[radfemwuornos]

there is NO radfem more unshakable than an ex/current SWer radfem. you will never understand the rotten, disgusting underbelly of masculinity the way someone does when their literal survival depended on catering to it.

this idea that women just “choose” SW on a whim or because they’re wanting to cater to the male gaze?? delusional. at least 90% of women end up there because they don’t have other options. this is my personal opinion as a former sex worker who used it to escape homelessness. most of my co-workers were single mums struggling to feed their kids. full stop.

and YES you’ll see women online saying “i love it, i chose it, it’s empowering.” but you’re forgetting: that’s the JOB. the fantasy is the product. the whole point is to make men believe it’s fun, empowering, and a choice.

and sure, there are always tourists who get tricked into thinking it’s quick cash because of what they see online. but they find out real fast that the “fantasy” was NEVER meant for women. it was always, always meant to lure in men.

[sichorean]

Some of the most horrific injuries I ever saw on a woman in the shelter were from pimps and sex buyers. I will never *ever* budge on my stance on this. Men who think they have the right to purchase women's bodies think they have the right to violate and harm those bodies, it's all a matter of control. Some of these women told me that sex buyers paid more to their pimp so they could brutalise her without him getting involved. The only things these traffickers would get upset about is harming the woman in a way that made her "Unprofitable".

The industry kills women, some by outright murder and some far slower and more insidiously, but it kills them all the same.

[azspot]

Earlier this month, a German court ruled that Google is liable for its AI search summaries. Rejecting defenses like “users can check for themselves,” and that they generally know “that information generated with AI should not be blindly trusted,” the court held that the AI’s summaries are reflections of the company and “above all an expression of Google’s business activities.” This is the latest skirmish in a decades-old battle over internet publishing. Historically, there were two different types of information distributors: carriers and publishers. A phone company is a carrier. It’ll transmit whatever you say, even discussions about committing a crime. Words are words, and the phone company does not know—nor is it liable for—the words you choose to speak. A newspaper, on the other hand, is a publisher. It decides the words it publishes, and what quotes to include in its articles. If those words or quotes are defamatory or otherwise illegal, it’s liable...

AI agents are agents of the person or organization that deploys them—and should be treated by the law as such. If a company hired human writers to write its summaries, that company would be liable for inaccuracies in those summaries. If a company’s human agent signed contracts in the company’s name, that company would be bound by those contracts. And if a doctor gave dangerously wrong medical advice, they would be liable for malpractice.

To allow businesses to hide behind the excuse of faulty AI in those same circumstances would be a massive handout to companies, and would introduce disastrous incentives for corporate misbehavior. Why hire human writers, lawyers or doctors when AIs are not only cheaper, but also absolve employers whenever they make a mistake?

We are rapidly moving to a world where AI-powered chatbots will be at the other end of all sorts of corporate communications channels. It makes no sense for a company to be able to honor its statements when it wants to and disavow them when it doesn’t.

Visa and OpenAI recently announced a partnership to build personal AI agents to, among other things, make purchases on our behalf. This is just one of many similar projects in the works, as companies race to provide us all with AI assistants. Will Visa take responsibility when its AI makes a purchase in your name that you don’t want? And if Visa won’t, why would anyone trust the system? Properly allocating liability is key to make this kind of thing work.

[shadycomputerpolice]

Fight patriarchy and fascism with your womb?

One of the non conservative/liberal criticisms I see against antinatalism is that good people need to have children, raise them with their ideology to make the world a better place because conservatives are having children. The idea is for "good people" to have children to outnumber the evil conservatives.

People often say this about the 4B movement's call not to give birth to a world that will discriminate against their gender. I saw a comment somewhere of a woman telling 4B antinatalists that they are going to be discriminated against whether they have children or not so they should have children to raise them to fight against patriarchy.

First of all, I personally don't care what happens to the world after I die. And if I am going to experience discrimination regardless, then I would rather stay childfree and enjoy my life as much as possible.

