public are insisting this cover is inclusive, feminist, collectively empowering, a step forward for age equality, etc. when it is not. My issue is that we are kidding ourselves. My issue is that when we claim poo poo like this is liberating, we obscure the actual work of liberation.) “If she had appeared on a different cover, say on Vanity Fair or the New Yorker, would we be as pissed off about it?” I am not pissed off. I am rationally critiquing a mainstream magazine’s contributions to beauty culture, because that is my job. But also: When Stewart was profiled in the New York Times earlier this year, I wrote an article saying pretty much the exact same thing about systemic ageism, and how her individual ventures do not help the collective cause. So yes, I would react the same way, and I did, here. “I don't think she looks young, I think she looks good for her age.” Looks good for her age is another way of saying Looks younger than people her age normally do. This is classic beauty culture rhetoric. Different language, same ideology. “An older woman I know says, ‘Stop saying I look great for my age. Just tell me I look great.’” Hmm. I’m hearing, “I don’t want you to evaluate my worth based on ageist beauty standards anymore, because ageism negatively affects me now! I still want you to evaluate my worth against whatever racist, classist, ableist, fatphobic, etc. standards continue to privilege me, though.” “It is a GOOD THING to look ‘good for your age’ because it means you are in good health, fit, agile, etc. Ask any primary doctor.” No. This response — which assumes health, fitness, and agility are and should be associated with one very specific aesthetic — is bursting with beauty culture conditioning. So is the medical system. “My grandmother, who died at 100, told people she was in her ‘mid 80s’ because she looked so good for her age. The reason is she got up early every morning and did an hour of exercise. She dieted her whole life so she maintained her weight. She also did her hair, dressed nicely and did her nails until the day she died — peacefully and happily. I walk in her footsteps and look good for my age.” What a lovely memory of a woman who internalized systemic ageism in such a way that she felt the need to lie about her age to the end <3
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 18:32
|
|
|
It’s like someone touting how progressive they are because they hire felons like Martha Stewart.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 18:44
|
|
|
martha stewart has been rehabilitated as a feminist icon for reasons unclear to me like the last scene of mrs maisel has a line that says she was unfairly punished for being a woman
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 19:04
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:martha stewart has been rehabilitated as a feminist icon for reasons unclear to me
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 19:06
|
|
|
love how both Radfems and Chuds hate the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit edition now
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 20:28
|
|
|
Ash Crimson posted:her "advocacy" is going to get cis women assaulted and killed because cis men seem to think being with someone they suspect is a trans woman is enough justification to use violence surely it already has happened
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2023 21:46
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2023 17:16
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/nytopinion/status/1667643438127370242
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2023 00:52
|
|
|
This month, state fairs across America are unveiling their butter sculptures. In Ohio, it’s inventors: Thomas Edison, Garrett Morgan, Josephine Cochrane, and James Spangler. In Iowa, the butter-sculpture displays feature athletes: Kurt Warner, Jack Trice, and Caitlin Clark. In Illinois, this year, it is a 500-pound cow. Butter sculptures are a popular novelty at state fairs because of their silliness, their dairy-based megalomania, and their sheer oddity, but the tradition began in the homes and kitchens of women, who for so long dominated the dairy trade. Ever since there has been a rich ruling class, they have been flaunting excess by carving food into ornate designs. According to the late Pamela H. Simpson, art historian and author of the article “Corn Palaces and Butter Queens: A History of an Unconventional Sculptural Medium,” archaeologists have discovered molds to shape bread and puddings into the shape of humans and animals from “Babylon to Roman Britain.” But the art form flourished during the Baroque and Renaissance periods. Simpson notes that a biography of the Italian sculptor Antonio Canova includes a reference to butter art as a table feature when Canovia, as a kitchen boy, carved a lion for a table centerpiece. Some historians dismiss the story as a myth, but by the 17th century the practice of carving butter into patterns and shapes was common on the tables of the wealthy and middle class in England, where dairy farming was widespread and the climate was a little more favorable (at least then) to keeping the butter cold. Until the Industrial Revolution, dairy farming was largely women’s work. Deborah Valenze, historian and author of the book Milk: A Local and Global History, notes that in the 18th century women’s responsibilities tended to be those located closer to the home, including duties such as milking cows and making cheese and butter while men worked the fields. As a result, dairy was a uniquely female enterprise. The work of an 18th-century dairy, Valenze, observes, “presented a world of labor, unto itself, topsy-turvy in its assignment of gender roles.” Women were the managers of the dairy and the merchants of their own wares. In her splendidly titled article "‘She Brought Forth Butter in a Lordly Dish’: The Origins of Minnesota Butter Sculpture,” historian Karal Ann Marling writes that the creation of dairy products was so much the realm of women that butter money was often the only money a woman could truly call her own. Similarly, sculpting butter became the realm of women. This ephemeral golden art, gently crafted into consumable shapes, was an expression of beauty and joy. When the Industrial Revolution expanded the manufacturing capacities of farms, it caused a boom in American agriculture. As