@halfheartdead - Tumblr Blog

its kind of crazy that the average online person is so rigid and dogmatic. time on social media directly correlates to mental rigidity and lameness. I’ve seen it come over 50 year old women as they discover tiktok, self diagnose with adhd and become trans crusaders. It can happen at any point.

The nature of the rigidity on the queer left especially seems to be a list of things that are “good”, and immediate discomfort at anything critical of them (there’s also a list of bad things and immediate discomfort with anyone speaking positively of them.) Progressive people with the right beliefs all open their mouths to emit memetic statements of affirmation when good thing is mentioned, like religious people murmuring amen.

“I’m thinking of making an onlyfans.” “Omg go girl!! get that bag” “Use that face card” etc

If you say something contrary their hackles raise and it’s this uncomfortable energy like something is out of place and they need to fix it. Don’t you know Thing is Good?

“Be careful, it’s really exploitative and hard to make money at first. You have to invest a lot of money to even have a chance if making anything”

*everyone gets uncomfortable*

“Okay but It’s her right to do it if she wants and it’s awesome that she’s empowering herself like this” “Yeah we totally support you” “With that body? She’ll be rolling in cash”

People will either quickly try to dismiss you or explain to you why you’re wrong with the energy of someone who expects groupthink (oh honey maybe you just missed the memo that Thing is Good, let me clue you in) and get suspicious if you don’t immediately fold, or in a larger group there will be this concerted effort to drown you out, to keep the space Good and Right. Disagreeing with someone or even just bringing up a real concern is seen as shaming in a lot of contexts (kink, gender, sex trade, beauty rituals, misogynistic phrases and beliefs) and the group immediately jumps to “protect” the shamed individual and shame the shamer.

dykemind

btw I think one of the things driving this is a belief set formed largely around what people around you believe vs your actual lived reality. if we all formed beliefs on our actual lived reality we would mostly have no opinion on a lot of things. The other antidote to this is curiosity and a healthy sense of universal skepticism.

halfheartdead

it might also work the other way around; where along with excessive social media use causing cognitive rigidity, people who tend towards cognitive rigidity may tend towards Onlineness because echo chambers affirm their beliefs.

autism is also another likely factor at play, autistic people spend more time online than average & cognitive rigidity is an autism symptom. while the autism diagnosis as is is flawed and lumps together a wide array of people who seemingly don't have as much in common, these groups with associated traits do exist (much like how hysteria was a harmful/incorrect diagnosis, but did name a real group of women with PTSD/other symptoms)

the dismissive way you bring up older women self dxing as adhd, minimizes the real phenomenon of older women who have symptoms finding language to describe their experiences. neurodivergency movement and terminology is a mess, but there is some real need and benefit to women self-diagnosing.

#hhdresponse

faunmoss

In her book Trauma and Recovery, Judith Herman writes about forgiveness (in the context of atrocities and abuse):

“Revolted by the fantasy of revenge, some survivors attempt to bypass their outrage altogether throught a fantasy of forgiveness. This fantasy, like its polar opposite, is an attempt at empowerment. The survivor imagines that she can transcend her rage and erase the impact of the trauma through a willed, defiant act of love. But it is not possible to exorcise the trauma, through either hatred or love. Like revenge, the fantasy of forgiveness often becomes a cruel torture, because it remains out of reach for most ordinary human beings. Folk wisdom recognizes that to forgive is divine. And even divine forgiveness, in most religious systems, is not unconditional. True forgiveness cannot be granted until the perpetrator has sought and earned it through confession, repentance, and restitution.

"Genuine contrition in a perpetrator is a rare miracle. Fortunately, the survivor does not need to wait for it. Her healing depends on the discovery of restorative love in her own life; it does not require that this love be extended to the perpetrator. Once the survivor has mourned the traumatic event, she may be surprised to discover how uninteresting the perpetrator has become to her and how little concern she feels for his fate."

(pages 189-190, Chapter 9, Remembrance and Mourning)

tl;dr: Forgiveness is not a requirement for healing. You can heal and move on without forgiveness.

It can also harm you and it should never be demanded of you.

And you certainly don’t owe forgiveness to anyone.

halfheartdead

this sounds like a description of reaction formation. if anyone who's read this sees this, does she use the term "reaction formation" in the book?

