We have a small, friendly groupchat for radfems & rad aligned women on Telegram. If you're interested in mutual support, friends & discussing feminism, send me a DM! Being 20+ and female is a requirement. 🥂
radblr can be pretty toxic / draining so I might log off for a while sometimes ❤️
my inbox is open for anyone that wants to talk 🔆
this post will be edited and expanded at times :)
Links to different topics based on my personal opinions:
General
Radical feminist resources
Radical feminist tumblr masterpost sources
What is a woman
Sex binary & intersex masterpost
Radical feminism & Radfem beliefs & illustrated
Why feminism's goal is not achieving "equality"
Why I am critical of gender & trans ideology
My thoughts on female seperatism
Why TRAs compare radical feminism to conservatism
"Radfems are gender essentialists" approach refuted
A glance at women's oppression
The origin of the patriarchy
Why women's opression is sex-based
Gender equality isn't the goal of feminism &
equity over equality
Why we should abolish gender / gender criticism
Dissecting gender / arguing with a TRA
Non binary is invalid
Why systemic misandry does not exist
Why you should be anti porn & more sources
Porn forged the trans movement
Appropriation of Indigenous “Two Spirit” People in Trans Politics
Why gender disphoria does not exist
Agender identity
Transgender VS Transsexual & The issue with the "true trans"
Men cannot be feminists but they *can* be allies
Why anti drag queens
"But women NEED men to protect them!!" - statistics
#Radblr Discourse
Yes, men need to change
Dissecting 'feminist' blackpill ideology & another elaboration on blackpill feminism
Receipts of blackpill misogyny
Political lesbianism, are lesbians better feminists?
Criticizing lesbians who police osa women on separatism
Advice for women who date men
no separatism = more patriarchy??
Bisexuality / Biphobia in radfem spaces
Biphobia on radblr
Analysis on general biphobia
Another one on biphobia
Why "febfem" can be seen as a biphobic term
Am I not a radfem if I desire romantic love with a man?
The flaws of tumblr separatism
"Why I am not a separatist"
Does radfem mean female separatist?
Would separatists accept osa women dating men if men suddenly ceased to be a collective danger
Radfems can't be male partnered, what other solutions than separatism are there? + another one on that
Another take on the separatist discourse
Rad-aligned misogyny receipts:
(idk I have too many atp... might stop adding...)
Semen change a woman's brain
Osa women are at fault for men invading female spaces
Anon receipts
TRA receipts
Receipts on autogynephilic statements
Crimes of trans identified males against women in female sex spaces
Receipts of trans violence
Terfbreaking receipts
Other topics:
The wizard liz: Spiritual narcissism
Why do men grow resentful of women who love them
Should the government be able to police pronouns
Criticizing immigration in Europe & elaboration & more elaboration
Arguments for pro choice VS pro forced birth
Book recommendations:
Princess: A true story of a life behind the veil in Saudi Arabia
About 80% of men claim "touch" is their "love language". And less than 20% of women say touch is their love language.
Men claim they need physical affection to feel appreciated. But they don't hug each other. They don't hold their children, or baby wear. They don't hold their friends hands or rub their backs after a breakup. They don't lean on each other on the train after a long night out.
Women do. Women reach out with their hands and their hearts daily both to friends and family but also to complete strangers. Men do not.
"Touch is my love language" is just shorthand therapy-speak for men to be able to say that they feel entitled to sex. Men complain that women want "acts of service" and men just want "affection" - yet a cuddle isn't what they're after, and providing sex that you do not want no matter how your day has been, no matter how tired or stressed you are, that IS an act of service. It's more than that, it's a chore. It's sexual coercion.
Question for my fellow radfems on tumblr: Do you make accommodations for religious women?
Let me explain what I mean with a specific, hypothetical scenario and let me know your thoughts:
Imagine that you are in a gym, in the women's only section to be exact. The women's section is a smaller compartment in a mixed sex gym where there's a few machines but a bigger number of the same machines is downstairs on the first floor, where both sexes have access and train together. In the women's section for the most part there is only one machine per type available; for example, instead of 5 treadmills in the mixed sex department, there is only 1 in the women's section and so on.
You like to train in the women's section to avoid stares from men and generally feel much more comfortable in a space where there's only women and no men at all.
Then there are some women who train in this female only space for religious reasons. They also do not want to be watched training by men, their reasons stem predominantly from religious reasons.
