the USA (untameable shrews of america) brings you the coochie queens of connecticut. irl radical feminist group. want to join? message @clit-club for more info as you cannot DM blogs with multiple moderators.
You know the people that are absolutely horrible to be around and have maybe even abused others, but then they decide Jesus has saved them snd they’re a born again Christian now?
Gender transition is that for leftist men. Both groups treat it like a rebirth. The fact that I’ve heard TIMs defend the shitty behavior of other TIMs by saying they were just acting out and were frustrated because they haven’t discovered their true self or started estrogen. The defense of Jax from TADC, which I refuse to watch, I’ve seen more than enough posts about that stupid show. The people who had a 4chan “phase” who refuse to be accountable for any past (is it really past?) bigotries or people they hurt.
It really is just abusive shitty person -> born again Christian, pink gender flavored.
terfs celebrating that the international chess federation has banned trans women from competing in women's FIDE competitions, because it's sooooooo feminist to argue that women are so biologically inferior and nowhere near as smart as men and thus can't play chess on the same level. girl that's not feminism that's literally just misogyny
I know you’re not looking for an answer but the reason chess sometimes still allows women’s only tournaments has nothing to do with women not being as good at chess, but because chess is such a predominantly boys club where men vastly outnumber women in competitions, and many male chess players are still quite dismissive of women players.
So women made their own chess teams where they could compete together but also didn’t have to worry about sexism from other male coaches and male players.
In fact, we find that gender bias inhibits women chess players; when women are told they are playing against men in online games, for example, they consistently play les aggressively, because we all still live in a sexist society and yes that even affects how we play chess. When women think they’re playing against other women they revert back to aggressive play. (And let’s not ignore the historic dismissal of female chess players by male chess players. Bobby Fischer’s “women are not so smart” quote for example)
So yes. We still allow women to have separate chess competitions, because at it turns out sometimes “equal opportunity” doesn’t actually lead to equality, even in a game like chess.
A vast majority of all chess tournaments are still open to all, coed.
"One study even found that the more men there are taking a maths test in the same room as a solo woman, the lower women's performance become. And, surrounded by men, she herself may come to grudgingly believe that women are indeed naturally inferior in maths.
The mind turns from a focus on seeking success (being bold and creative) to a focus on avoiding failure, which involves being cautious, careful and conservative. A mind that is struggling with negative stereotypes and anxious thoughts is not in a psychologically optimal state for doing taxing intellectual tasks.
Stereotype effects have been seen in women who: record their sex at the beginning of a quantitative test (which is standard practice for many tests); are in the minority as they take the test; have instructors or peers who hold sexist attitudes or have just watched women acting in air-headed ways in commercials."
Delusions of Gender by Cordelia Fine
Add to that the pressure of having to represent all women: indeed, every time a woman fails against a man it is held as proof of the unfitness and inferiority of our entire sex. I also remember a study that showed men try harder when facing a woman, they really make it a point to destroy her, because it's not just a game to them it's about maintaining their dominance. Worth noting that male chess players have been sexually harassing and threatening female chess players since the begining. You make a piss poor political commentator if you refuse to take any of this into account (or are simply ignorant of those facts) as you complain about women not wanting to compete in a male environment.
And lastly, I'll say it again, even if none of this happened, women don't need your permission to spend time together and play together and exist without men. We don't owe men our attention.
Honestly, these people just keep outing themselves. It's like they're negging women or something.
Men are KNOWN to sexually harass women, we KNOW women perform worse among men because of rampant and internalized misogyny (see the points above). So women want their own spaces to get away from that.
The fact that these people are incapable of understanding that women don't want to deal with misogynistic bullshit from men, and instead default to "if you don't put up with men sexually harassing you in chess, you admitting that you're weaker than them. You're lesser? Are you dumber than men, is that it? You're just a stupid woman? That's why you don't want to compete with men who statistically put you in danger? You're inferior?"