the scale of the industry grew, so did the profits. And as the profits grew, Valenze argues, women were pushed out of the dairy business by men. Simpson argued that butter sculpting entered the mainstream in 1876, at the Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia, when Caroline Shawk Brooks carved an image of Iolanthe, a fairy queen from a comic Gilbert and Sullivan in front of a crowd of spectators. The exhibition happened on October 14 and coincided with “Alabama Day” at the fair and the annual meeting of the National Butter and Egg Council, which put forth a statement loudly denouncing the use of “oleomargarine.” It was, in part, an orchestrated political statement from a newly burgeoning dairy industry that was expanding with the use of manufacturing processes and advances in refrigeration but threatened by the emergence of butter substitutes. But more than a celebration of overabundance and agricultural prowess, the butter sculpture was a work of women’s art. Simpson writes that Brooks was heralded as an artist, and one historian at the fair noted that her achievement was significant because it demonstrated the “native” talent of a woman: “the lady had no instruction in the art.” Just as butter carvings captured the American imagination at state fairs, women were being edged out of the dairy business almost completely. But they still retained a monopoly on the production of food at home, and with it the skill of creating art from butter. Butter sculptures were a quiet way of finding joy in the drudgery, the humor and beauty in the often back-breaking work. So when America wanted to celebrate its prosperity and its centennial declaration that it was a world power, it was women who stepped forward to demonstrate the art of sculpting butter. Of course, men got in on the action, too. But this was an artistic field that women had created. The rise of butter sculptures was accompanied by that of other large agricultural displays — like corn palaces and towers of oranges. Between 1915 and 1925, Alice Cooksley, an English immigrant who married a dairy man from Illinois, displayed her award-winning floral butter sculptures at fairs across America. “Perhaps most people wouldn’t think of my work as art,” she told American Magazine for their July 1, 1927 issue , “but it brings pleasure to many who couldn’t be reached in other ways. To many a hard-working farm woman, butter means churning, lifting heavy cans, cleaning endless operators, backaches, and headaches. I would like them to think of my flowers the next time the work seems too hard.” Butter sculpting is an enduring art, one that attracts people to laugh and marvel, and to find joy in the subversion of a cow being carved out of its own cream, the silliness of seeing Jimmy Carter’s head carved out of butter. Simpson writes, “The idea of abundance underlies all of these images. The novelty of seeing something usually associated with small pats on pancakes presented in such gargantuan qualities as life-sized sculpture was part of its appeal. Only a land with an abundant supply of butter could afford to do such a thing–a fact not missed by those Britons who complained about the butter statue of Queen Elizabeth in 1952.” The fact that press releases and news stories even today emphasize the alarming amount of butter used for these sculptures drives home the point — we are a state that creates; we are a land that overflows with butter cows and honey.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2023 22:16
|
|
|
For the last week or so this lady has been getting TERFs to say some truly unhinged stuff about menstrual blood https://twitter.com/_celia_bedelia_/status/1690144161276551168?t=LwEql6yD8vc5ZZD93k06Cg&s=19 https://twitter.com/_celia_bedelia_/status/1689589543152836608?t=UA3_1ZjcEptQn0VGwVgzxw&s=19 https://twitter.com/_celia_bedelia_/status/1689847732553277440?t=wAw02WV7sw7BnOQsDOgA1A&s=19 It started out with someone contending that they don't want trans women in bathrooms (ofc) because what if they had to wash out bloody underwear in the sink, can't have trans women around for that, and the natural response to this is "why not" but the more interesting question is "what are you doing washing your bloody underwear in the sink in a public bathroom" and they've spent days and days doubling down on it repeatedly
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 22:35
|
|
|
as batshit as this probably sounds thats actually a third wave feminist idea about how menstrual blood being unclean in certain cultures is evidence of patriarchy because menstrual blood is completely uncontroversial and wholesome its a pretty stupid idea is why i was surprised when it started to come up again in the fourth wave in the context of asking why public womens bathrooms dont have free menstrual toiletries if youre wondering why some women have decided its actually cool and good to wash bloody undergarments in public sinks
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2023 01:05
|
|
|
Meeting my husband was like grabbing onto the landing skids of the last chopper out of Saigon. Looking back, that was the actual moment I narrowly escaped life as a clueless pagan, a half-baked feminist with mostly fuzzy ideas about what was best in life. By the time I met him, I was a fresh convert to political conservatism, but my nascent right-wing leanings had not yet translated into any meaningful changes in my personal life. I was still a “social” liberal, which I mostly interpreted as being very, very social. As Ben Orr sang in my second-favorite Cars song, “Let’s Go,” “I like the nightlife, baby.” Yes, I assumed I’d get married “one day” and yes, I wanted to have kids “one day,” but I was not in any kind of hurry. I had places and parties to go to! There was zero urgency about the future. The only future plan I cared about was what I was going to do that weekend. It’s embarrassing to admit that I was not 22 or 25. I was 28! In my new book, Domestic Extremist, I describe my reaction when I found out my husband had highly toxic masculine attitudes. He was the first conservative besides my parents whom I’d ever met. When I discovered early on that he was also a social conservative and (trigger warning) pro-life, I was dismayed and shocked. Horrified, even. You don’t believe in women’s rights? You want us to stay barefoot and pregnant all the time? How dare you! But