#i might read this eventually

liberate-women-now

Just wanted to inform you all that the Wikipedia page about gender critical feminism has been renamed to "Trans-exclusionary radical feminism." The proposing party said using "gender-critical" was like calling Nazism "Jewish-critical socialism" and another called it akin to calling Scientific Racism "Race Realism."

This is just a small example of what happens when we let scrotes control the narrative; they change terms, definitions, quietly erase facts, and eventually they slowly rewrite history. These small changes (including within academic work and on websites such as Wikipedia) add up and can ultimately influence or change people's opinion. I HIGHLY encourage radfems on this website to join Wikipedia, learn its policies and guidelines, and start making good faith edits so we can restructure the biased cesspit it currently is.

If you are interested in editing and want tips or help, reach out to me! I would also love if another person could collaborate with me!

halfheartdead

This doesn't even make sense, because I'm pretty sure the "gender critical" label arose for NON-RADICAL FEMINISTS to say they agreed with the radical feminist argument against gender identity/transition. Helen Joyce is mentioned multiple times but I'm pretty sure she is not a radical feminist, for instance. (please correct me if I am wrong).

Honestly, the top is pretty biased but TBH this definition even existing out there is good to see. There are ties between "TERF"/GC feminist groups and the right-wing, unfortunately.

I was curious about Janice Raymond's inclusion for the Transsexual Empire, interesting they state "Several authors have since characterized this work as transphobic and constituting hate speech, as well as lacking any serious intellectual basis." when Thomas Szaz positively reviewed the book. If anyone knows how to edit wikipedia I think it would be an important inclusion to make. It will take time for me to learn how to edit wikipedia, but if no one else does I would make that addition. Maybe I will DM you later?

https://www.nytimes.com/1979/06/10/archives/male-and-female-created-he-them-transexual.html

It's interesting the history section has nothing past the 2000s, such as JKR's infamous blog post. Also more could be said about JKR such as her creation of Beira's place (would need to look into its existence more).

I'm glad to see the citation of older radical feminist writers (Janice Raymond, Sheila Jeffreys, etc.) but disappointed not to see current writers like Jane Clare Jones and Victoria Smith mentioned.

Also interesting they mentioned Ovarit (closed), but not the current Vexxed platform.

#hhdresponse #radical feminism #radical feminist safe #radblr

acidbathbunnies-moved

High-resolution X-ray offers a new look at an understudied organ: the clitoris.

The rete ovarii, a poorly understood structure connected to the ovaries, may be much more essential to ovarian function than scientists init

some cool articles i found

halfheartdead

This work could be used to improve reconstructive procedures to restore the clitoris and clitoral function in patients who have experienced female genital mutilation, the study authors wrote. These procedures, which involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, are carried out mostly on young girls between infancy and age 15, can cause serious medical complications, and are considered a human rights violation, the World Health Organization states.

I hate the usage of "experienced" here, it's such a euphemistic term. They outright state it's a HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION performed on CHILDREN. They should have said something along the lines of "patients who are VICTIMS of female genital mutilation."

#hhdresponse

i'm not a tumblr native, but wow dort from the minions and monsters movie is so hot like i really should've been here as a teen with my taste in characters...

hoppers had mayor jerry they're really feeding the strange man enjoyers. mmm.

#hhdoriginal

kiefbowl

it's funny that men undermine female politicians because you'd think men would love a little mommy state. obviously it's because men want power, but every day politicians prove that they're super for sale and wiling to barter their codified power away for money anyway, so idk let women take a shot at it and you all go back to subsistence farming or whatever your weirdo fantasy is. you can even do your favorite thing which is devalue the sector as it becomes female dominated. god knows, there are women who will say I'll do it for $30K for twice the work. let mommy run the senate!!!

halfheartdead

you underestimate men's daddy issues and desire for strongman daddy

kiefbowl

perhaps it is feminist praxis to stop engaging with social media. I know that sounds like a joke but I don't think I am joking. women on display, constantly. hyper vigilant observation of women, constantly. women as product, constantly. idk. there's a lot being normalized that I think humanity will be forced to reckon with long after we're dead.

halfheartdead

social media is based on the monetization of our attention and relationships. it's like how pyramid schemes and mlms prey on desperate women, who then try to shill the shit to their social network. companies are rooting more and more into our personal lives to profit. now that more people are on them, others feel pressured to join to feel involved.

it's fucked up because there are good and bad elements; but many times the bad outweighs the good. it looks like tiktok is female-majority and there may be value in some use cases or hearing from interesting creators who wouldn't do the video-editing to post on youtube, but then there's the carefully crafted addictive part. which the more vulnerable of us will lose a lot of time to.