Today in Women's History is the anniversary of the birth of the legendary Ida B Wells-Barnett.
Ida B. Wells was known nationally and internationally as a “crusader for justice.” She traveled throughout the United States and foreign cou
Ida B. Wells was known nationally and internationally as a “crusader for justice.”
She traveled throughout the United States and foreign countries raising awareness of oppression of African Americans and women.
Born on July 16, 1862, in Holly Springs, Mississippi, she was orphaned at the age of 16 when her parents died as victims of the Yellow Fever Epidemic of 1878.
Ida recieved her education and early training at Shaw University, now Rust College. She became a teacher, journalist and public speaker.
She married Ferdinand Barnett, owner of the Chicago Conservator.
Ida was one of two women who signed “the call” for the formation of the NAACP.
She was a religious woman who read the Bible regularly, read Shakespeare and loved classical music.
In recent years, her hometown honored her legacy by naming the post office the Ida B. Wells Station, and a postage stamp was issued by the U. S. Postal Service commemorating her crusade for human rights.
Ida B. Wells was:
A passionate crusader against oppression
A teacher and acclaimed journalist
An articulate public speaker
A civil rights activist
An anti-lynching crusader
A woman’s rights activist
One of the founders of the NAACP
To Visit her Museum at
220 North Randolph Street
Holly Springs, MS 38635
Admission Donations
Adults: $20
Children (12 and under): $5
Tours are available Monday through Friday between the hours of 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. Tours can be arranged by calling 662-252-3232 or 662-579-5747.
also like. video games and movies/fandom (often based on books by or directed by women)
meanwhile men in women’s spaces is like. our changing rooms. reminds me of that dianic wiccan quote about how the men only want to be included in women’s events when the women are naked
Why do I have to be so far away from Berlin? This sounds amazing.
A superlative Berlin exhibition gathers over 300 photographs by the overlooked women of the Bauhaus.
July 16, 2026 by Malcolm Forbes
Mask Photo No. 13 at the Bauhaus Archiv, Berlin. Credit: Album
Think Bauhaus, think design. The German school, founded in Weimar in 1919 by Walter Gropius, was a creative hothouse, and later powerhouse, with a singular artistic vision. The buildings, furniture and domestic objects it produced were made up of sleek lines, clean planes and basic geometric forms. The Bauhaus aesthetic was modernist and minimalist, rational and functional. When the school relocated to Dessau in 1925, Gropius himself designed the new premises. An architectural wonder of glass, steel and concrete comprising studios, workshops, classrooms, offices and a so-called Festbereich, or ‘events area’, the building encapsulated the Bauhaus ethos. It was simple yet innovative, a triumph of both style and substance.
But the Bauhaus wasn’t solely a school of design. Another great misconception abounds. Much has been written about the male artists who lectured there, such as Paul Klee, Wassily Kandinsky and László Moholy-Nagy, and many photographs from the era show male students at work and at play. But the Bauhaus wasn’t exclusively a man’s world. Gropius’ 1919 manifesto announced that the school was open to ‘any person of good repute, without regard to age or sex’. Although grossly outnumbered by men, women still applied and attended to take advantage of what was unique access to art education. Most were encouraged to take up supposedly feminine subjects, such as weaving and ceramics. However, a number refused to be slotted into a gender-specific pigeonhole and pursued photography instead. Throughout the 1920s, women photographers made their presence felt at the Bauhaus: some took pictures that were used to advertise the products created by the school; others prioritised art and radically experimented with the formal possibilities of photography. In 1929, when the school established a photography course, almost half of the students who signed up for professional training with the camera were women.
A superlative exhibition at the Museum of Photography in Berlin focuses on the pioneering female artists who viewed life through a lens. New Woman, New Vision: Women Photographers of the Bauhaus assembles over 300 photographs that showcase a diverse range of subject matter and artistic techniques. A lot of the images are, to use that shopworn word, iconic. However, many of the women who created them didn’t get the recognition they deserved at the time and drifted into obscurity. Only now can we appreciate their individual talents and collective impact.