somehow, it had the opposite effect on me. As I wrote in my book, “I suddenly discovered that there is something very attractive about a man who wants to convince a young woman that babies — her future babies, perhaps even babies he wants to have with her — are precious and must be protected. It was a display of confident masculine energy I had rarely encountered among the skinny-jeans hipsters, waxed metrosexuals, and louche Ivy League grads I was used to dealing with. This man wanted to protect children ... my children ... our children. Swoon! Forget Mr. Big: here was my Mr. (Far) Right! A man willing to risk his new chick walking out the door because he defended a child’s right to live is a man who will defend his own child. By the time we got married the following year, I was already dabbling in domestic extremism and planning to have children as soon as we could.” When I saw the viral TikTok video a few months ago where a young liberal feminist laments the fact that the only masculine men she ever meets who know how to treat women properly are “MAGA Republicans,” I felt validated. Young feminists are just waiting for these guys to win their hearts! The open question is: Are their hearts already two sizes too small? Have they been pickled in the acidic brine of shrill man-hating for too long, or is there still something left? Do I want to condemn Generation Z men to a fruitless pursuit of shrill and sterilized young feminists? No, I do not. And I also don’t want young men to hide their inner Ken and pretend to be a woke ally in order to find their Barbie. My point is this: Let your Ken flag fly, fellas. If she is appalled, then she is not your gal. Don’t ever “feminize” yourself to appeal to a woman. Her liberal indoctrination may demand it on paper, but in reality, it will always be a turnoff. And never, no matter what, tell anyone your pronouns are “he/him” when you are obviously, visibly male. That’s like admitting people might not be able to tell right away! It’s not hard to find women. You just have to try to find some who are open to hearing you out. If she likes the cut of your jib enough, she’ll give you a shot. You just have to bring the rizz; let your youth or whatever else you got do the rest! Need some free dating tips? Here are some easy conversation starters to woo woke women: “I take care of my body, and I can tell that you do, too.” “Your name is [her name]? That’s really pretty. I want to name my firstborn daughter that.” “No, I don’t use dating apps. Never had to.” Drop subtle hints that you’re not like other guys — you know, like their male feminist allies who rely on high-dose intravenous Viagra when it’s their turn in the nonbinary polyamory house to service one of the housemates with a front hole. Try it! Locate a fresh-faced lass who looks like she still identifies as female and has most of her original body parts intact. You might find her gawking at a campus Slutwalk, or parading in the nearest Women’s March, or at a Lizzo concert. Approach her. Compliment her. If enough good guys deprogrammed enough fertile young feminists, I wouldn’t have had to write my book. Would have saved me a lot of trouble, believe me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 00:09
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 00:30
|
|
|
quote:Drop subtle hints that you’re not like other guys — you know, like their male feminist allies who rely on high-dose intravenous Viagra when it’s their turn in the nonbinary polyamory house to service one of the housemates with a front hole. so you're supposed to tell her you're gay, gold star, and monogamous?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 02:06
|
|
|
quote:Try it! Locate a fresh-faced lass who looks like she still identifies as female and has most of her original body parts intact. You might find her gawking at a campus Slutwalk, or parading in the nearest Women’s March, or at a Lizzo concert. Approach her. Compliment her. I think that this is the most offensive line in the piece, but I will not be rereading it to confirm.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 02:16
|
|
|
She's too dumb to know "social liberal" is just a pointless label to hide behind while being an evil trash human being and thinks dropping it is some kinda insight.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 02:27
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:its a pretty stupid idea is why i was surprised when it started to come up again in the fourth wave in the context of asking why public womens bathrooms dont have free menstrual toiletries if youre wondering why some women have decided its actually cool and good to wash bloody undergarments in public sinks I missed something. Is fourth-wave feminism the "why don't we make women's health resources readily available?" side or the "how dare you, it's misogynist to suggest that my menstrual blood is anything but sanitary and delicious" side?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 02:42
|
|
|
its both of those things im not really sure why but free tampons in public restrooms only really becomes a talking point in the teens so its technically a fourth wave issue even if it has gently caress all to do with the internet which is how the fourth wave is usually defined as distinct compared to previous waves you can perhaps see how my facetious phrasing lends itself to internet logic tho since there are obviously better ways to make an argument for free tampons in public restrooms than saying that the patriarchy has an irrational hatred of menstrual blood the latter theory has its origins in menstrual blood taboos in tribal cultures but in addition to these taboos being more matriarchal than patriarchal they have basically nothing to do with contemporary sanitation practices in the developed world unless youre trying to win an argument fishmech style Some Guy TT has issued a correction as of 03:15 on Aug 15, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 03:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
It rules that these fucks can't keep it together for enough paragraphs to make a point and can never stop themselves from falling back into their psycho insanely online shibboleths. Nonbinary fuckhouses! Lizzo slut walk front hole! Intravenous soyboy viagra! I'm the normal one actually!
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 06:21
|
|