#hhdresponse

valeriezine

Finally, FINALLY I have put together all the Valerie issues and print layouts in google drive folder for any of you to read/save/print :)

i wish i could develop some kind of mentor/mentee relationship with a female creative sigh. i really would benefit from collaboration with a good editor.

or maybe this thought betrays my lack of slef-confidence and paranoia.

#hhdoriginal

vxhtdkggyigb

Reading people discuss this case is so depressing, people still have no idea how domestic abuse works. People discussing how responsible she is--YOU ARE IGNORANT, she's BEEN CONTROLLED since she was a teen thru these pregnancies and isolated. None of these kids had access to school or resources where they'd meet mandated reporters.

Just days after authorities removed 16 siblings from a squalid home and arrested their parents and grandparents, the question looms over the

#hhdoriginal

questcequecestqueca

She played bass on 10,000 songs, including the most-played track of the twentieth century. She was paid $55 per session. Her name never appeared on the albums.

Gold Star Studios, Los Angeles, 1964. A woman in a cardigan walks past the receptionist, a Fender Precision bass in her hand like a briefcase. She doesn’t sign autographs. She signs a timesheet.

Her name is Carol Kaye. In three hours, she will record what will become the most-played track of the twentieth century. She’ll pocket fifty-five dollars and head to another studio, on the other side of town, for the next session.

The record label will never put her name on the album.

Between 1957 and 1973, Carol Kaye took part in roughly 10,000 recording sessions. Not as the featured artist, not as a guest, but as a hired hand. She was part of an anonymous collective nicknamed The Wrecking Crew—elite studio musicians who actually played the instruments on your favorite records while the famous bands posed for promotional photos.

The work was relentless. Three albums before the day was over. Stale coffee in paper cups. No rehearsal. The charts arrived minutes before the tape rolled. If you couldn’t read a chart and nail the take in two tries, you didn’t get called for the next session.

Carol could do it on the first try.

She started playing guitar in grimy bars at fourteen because her family couldn’t pay the electric bill. Music wasn’t a romantic dream for her. It was survival. It was a job—factory work with better acoustics and lower pay.

But she was faster and sharper than almost everyone else. She corrected charts in pencil while the producer was still explaining what he wanted. In one session in 1968, she told a famous producer his arrangement sounded like a dying dog. She chose her own line. They kept her version.

That descending bass line that drives the Beach Boys’ “Wouldn’t It Be Nice”? Carol Kaye. The propulsive groove of “These Boots Are Made for Walkin’”? Carol Kaye. The acoustic-guitar intro to “La Bamba”? Carol Kaye. The iconic theme from Mission: Impossible? Carol Kaye.

She invented techniques on the spot, out of sheer necessity. When the bass sound was too muddy for AM radio, she stuck felt under the strings and used a hard pick instead of her fingers. The tone cut through the static like a blade. It became the sonic signature that defined 1960s pop.

Bassists spent years—decades—trying to crack the secret of the Beach Boys’ gear to get that sound. They were studying the wrong people. They should have been studying Carol.

She received no royalties. No residuals. No gold-record ceremony. No credit on the album sleeves. When “You’ve Lost That Lovin’ Feelin’” hit number one, Carol was already back in a studio cutting a soap jingle.

The biggest bands mimed her bass lines on TV variety shows. New York marketing departments decided a mom in classic clothes didn’t fit the rebellious-youth image they were selling. So they simply left her name off the album credits.

For thirty years, almost no one cared. The truth only began to surface in the late 1990s, when music researchers found the same union contract numbers on thousands of hit records. The very documents meant to preserve studio musicians’ anonymity betrayed them.

Think about it. Every time you heard “Good Vibrations,” “River Deep – Mountain High,” the Righteous Brothers, Nancy Sinatra, or Sonny and Cher, you were hearing Carol Kaye. She composed the soundtrack of an entire generation’s youth.

