international house of peaking

tired adult woman exploring gender critical stuff

[rabiesofficial]

Is it just me or is this comment insanely funny

[woman-for-women]

Pairs well with this

[spiderfreedom]

This has the exact same vibe as that FBI report saying it's hard to infiltrate anarchists because they are "scholars of history" and read too many books for infiltrators to keep up with.

[the-rad-menace]

Speaking of smart, well read women, here's a link to an extensive library of Radical Feminist writing! There's even a fiction section.

[fuckcrumpets]

“There is ZERO reason for [female-only] spaces to exist.” Okay.

[loserdogma]

What they meant to say was “there is ZERO reason for female-only spaces to exist that I respect.” There are thousands of reasons for female-only spaces, they just do not respect or value those reasons.

[doingitatmybirthdaydinner]

if males aren't any more unsafe than females, then go be with the males. go in the male bathroom and locker room, and the male college dorm. you'll be safe, because amab bodies are not unsafe and you don't have trauma from amab bodies. tell the males in those spaces that they won't be better for excluding minorities.

[lurknotes]

every damn time

[trans-masked]

If you find yourself suspicious of really basic feminist phrases or principles like “women’s rights” or “no uterus no opinion” or “end FGM/child marriage/coverture/bans on girls education” because you’re worried it might be a dog whistle for transphobia you need to get your shit together actually

[anjomecanico]

People are so indoctrinated by patriarchy that mentioning something neutral like "men on average are physically stronger than women" will get you accused of saying women are inferior to men. Like, nobody said that, you are the one who believes physical strength equals worthiness and value as a human being and is projecting it on completely neutral assumptions.

[capricorn-season]

[ilynpilled]

it is this 4ever everywhere u look

[capricorn-season]

[joannerowling]

Okay, i don't always reblog those (because they sadly get repetitive), but this deserves to be seen because of the video attached. It should be shown to anyone who ever says that trans identified males won't use gender ID to get access to victims. Listen to what this man is saying, starting at 0:50. He's VERY well informed about the power his legally obtained "female identity" gives him to masturbate in front of little girls (here it seems he was caught lurking around county recreation centers, which may include pools, fitness rooms, a gymnasium, etc) and threatens to sue the public servants who threw him out, for looking up his name in the publically accessible sex offender register and making the rational decision to ban him. This is not a mentally ill person, this is a man who is articulate, manipulative, and knows how to twist the law to his advantage.

[sangredesirena78463748-deactiva]

all afab ppl r guilty of transmisogyny but saying all amab ppl r guilty of misogyny is an unfair and violent generalization. weird how tht works, i think

[cdigoddess]

they just look like that

[kkoffin]

“women who disagree with me [feminists] are ugly, brutish and manlike hahaha!!” says the “progressive” “gender is a social construct” crowd

but allegedly said feminists are the ones who think “women should look like women” or are “attacking women for not fitting their beauty ideals”.

anyways. the reason why they aren’t conforming to ur beauty standards is because they don’t see gender non-conformity as a thing to be fixed. and because they don’t want to give thousands of dollars of their own money to misogynistic companies that profit off making women feel insecure. hope that helps

[guillotinafem]

bro code with a woker bandaid on it. males will always stick together no matter what 🧐

[biologicalbreakfast]

Yeah, someone called him out for it and he tried to backpedal but it's obvious by his responses that it's still just fucking bro code.

[evidence-based-activism]

I think part of why there’s suddenly so much “confusion” about what a woman is, is that it’s much harder to argue philosophy than policy. Because, you know, whether the people saying ‘female’ is such a nebulous concept really believe it or are just being disingenuous, they can certainly derail any conversation they’d like.

You can spend years in a philosophy class debating about the metaphysics of a chair, but if your boss tells you to purchase 100 chairs and you purchase 100 couches, you’ll both know you’ve done something wrong. 