As you're working out on one of these machines, a woman approaches you and asks you how long you intend to keep going and you reply that you've only just started your workout and tell her how long you'll approximately take until you are finished. The woman argues that since you're not religious and do not "need" to cover yourself in front of men like she does, you could just go downstairs to the mixed sex section and use those machines and leave the one you're currently using to her and other women who can only train in this singular sex space.
How would you most likely react and/or respond to her argument?
Scenario A: You tell her that in this country with the locally established women's rights, a woman covering herself is optional and a misogynistic choice women make under the influence of oppressive, patriarchal religions. You also say that her not wanting to train next to men because of her faith is not more valid or important than your reasoning for not wanting to train next to men with the absence of faith and that you will not leave your machine to go work out downstairs. You empathize with this woman and the fact that you do not know her background and to what extent she might be forced to cover up because of her family but at the same time do not believe that sacrificing your comfort and right to be here will help her out in the long run. You even hope that by refusing, she will eventually see how restricting her religious lifestyle is, start to resent it and break free.
Scenario B: You feel sad for this woman and how restricting her life must be, although you also recognize at the same time that she would probably have the agency to break out of it, if she really wanted to. That her covering herself, would not be necessary if she really decided that she didn't want to anymore. You decide that your comfort and right to be here mattered less than making this woman's life a little easier by giving in and using the machines downstairs. You simply hope that she will someday realize how misogynistic the religion is, that she follows. You know that you would be justified to refuse giving up your machine as you were there first but also think that refusing to give in, would rather make her resent people outside of her religion as she would view them as disrespectful, thinking that they are actively making her life harder; that she would avoid these people and likely blame them for not making her restrictive lifestyle easier instead of recognizing that the true culprit and root cause is the religion itself that she follows. So you bite the bullet, leave her the machine and go train downstairs.
Feel free to share your thoughts and/or alternative ways you would likely react. Which scenario do you align with more?
Personally, I feel very torn between both of them so I wanted to hear your takes on this.
Are there other ways in which you (would) accommodate religious women and/or sacrifice your own comfort in order to make their life easier, in which ways and for what reasons?
Do you believe that doing so could potentially open them up more for external opinions / religious criticsm as they do not view you as someone who is making their life harder and/or that not doing so would make them resentful of you and people outside of the religion rather than the religion itself or would it be more likely that it leads to them resenting the religion itself as they realize how much it restricts them?
I would also be very happy to hear the opinions of ex-religious radfems!
Over 80% of English vocabulary comes from old French. However, when you look at the most commonly used words in English, you have to look well outside the top 100 before you find the first word that doesn't come from Old (pre Norman conquest) English.
This is because the most basic words, the ones we use most often and which describe the most fundamental concepts, tend to remain very stable over the long term.
You can see the evolution in the meanings of words such as "terrible", "awesome" and even "gay" in relatively recent history.
Generally, when the meaning of a word evolves, it is because we no longer have much use for the old meaning, or because the same word can have different meanings depending on the context, without causing confusion. (Take the word "sole", for example, which can mean a type of fish, the bottom of a shoe, or "only". Nobody is ordering sole in a restaurant and expecting to be served a shoe on a plate.)
None of this applies to the word "woman", which is about as basic as it gets. Both "woman" and "man" come from Old English and have been used consistently for over a millennium to mean, respectively, "adult female human" and "adult male human". These words haven't evolved because the original meanings are no longer relevant. We still need to be able to identify and distinguish between female people and male people as much as we ever did. Nor are they the type of words which can comfortably support different meanings.
If the word "woman" can mean either "female person" or "male person who identifies as the opposite sex", how are we supposed to understand which group of people we are discussing? And more to the point, "women" is a category word. In order for a category to exist, all the things or people in it need to have something in common. If what women have in common is being female, changing the definition to include male people makes it a meaningless word for a non-existent category of people with nothing in common.
So yes, "language evolves". But certain words do not, because our need for these words remains the same over time.
Until about 10 years ago everyone agreed that women are female people. Most people still do. And we definitely still need a word for female people that doesn't include male people.
If you redefine "women" to include male people then you no longer have a word that just means female people.
This isn’t the natural evolution of language. This is a rather Orwellian weaponisation of language, designed to prevent people whose beliefs are grounded in reality from being able to express those beliefs coherently, and to stop women as a whole from engaging in activism as a sex class. And that's why it must be resisted.
a cosplayer was found dead in the rhine in germany after the dokomi, circumstances of the death are not clear yet, a TIM and apparently a sex offender who groomed a minor, wow
the main focus is on trying to get people to address him with female pronouns btw
Aparently telling homophobes "it's okay to bi" when they say "lesbianism and gayness is fluid" is "asserting bisexual supremacy". Like we can't even defend them by saying, hey leave lesbains and gay men alone, it's perfectly fine to be bisexual because that's what you are if you like both sexes. And they take it as asserting bi supremacy. Lolllllll. No one has ever said that bisexuality is superior like I see lesbians saying lesbianism is superior. They really are just internally homophobic.
sexuality isn't fluid and if anyone claims it is, yes that person is probably bi and in denial.