And yet the records still say nothing. She’s now over eighty. She wrote instructional books. She trained countless bassists. She is finally starting to be recognized by music historians who uncovered the truth about The Wrecking Crew.

But she never got what she deserved: her name on those albums. Credit for the music that defined an era. Recognition that those bass lines everyone associates with the “Beach Boys” were, in fact, Carol Kaye’s.

Fifty-five dollars a session. Ten thousand sessions. The most-played track of the twentieth century.

And the world didn’t know her name.

oceanmirage

Since the bots are flooding in I want to make a little post for the minors on here. Please remember when you see them that these are not targeting you personally, they're nothing, they're vapor, words a pathetic, angry coward spat out and then scattershot into the universe because they feel too helpless to do anything meaningful with their life. But what is real are the other women on here, the living, breathing adults here who care about you, yes you as an individual, who want you to be protected and supported, who are working to create a world that's safer for you to live in. We are real. Our words come from love, not hatred. They weren't blindly shot at you from a bot created to spread misery, they were thought of in our flesh-and-blood brains and typed with our flesh-and-blood fingers for you. We're real, and we care about you and we're here for you. All that said, it is also okay to be distressed, upset, angry, whatever about having this shit flood your notifications. You are not silly or oversensitive for feeling offended or hurt or guilty, or for having these words trigger doubt in yourself and in your beliefs. That's what they're for. They're designed to make you feel as bad as possible, and you're not bad or wrong or stupid for feeling bad! I would argue that they are designed very specifically to make young, vulnerable people feel as bad as possible. Most of us who are older can cope with receiving threats and insults a little bit easier, we've often been called similar things before and have already had our "they don't know anything about me, I know who I am" moment. We have more confidence in our beliefs, less insecurity, more strength in our identity and a stronger sense of who we are, our emotional reactivity and its intensity has usually leveled out a little or we've figured out healthier ways of coping with it. Our most horrific traumas aren't as fresh or we've had time to at least partially heal from them. All of these things make it a bit easier to brush this kind of thing off and move on, but these are things most teenagers don't get to have because they come with time and experience. I'm certain the author of these bots is well aware of the fact that those of us who are older will likely be impacted less, and the younger and more mentally ill/traumatized/prone to neurotic thinking we are the more likely these bots will cause us distress. I'm just speculating, but I can't help but wonder if frightening young, traumatized girls away from the movement isn't the whole point. It is not lost on me that an overwhelming amount of the bot reblogs center around pedophilia, something many, many young girls have been profoundly hurt by and haven't yet had the time and opportunity to heal from whatsoever. They may even still be in physical proximity to the perpetrators. It's natural to be extremely alarmed at being accused of participating something that has hurt you so badly. Please try to remember that while these are ultimately empty words, it's also normal for you to have strong and complicated emotional reactions to them. Please be kind and understanding to yourself. And I'm so, so sorry. It's not fair that you have to experience this kind of vile harassment just for speaking your mind or existing in this space. It's not fair that @staff isn't protecting you from this. It's not fair that you have to feel these painful feelings just because some maladjusted adult refuses to work out their shit in therapy. It isn't fair, and it isn't okay, and you have every right to be angry.

halfheartdead

But what is real are the other women on here, the living, breathing adults here who care about you, yes you as an individual, who want you to be protected and supported, who are working to create a world that's safer for you to live in. We are real. Our words come from love, not hatred.

I don't know the full context of what you're referring to (is it TRAs spamming bots/sexual content in radfem tags or towards accounts of teen girls?) but this is questionable to tell teen girls on the internet. They don't actually know any of us and this phrasing encourages a sense of familiarity and safety that doesn't really exist. I get you mean well, but it's not a good idea to encourage this to teen girls, especially those who are likely more marginalized. (I saw on your first post about your obsessive thinking so please don't take this as a harsh condemnation)

Radblr is just a web of accounts from mostly women that discuss similar topics with similar viewpoints at the end of the day.

I'm thinking back to my time on radtwt seeing how accounts from teen girls blew up and how they grew followings of adults, were exposed to tons of awful shit, and adult conversations that would be stressful for girls to navigate. While twitter is a worse platform with larger male userbase, similar happens here.