The opening section, entitled ‘Viewing the Self’, looks at how the photographers turned their gaze on themselves. There are traditional pictures: Gertrud Arndt and Marianne Brandt pose demurely and ostentatiously with flowers and jewellery; Arndt is then seen exploring her identity in a variety of guises with costumes, masks and veils.
Things become less conventional when we glimpse Grit Kallin-Fischer lying on her back, one arm languidly draped over the other. With her short hair, short minidress, and cigarette burning between her fingers, she fully embodies the archetype of the New Woman, an exemplar of both independence and resistance.
Grit Kallin-Fischer, Selbstporträt mit Zigarette, 1928, Bauhaus-Archiv Berlin.
Then there are the more bizarre shots involving reflections and distortions: Brandt’s warped image duplicated in metal spheres; Ise Gropius’ profile reproduced in a tapering row of mirrors; Florence Henri’s black-clad top half staring back at her through the looking glass.
Marianne Brandt, Selbstporträt mit Kamera im Atelier in der Kugel gespiegelt, Bauhaus Dessau, 1928-1929, Bauhaus-Archiv Berlin. Credit: VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn 2026
In another section we find more portraits, this time of friends, colleagues and partners. There are intimate close-ups of men asleep, their vulnerability accentuated by soft lighting and the camera looking down on them from above. Happy women’s faces are captured from below. The grimy and bedraggled Bauhaus cleaner looks like she works in a mine rather than a school. A caption informs us that, in Walter Peterhans’ classes, students were taught to meticulously arrange their still lifes and tease out the textures of the hair, skin and clothing of their models, even the textiles of the furniture they sat on or reclined against. Exhibits bear this out: in Ivana Meller-Tomljenović’s 1930 image of a woman in a chair, the light sharpens the subject’s cheekbones, filters through the lines of her skirt and makes her halter-neck top shimmer.
Some portraits feel too staged and too stylised, particularly those of dancers at rest, grandmothers in their finery and a pensive Bertolt Brecht. More interesting are the photographs from the large section ‘People and Places’. Here we glimpse photographs taken on the move and off the cuff, both at home and in far-flung locations. Many of the individuals in the pictures don’t even know that a Leica is trained on them. Children play in the street in Chicago. Berlin football fans without tickets furtively watch a match at a distance through cracks in a fence. Two Berlin images present descents to different destinations: in one, bathers walk down steps in monochrome sunshine to Wannsee’s open-air lido; in the other, children reach the halfway point of the staircase at the eerily deserted Neukölln U-Bahn station.
Elsa Thiemann, Berlin, die große Treppe im Freibad Wannsee, 1950er-Jahre, Bauhaus-Archiv Berlin. Credit: Margot Schmidt
Elsa Thiemann, Berlin, Kinder am U-Bahneingang in Neukölln, 1950er-Jahre, Bauhaus-Archiv Berlin. Credit: Margot Schmidt
Back above ground there are bustling street scenes in Paris and shots of rural life in South America. All these photographs are refreshing. They exude vitality and spontaneity. We sense that each photographer enjoyed taking them under these circumstances and on her own terms: no constrained studio shots, no fastidiously put-together compositions, no rigid rules.
Elsewhere, in the section ‘The Allure of Architecture’, people give way to place. Structures are not shown in their entirety; instead, photographers home in on original features and emphasise their strangeness through disorientating perspectives. We view the thick blocks, glass panels and domino-like balconies of the Bauhaus buildings; the staggered ziggurat side of a New York skyscraper; the serried rows of striped awnings on a German Konditorei. Bomb-ravaged Berlin buildings from 1945 look like they are either disintegrating into rubble or sprouting out of it. The inner framework of the city’s radio tower, seen from the ground up, is a tangled mass of girders.