Secondly, anybody who has lived in oppressive systems knows that numbers alone are not enough to change systems: you need power (money, weapons, political access and control, etc.). If you do not have power, you and your future descendants are not changing shit. You are only bringing in more people to be exploited by the system.

All around the world, the ruling class are the minority of the population and yet the majority is unusually unable to overthrow them without power (money, weapons, political access and control, etc.). And even then the system of a few ruling class repeats itself again.

Thirdly, what guarantee do you have that your child as an adult will keep your ideology? Many people who were raised religious are no longer religious, women raised by working women are choosing to be tradwives, boys raised by feminist mothers turn out to be misogynists and even rapists. As minors, you may be the primary influence on your child but as they get older, you will not be. Adults choose their belief systems.

In conclusion, your weird cult like plan of raising children in your image and ideology is flawed because ideology is not hereditary.

[butchfever]

[trash-and-trash-accessories]

I do want to note that the whole "women are allowed to dress masculine and wear trousers" thing needs to be viewed in its historical context:

People fought for generations to be allowed to dress that way. They fought hard to be allowed to wear pants. Blue jeans were a symbol of feminist revolution. Women were barred from workplaces and schools for wearing them.

This is not some a natural fact that women dressing masculine is less shocking and humiliating. That normalization was fought for and hard-won.

And yet so many people erase the struggles of those people who fought to make that happen and pretend that it's just normal and natural that people don't see women "dressed like men" as ridiculous.

The Marriage of Figaro has what's called a "breeches role" which is a woman wearing men's clothes playing am ale role. This was done partly due to the vocal range requirements, but in many cases it was done comedically. It was risque and sexualized or comic relief that a woman was dressed as a man.

Anti-suffragette posters mock women wearing pants - well they were bloomers and split skirts back then - and mocking more masculine cut styles of clothes. This was meant to portray this as ridiculous.

They mocked the "new woman" in Weimar Germany, lamenting that they were too masculine.

This is a political cartoon from the 1920s depicting a woman in masculine dress deciding which bathroom to use:

Sorry but you're erasing these struggles and flattening history when you say this shit.

Women were killed and institutionalized in the struggle to make this happen. It really fucking bothers me the way it's framed as "people just don't find it as weird when women dress masculine."

Yes they fucking did. Until women and transmasculine people fought for their right to wear what they want. It's normalized because people struggled to normalize it.

And it's not normal everywhere. There are many countries where it's still illegal for women to wear pants. Afghanistan, for example.

Even in the US, it's forbidden and considered ridiculous in groups like the FLDS, the Amish, and the Hutterites.

We are flattening and erasing the struggles of women when we say these things. I know we're trying to build theory here but you can't build solid theory on a foundation of lies.

[dailyhistoryposts]

The Original Rainbow Pride Flag (1978) by Gilbert Baker.

[pixeljade]

Just to be clear here, if you are TME and you are fantasizing about being TMA because we're "so transgressive", stop that line of thought. TMA folks die for those transgressions, and even those of us who don't die of it are punished to the point of extreme trauma for it. You can fantasize about it because you can, from outside, view the benefits of transgression without experiencing the negative consequences of it. It is EXTREMELY offensive to be painted as "so lucky" for something which has left me afraid to exist freely. It's like if you saw me complaining about my disability and said "Wow, you're so lucky that you have a disability, I'd love for people to fawn over me!", not only are you ignoring the massive negatives, but you're assuming a positive that doesnt really exist. So fuck off

[dapperprincess]

Just to be clear here, if you are male and you are fantasizing about being a woman because we're "so transgressive", stop that line of thought. Female folks die for those transgressions, and even those of us who don't die of it are punished to the point of extreme trauma for it. You can fantasize about it because you can, from outside, view the benefits of transgression without experiencing the negative consequences of it. It is EXTREMELY offensive to be painted as "so lucky" for something which has left me afraid to exist freely. It's like if you saw me complaining about my disability and said "Wow, you're so lucky that you have a disability, I'd love for people to fawn over me!", not only are you ignoring the massive negatives, but you're assuming a positive that doesnt really exist. So fuck off