There is not much of a unified feminist movement online and these are all accounts of random women and/or possibly LARPing men. There is value in online feminist communities as places , but women have become frustrated and burnt out with them for reasons. Plenty of the women are mentally ill and/or not particularly nice or pleasant people; not that they have to be, but that is the truth.

I'm certain the author of these bots is well aware of the fact that those of us who are older will likely be impacted less, and the younger and more mentally ill/traumatized/prone to neurotic thinking we are the more likely these bots will cause us distress. I'm just speculating, but I can't help but wonder if frightening young, traumatized girls away from the movement isn't the whole point. It is not lost on me that an overwhelming amount of the bot reblogs center around pedophilia, something many, many young girls have been profoundly hurt by and haven't yet had the time and opportunity to heal from whatsoever.

Yea I'll outright say it. A lot of these men are pedophiles or generally sexually abusive, and derive sexual gratification from harassing women and girls. Many transwomen in the west are autogynephiles (AGP). AGP is a paraphilia, and paraphilias cluster. Pedophilia is a paraphilia and the two DO overlap often!

This is why encouraging teen girls into radical feminist communities with no caveats is something I can't get behind, because there is a high chance of girls being repeated exposed to sexual content and graphic conversations they are not ready to process (which is totally normal). With how often photos of AGPs in lingerie used to go around, I don't think it's great for girls to be repeatedly exposed to that shit!

I think there are ways for teen girls to have blogs or accounts in radfem spaces safely (act more as lurkers, do not post much information about yourself, turn off asks/submissions, heavily filter), but it's a lot of heavy shit to be exposed to young with no filters or real means to get support.

Along with that, I suggest teen girls start reading more about history, feminist literature, and doing well in school to have more options in life. If you do want to dedicate yourself to helping others, make sure to help yourself first.

oceanmirage

This is an excellent addition and this person is absolutely right. I was trying to convey that there are people out there who care about minors and their suffering and it might help to remember that when you experience harassment, but please be very skeptical and keep your guard up with all of us, including myself. Most of the accounts on here are anonymous and could be anyone, with any intentions, and like this person said this pocket of Tumblr attracts a great deal of genuine predators and pedophiles. They really are crawling all over the place, and they are absolutely willing to pretend to be one of us. Not only that, we could be actual women but still not be capable of having any kind of an appropriate relationship with a minor regardless. We're not necessarily safe people just because we're women. And I agree completely that there is a lot of extremely distressing content on here that girls shouldn't have to be exposed to. I think I feel a little torn because at the same time, I feel like being in radblr as a girl would've been enormously helpful to me even with all of the upsetting content, but idk that's just me and I can totally see girls getting really hurt spending time here, becoming depressed or agoraphobic or even traumatized. I don't have an answer or conclusion or anything, I just wish there were spaces for young people on the internet where they didn't have to be exposed to all of this awfulness. Really, this thoughtful response already put everything so well I don't have much to add, I just wanted to highlight everything said because it's important. Thank you for taking the time to write this.

halfheartdead

And I agree completely that there is a lot of extremely distressing content on here that girls shouldn't have to be exposed to. I think I feel a little torn because at the same time, I feel like being in radblr as a girl would've been enormously helpful to me even with all of the upsetting content, but idk that's just me and I can totally see girls getting really hurt spending time here, becoming depressed or agoraphobic or even traumatized.

Yea it's unfortunate it's a mixed bag, that radblr could be helpful for some and detrimental to others. Teens mature at different rates and the thing is unfortunately, kids aren't the best at telling what they're ready for either. So I think a more blanket guidance to not put too much of yourself out there is a small reprieve. It's unfortunate teen girls are some of the greatest victims of male violence and patriarchy.

#hhdresponse

marbleguard

i notice that for a lot of female comedians a main topic of choice is routines about the details of their sex lives and their appearances. obviously this is a case of them just doing what people want to hear, so im not necessarily trying to place the blame on them. but i do think its interesting that comedy, which is at its core mostly about a person making unique observations about topics in everyday life, women are mostly only given attention for their observations about that narrow band of topics. I can't really think of a male comedian who's "thing" is routines about having sex and trials and tribulations of trying to look sexy. I think most people would find that a little weird if that was the bulk of his performance.