Lucia Moholy, Architekt: Walter Gropius, Bauhaus-Gebäude Dessau (1925-1926), Balkon am Ateliergebäude, 1926, Bauhaus-Archiv Berlin. Credit: VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn 2026
The most challenging photography on display is left until last. ‘Art and Experimentation’ gathers together more avant-garde work. Photograms depict playful ghosts. Collages of magazine photos and newspaper text constitute surreal friezes. One or two abstract montages made up of a further mishmash of mediums defy description and simply have to be seen to be believed. This section provokes mixed emotions. In places we are stimulated and regard a piece as the result of an artist letting her imagination run wild. At other points we are left cold, and dismiss a work that strives for significance as a slapdash cut-and-paste job.
At its core, the exhibition is a celebration of remarkable women who used photography to record their surroundings and portray themselves in fascinating ways. Potted biographies of the photographers add context. They also reveal the hardships these women endured throughout their careers. Elsa Thiemann (1910-81) and Etel Mittag-Fodor (1905-2005) capitalised on the photojournalism boom in the 1920s and 1930s and sold their images of modern life in cosmopolitan cities to photo agencies for distribution to newspapers and magazines. But their work was published either anonymously or under the name of the photo agency, which made it almost impossible for them to make a name for themselves within their field. When the Nazis came to power and the Bauhaus closed, several photographers were forced to abandon their craft and go on the run. Prague-born Lucia Moholy (1894-1989), who secured a reputation as one of the foremost female architectural photographers of her time, fled Berlin in 1933 and had to leave her negatives behind. However, many of them ended up in the possession of Walter Gropius. He published her images to raise the profile of the school and its architecture but failed to credit her as their creator. It wasn’t until 1957 that Moholy’s negatives were returned to her, following a prolonged legal dispute.
Lucia Moholy, Mädchen mit Kamera beim Fotografieren (Lucia, Tochter von Yella und Hans Curjel), um 1929, Bauhaus-Archiv Berlin. Credit: VG Bild-Kunst, Bonn 2026
Irena Blühová (1904-91), who documented social injustice and political turmoil in photo form for the leftist workers’ newspaper Arbeiter-Illustrierte-Zeitung, found herself faced with a different kind of erasure. She returned to her native Czechoslovakia and became a fighter in the antifascist resistance. She had to go into hiding in Bratislava in 1942, during which time all her negatives were destroyed. Only after the war did she manage to reconstruct her work from previously published photographs.
A rich selection of that work is on show here. These photographs and others like them are particularly special. What Blühová restored and Moholy reclaimed can be admired now as both striking snapshots and salvaged artefacts.
New Woman, New Vision: Women Photographers of the Bauhaus is at the Museum of Photography, Berlin until 4 October.
Malcolm Forbes
Malcolm Forbes is a freelance writer and critic based in Edinburgh. He has written for the Economist, the Financial Times, TLS and the New Republic.
So this is just men talking to men and blaming women for the rape treaths that men send them.. MEN TALKING TO MEN about raping men and then BLAMING WOMEN...
Women do not make rape treaths... BECAUSE WOMEN DON'T RAPE. MEN DO.
This is the fantasy of a moid dreaming about getting raped by women and finding a way to blame women for his sick fantasies.
WE HAVE TO KEEP THEM OUT OF WOMENS SPACES AT ALL TIMES!!!!
This man has whiteknight in bio...accusing me of racism...sending dogwhistle abreviations as treaths, because I outed one of his brothers for the rape fantasist that he is...
I hit the nail, right on the head...didn't I?😭😂🤣 All these DM'S...please, DELETE😂
Angry and for what ...
being a vile and despicable human being...
and getting called out for it...
Sound as male as child abandonment.
Your attempt at gaslighting is not even worth a responds. Sympathising with rapists, pedo's, racists, and entitled men is a white men's game, I DO NOT PLAY! You do...🫤
Here's what you should do! 🧐Stay mad, stay outing yourself in every horrible way possible!