But how do you argue something as basic as a definition with someone determined to ignore reality? If you hold up a pear and insist it’s an apple, insist the dictionary definition of ‘apple’ is incorrect, how do we advance in our discussion? If I relent and agree to pretend a pear is an apple, how do we discuss the differences between the two? If I hold fast, then you’ve stymied the discussion; we cannot make decisions or share opinions if we each believe the same word has two different meanings. You’ve created a language barrier within a single language! Defeated words’ very purpose! Blocked communication before it began!

Just think: every word in this post has a precise definition. If it didn’t, this post would have no meaning. And if this post made you angry, then know you already understand its basis. Just think: with no method of communication you could neither agree nor disagree with the ideas set forth, so, otherwise why would you be angry? 

[51g970n284-deactivated20220926]

What is a pear? It’s a fruit with small seeds that grows on a tree. It can be golden or green or even red. It’s sweet when ripe. You can cook with it and there are a number of different varieties. 

So this is a pear?

Oh, well pears have a distinct shape where they’re narrower at the top than the bottom.

So this isn’t a pear?

Pears have softer flesh than apples.

So this is no longer an apple? Is it a pear now?

Fruit is a social construct. 

[greenwire]

“Apples are genetically distinct from pears. Apple species come from plants of the genus Malus, while pears come from trees of the genus Pyrus”

“Oh, so now you’re claiming that you can tell, by looking at a fruit, what its genetic sequence is?”

[astronofeminist]

As soon as women start getting equal rights after much effort, the definition of woman changes. What a coinkidink

[pikafem]

This is so wildly homophobic I don’t even know where to begin. I feel so disheartened.

[old-school-butch]

Why are these people in the same community as gays and lesbians? This ideology is fundamentally hostile to our existence.

[transphobia-is]

transphobia is homosexuality. Example 5

[femclasscirce]

Isn’t this the TIM who started the barbie classism discourse

[friendlymathematician]

and they’re always using those little euphemisms to appear reasonable to people who don’t know much about trans ideology. it’s not “unfamiliarity of the body type”. it’s (depending on the person) somewhere on a scale from “complete lack of attraction to members of that sex” and “actively repulsed by members of that sex”. but it sounds more palatable to the general public to speak of “overcoming an unfamiliarity” than to outright state “overcoming a lack of attraction”.

[capricorn-season]

[quinntheestallion]

It’s true. Porn subreddits are the place you can have a “cis women only” rule and not get banned

[vifetoile]

i scrolled past this and then as it sunk in i found myself shaking with fury in my computer chair. all this talk about "sisters not cisters" and this is what they think of "cis" women. they think of us as meat.

[guillotinafem]

20 bucks this guy has a sexual assault charge under his belt

[uncertainwaters]

i am so exhausted with the idea that lesbianism is some sort of jealously guarded clubhouse rather than a description of the class of human females exclusively attracted to other human females. it is a descriptive term. all nouns are "exclusionary". that is how language works. if i call a sphere a round three dimensional object, i am excluding squares from the definition of a sphere. if someone started saying squares are also spheres, round three dimensional objects would continue to exist. at some point, you would need a word to describe them.

homosexuals don't stop existing just because you erode our language to describe ourselves. whether we are called tribades or lesbians or inverts, we continue to exist as a distinct class of human being.

even if you won, and "lesbian" was redefined to the point of having no meaning at all, at some point, we and those around us would observe that we have a distinct quality that we share in common: that we are females exclusively attracted to other females. and we would name ourselves yet again. we aren't going away. this neo-homophobia is the equivalent of jamming your fingers in your ears and closing your eyes and hoping the homos stop existing as long as you pretend we aren't here.

we're lesbians. we are still here. we aren't going to vanish. get over it.

[loserdogma]

I haven’t been able to get over the grief of all human history being held back by the subjugation of women and I actually don’t think I will. Could you even imagine. Thousands of years of recorded history and women have only just (not everywhere and not fully) been able to really get the opportunities that led to the men of history we all know now. Everyone knows Socrates but so few know Aspasia. The amount of philosophy, technology, theory, and humanity lost due to the oppression of women is a genuine travesty. I think of it all the time; how many geniuses were confined to the home? How many Albert Einstein’s were forced to be wives and mothers? How much of human history is corroded by the subjugation of women? All of it?