IDs only have an M, for male, or an F, for female. this is your sex, which is immutable, and will remain the same from birth until death.
the small M or F on your ID does not state how you wear your hair, what pronouns you use, what type of clothing you wear, whether your favorite color is blue or pink, whether you identify as a woman or a man or nonbinary, whether you are masculine or feminine, whether you have or have not taken cross-sex-hormones, or whether you look more like a woman or a man. it is just your sex. an entirely neutral biological state of being, just a data point about which out of the 2 human sexes you are. that's all. means nothing else about you. just your sex.
side note: I thought that sex and gender were different, and that there could be male women, and female men? but ig not?
IDs only have an M, for male, or an F, for female. this is your sex, which is immutable, and will remain the same from birth until death.
the small M or F on your ID does not state how you wear your hair, what pronouns you use, what type of clothing you wear, whether your favorite color is blue or pink, whether you identify as a woman or a man or nonbinary, whether you are masculine or feminine, whether you have or have not taken cross-sex-hormones, or whether you look more like a woman or a man. it is just your sex. an entirely neutral biological state of being, just a data point about which out of the 2 human sexes you are. that's all. means nothing else about you. just your sex.
side note: I thought that sex and gender were different, and that there could be male women, and female men? but ig not?
Ageism is the most saddening trend of recent years. Under the guise of "self-care", we are putting ourselves through the torture that is deep self-hatred.
My grandmother will be 94 years-old this year. She is the youngest of 5 (all boys, she was the only girl). She had measles as a child and survived, despite becoming deaf on one ear because of it. She outlived both her parents. In fact, she has more than doubled the age that her father lived. She outlived all of her brothers. All of their wives. Some of her nieces and nephews. She spent almost half of her life living under an oppressive dictatorship, witnessed multiple armed conflicts, survived a bloody pandemic!
She only went to school until the age of 10, yet created a successful business along side my grandfather. Said business put my mother through Law school and my uncle through Business school. Both of my cousins went to Med school. I went to Law school and my older brother works in the marketing department for a big international company. Although she doesn't always comprehend what we do, she is insanely proud of each of us and will tell strangers on the street about our accomplishments.
She is beloved by both her family and her community - most of which she, too, has outlived. When she passes away (in many, many years, I hope) she will be greatly missed by all.
And yet ...
Sometimes she will turn to me and say she no longer recognises herself in the mirror. Or she will say that she no longer wears lipstick because "women her age should not wear make up". She gave me one of her white purses the other day because "she is too old to wear it". We are living in a society that convinces people like my grandmother that there isn't a space in it for them anymore. That, in turn, is trying to convince every single one of us that becoming someone like my grandmother is undesirable.
I will counter argue by saying that not only is my grandmother one of the most beautiful women on earth, both inside and out, but she has also lived a more fulfilling life that the great majority of influencers you see on social media selling "magical creams" and "baby botox" to impressionable young women.
And if I die looking like her, face covered in wrinkles from all the smiling and all the crying and all the living I got to do, I will die a much happier woman than those who think chasing eternal youth is the reason they were put on this earth.
yesterday i went thrifting, as one does sometimes, visiting a few nearby spots to look for something lighter for the summer. after a while, something hit me like a cartoon ass anvil from the sky.
not only are women's clothes more revealing and uncomfortable, less practical and adjusted for any kind of movement. they are also made from worse materials.
men's shirts? usually 100% cotton, sometimes mixed with viscose, you can even find a couple of linen ones if you're lucky. men's pants? similar situation, not to mention an addition of wider pockets.
women's shirts, blazers, sweaters and dresses are plagued with polyester and acrylic. we're wearing fucking plastic, frying ourselves in the summer heat, getting skin conditions and rashes, because our clothes are literally not suitable for wearing. it's damaging our hair in winter, harming our skin in summer, making us sweat and smell like crazy, not to mention that if you accidentally get on fire while wearing those, it will literally cling to your skin and melt with it.
please, check the tags on your clothes and the ones that you want to buy, your skin and overall health will thank you. take care of yourself, especially in this kind of weather, because the shit they sell to us is just ridiculous