Let's get this on the internet for my peers to see. Thank you, for showing exactly what I have always believed your kind to be.
These are reblogs I've never once sent you a DM thought you're welcome to screen shoot the one's you say I did.
Again literally all I have done was point out to content YOU ALREADY have on this account before me.
So so far all you've shown is that you're a lair and it's the only response you have to your hate content and lack of 2nd wave black radfem we call womanism.
No push to assist black women's issues on this account at all.
No Black radfem papers, publishments or academics, not a drop.
No addressing Mysogynoire either.
You're a larper as a 2nd wave feminist, no more accurately you're a NET educated dipshit for the right wing.
Try responding with actual events, facts and education instead of making things up.
and DM's are direct messaging or are called PM's that's the send a message function on here buddy, I'[ve not once sent you a DM.
But again you are welcome to screenshoot this.
You gotta be an older terf seeing as most black radfems know the basic site functions you seem like an oldster here larping.
And given NET history with the right wing and bot farms you're likely a white guy.
My content is literally on this account so anyone can look up what I do, say what I believe and back.
Again all caps and your editorial lies of the facts ongoing here can be seen by all the readers.
Including you being the sole one bringing up race and being a sex pest on this discourse.
Again this is called a reblog.
Again I only pointed out to YOUR own posted factual content.
But keep going the all-caps and the colours and all the faked outrage when you have shown who you are by the content here.
And again this is claaed a reblog, even in non-english sites, which means you here repeated getting this wrong is generational and not based on ability.
You're old and here larping and once more have zero feminism of colour on this account.
Not a scrap.
You even didn't know black 2nd wave had it's own name and practices.
Caps, Colour, rant but you're a larper.
And the rapist pedo is on the terf side.
Since 2007, Jezebel has been the Internet's most treasured source for everything celebrities, sex, and politics...with teeth.
^^^ # WoLF is the largest public GC radfem terf organization on all of the Earth.
You've been Trump and Heritage Foundation allied since before his 1rst term.
Maybe you should actualy read the articles you post about. But this time do it with the reading comprehensive skills, I asked you to get!
I asked 1 simple question...and yet... No answer...
Just a simple question...WHAT DO YOU DO TO STOP YOUR FELLOW WHITE MEN FROM RAPING, KILLING, ENSLAVING WOMEN CHILDREN AND POC??
LET'S BE REAL RIGHT NOW,...WE BOTH KNOW YOU DO NOT HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT!
YOUR ACTIVISM EXIST ONLY ONLINE...YOUR PEOPLE WILL NEVER ADRESS THE ROOT CAUSE...YOUR FATHERS, BROTHERS, UNCLES, PRESIDENTS...
I know you are mad at me at the moment, and I also know that redirecting and gaslighting are some of your ancestors favourite ways of dealing with moral humiliation as a result of exposing your true nature...but stick with me for this one...
Any one can reblog a post...
A racist can reblog a pro black post....
A mysoginist can disguise himself as a women and enter female dominated spaces...
A man can claim to be progressive...but his activism is just HARASSING WOMEN AND POC ONLINE...😂 (Granddaddy would love this)
THIS ONE WILL BLOW YOUR MIND...
Someone with internalised hatred can pretend to love themselves and their peers...
Again...thank you for proving my point! 👆
I now understand why you people are like this... 🧐
YALLL HATE GETTING CLOCKED! OMFG😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣
Hey White knight! i know your reading comprehensive skills do not exist and your racism requires you to harrass black women who call out rape fantasist.
But you still havent answered my question...
WHAT DO YOU DO OTHER THEN POLICING AND HARRASSING WOMEN AND POC ONLINE TO STOP YOUR WHITE BROTHERS, FATHERS UNCLES FROM RAPING WOMEN AND CHILDREN????