[gendiebrainrotreceipts]

The scene in Tiptoe where the gay guy is like ‘you (the straights) are the ones who forced pronouns on us! You were the ones who constantly policed those who didn’t conform to gender roles!! So when we finally say ‘ok you’re right I’m not a real man, I’m a woman’ you’re still not happy!!’ Like…he’s not entirely wrong but why are you, the so called progressives, giving into the homophobic policing? Why are you validating the gender roles they’re all so obsessed with?

[gnomebutch]

Front page of Reddit was designed to ragebait me

[gnomebutch]

he needs to kill himself sorry

[gnomebutch]

[wontshaveforu]

today marks 3 years of Sarah Hegazi’s death. she was an egyptian lesbian activist who was arrested and tortured after raising a rainbow flag in a concert in Cairo, in 2017.

she was granted asylum in Canada after leaving prison and never really recovered mentally. she was isolated and depressed. she committed suicide on june 14th 2020.

don’t let anyone fool you that lesbians are the “less oppressed of the LGBT”. don’t let anyone fool you that our pain isn’t real. that straight men can suffer the same things as us because they said they are ‘queer’.

don’t let women like Sarah be ever forgotten.

[wontshaveforu]

4 years.

[wontshaveforu]

5 years.

[prodigalwitch]

the whole 'life begins at conception' argument is a patriarchal myth developed to place undue importance on fertilization (the male role) in the creation of life. especially when you consider that between 30% and 50% of fertilized eggs fail to implant in the uterus, and thus will never develop.

[prodigalwitch]

also, a note on the word 'conception'-- aside from pregnancy, conception refers to the formulation of an idea (a concept), again placing undue importance on the decision to ejaculate inside of a woman

[prodigalwitch]

and specifically in the religious environment i was raised in, conception (that is, the literal idea of a future human's existence) is ultimately God's decision, again stripping any agency from women in the act of creating life. two males decide if life should begin within you. this is why abortion is such a slight to the Christian male ego in particular. an abortion effectively demonstrates a male's material lack of possession of a womb he feels entitled to.

[g1rluninterruptedd]

“patriarchy hurts men just as much as women” let’s not lie. this irritates me so much because men “not being able to cry” or whatever will never compare to femicide. it will never compare to the amount of women brutally assaulted and murdered. it will never compare to the mistreatment women have faced in every aspect of their lives. don’t fucking even.

[torchestogether]

it actually infuriates me that we as a society have decided to medicalize and pathologize gender nonconformity

[tra-archive]

Yet again we’re seeing Michelle Obama get called a man and TRAs trying to make it all about them.

“Transphobia hurts cis women too!”

Do they seriously think this is transphobia?? They’re not calling her a man to be transphobic, they’re calling her that because they’re RACIST. When they use those insults, they aren’t thinking “ooh I bet those trans people will be so offended!” they’re aiming to offend Black women, not trans women.

She is an intelligent, strong, educated woman who has money and success, two things men hate women having (just look at how much abuse billionaire women like Rihanna, Beyoncé, Taylor Swift and JKR get from men). Calling her a man is a way to tear her down in the hopes of hurting her and other Black women who read those comments. It’s pure misogynoir. TRAs need to stop barging in on conversations that have nothing to do with them.

[lezstuffs]

[anjomecanico]

Mental hospitals being mixed-sex is a human rights violation

[magnoliamyrrh]

i think misogyny starts to feel like a lot more crazy of an opression when u process that we are half of the entire world population. half of all humans. and half of all humans have been systemically opressed by the other half in large swatches of the world for going on hundreds and thousands. h a l f. and we treat sexism like its somehow much less of an opression than other ones