I know you desperately want me to be a rapists, racist apologists like you...but I just am not.
so basically, a big right-wing 78-year-old female politician in the UK, Ann Widdecombe, was brutally murdered in her own home 2 days ago
she was beaten to death by a “white male” who is still at large — clearly a politically motivated attack
yet, every left-wing person on social media is like: “murder is terrible, but let’s not forget she was a cunt with terrible views”
completely overlooking the fact that a male killed a woman with his bare hands — literally beat her to death, which is an incredibly personal and passionate way to kill someone — and that’s about the most conservative and evil thing any human can do
it’s clear why he killed a right-wing woman, and not a right-wing male
also, it’s interesting how many people are willing to overlook a male’s actions (murder) because apparently a woman’s opinions are worse
professions older than prostitution because i’m so tired of hearing that misogynistic talking point created by a british imperialist witnessing impoverished women in india
1. hunter
2. forager
3. midwife
4. babysitter
5. weaver
6 doctor/healer
7. shaman
8. fisher
9. stonemason
10. navigator
11. sentry
12. butcher
13. cook
14. storyteller
15. woodcarver
16. food tester
17. builder
18. tanner/leatherworker
19. scout
20. fire tender
there is no evidence of prostitution’s existence until the neolithic agricultural revolution, stemming from an unequal resource distribution and the rise of female oppression. for reference, the start of agriculture until now comprises less than 10% of homo sapien history. do not let men tell you misogyny is a natural part of life. it’s not.
trans women say they need to avoid male bathrooms because males are dangerous and they would be assaulted or raped. but when women say the same thing about not wanting males in our bathrooms, we’re bigots.
trans women are male. they retain male criminality patterns. It’s perfectly reasonable for women to not want males in out private spaces.
women’s comfort and safety shouldn’t be sidelined for any male.
“At a clinic in Anand in northern India, women give birth to Western children. White women’s eggs are inseminated with white men’s sperm, and the embryo is implanted in the wombs of Indian women. The children will show no traces of the women who bore them. They will neither bear her name nor get to know her. After giving birth to the children, the Indian women surrender them. They sign a contract and receive between 2,500 and 6,500 USD the moment they give up their responsibility for the child they just gave birth to. For the women, most of whom are poor and from nearby villages, the payment can be up to the equivalent of ten years’ salary. The buyers are typically American, European, Australian, Japanese, or wealthy Indians; they are childless heterosexual couples, homosexual men, and single men… With traditional surrogacy, the industry had been limited to the Western world. An Indian mother would have meant a child with Indian features. But suddenly, through the miracle of modern technology, it became possible for an Indian woman to give birth to a white child. Thus, Americans could pay two-thirds less than for surrogacy in the USA and still come home with their “own” child, even though it had spent nine months in an Indian woman’s body. Embryo transplantation also impacted on American courts’ judgments in the child custody cases. In one case from 1993, almost identical to “Baby M”—the mother had second thoughts after the birth and wanted to keep the child—the judgment was that she was not the child’s mother. She “was not exercising procreative choice, but was providing a service.” Because the egg wasn’t hers, the pregnancy wasn’t motherhood but a “service”; therefore, she had no rights to the child she gave birth to. This has now become standard practice in the USA, and even when the egg belongs to a third woman—a so-called egg donor—custody is granted to those who paid for the child.”
— Kajsa Ekis Ekman, Being and Being Bought: Prostitution, Surrogacy and the Split Self
(via invertprivileges)
Directed by Libby Spears, this documentary film exposes the failures of the United States legal system and the foster care systems implemented to protect children from the growing child sex trade in their own backyards. Spears scrutinizes these elements as well as family life and mainstream media that normalize violent sexual behaviors against children. Playground gives an up-close look into the raw reality of the sexual exploration of children in the Unites States for an unwary audience.
Illustrations by Yoshitomo Nara in collaboration with animator Heather Bursch
