泣き虫

⚢ dude, we gotta play the reaper.

[nakimushiga-ru]

peak trans yes but when will you peak men

[nakimushiga-ru]

While out of commission with a chest infection I've managed to read through the entirety of the WPATH report by Environmental Progress. It's

[nakimushiga-ru]

Hi, i’m the original anon of this ask ( https://www.tumblr.com/nakimushiga-ru/734009353605152768/any-arguments-against-full-separatism-from-moids ) i think we ( u me n a few of the other anons i suspect) are having completely different conversations entirely because i haven’t come across that child bride post yet, so was largely unaware of the context of your posts, which i do apologize for as i now feel that my ask must’ve come across ridiculously insensitive and tone deaf.

Could you please link the post you speak off? i’d like to read it because the child bride aspect of the conversation seems.. vile.

nahhhhh it's not tone deaf it's just a different problem. don't be sorry about that. me talking here is not helping child brides in other countries either, i do not have the power to do that, what is vile is women who DO have the power making choices that put children at risk instead of helping them. i can't link the post (series of posts) because 1. i forgot who it was 2. i feel tainted enough by what i saw, i couldn't handle reading it again. you can see the dynamic in EVERY woman who talks about male terrorism and crimes against women, but then denies that men are the problem and claims women are oppressed for their heterosexuality, rather than femaleness. it's just a big circle. no one needs to be exposed to certain literature or discourse to make choices that don't hurt children, you just have to fucking care

[nakimushiga-ru]

women observing the world around them: men are doing bad things to women and children women with their third eye open: i have noticed that too, let's do something about that the first group quickly stapling their third eye shut: no

[nakimushiga-ru]

I find it interesting that OSA women have said that it's unfair for lesbians to tell them to stop dating men for feminist reasons as lesbians still have the option to date and love while OSA women must stay single (or as they actually see it: lonely and unloved) forever. As if lesbians never experience loneliness or feeling unloved or choose to stay single...

Their boyfriend/husband will most likely hate them more than some "mean" lesbian separatist on the internet.

they're saying lesbians advocating for women to have their own resources away from men in order to keep safe will not help child brides. why is no one seeing that. this isn't about sexuality, this is about children. it's not like child brides can go 'oh well hm i'll just walk away then', so it is up to other women. because men are doing these horrific things and won't stop.

[elitisthomosexual]

How do you even begin to advocate for female bodily integrity (integer means whole, complete) in a world where femaleness, just like maleness, is believed to be one incomplete half of a hetero whole? 

[hidetothink]

As women rightfully critique the misogyny surrounding male same-sex couples and surrogacy, I hope they will do so with a nuanced empathy and a recognition of deeply societal homophobia

Many gay men, myself included, have been beaten over the head about our inability to have children with our partners. I imagine bisexual men in same-sex relationships experience this as well. For millennia, the sin of homosexuality and all same-sex attraction was often the failure to produce offspring. Despite this, I rarely see such historic perspectives addressed when critiquing and analyzing suragacy

Simplifying this issue into just "men are obsessed with their genes and want bio kids because of it," while conveniently ignoring the dynamics of homophobic oppression, is...lazy and unfairly inacurate

The abuse of women's bodies, particularly disenfranchised women, is neither lessened nor erased by the history of homophobia. There exists no justification for treating women as objects, let alone medicine for gay and bi men and our experiences of homophobia

But untangling the mess of modern surrogacy and same-sex couples, without recognizing its complexity from every angle, feels deeply apathetic to same-sex couples and women, depending on which "side" is talking

But I will end on this: women are never a tool for soothing your internalized homophobia (regardless of whether you feel like it), and het-privilege always requires you to have intentional empathy and nuance (regardless of whether you feel like it)

[ms-hells-bells]

.....it’s not complex tho. no one has the right to use the female body as an object, especially not males. you feeling bad about that doesn’t change it, it adds zero to the discussion. males can’t have babies, that’s just life. 

of course, they shouldn’t be made to feel lesser for not having children, but the reality is that even if there was no homophobia, there’d be a lot of gay men that want to have a family, but can’t because biology. that is a fact that gay men have to come to terms with....for forever, basically. this is not het privilege, this is science. you’re not women, you can’t have kids.

your emotions that come with not being able to have kids are valid, just like that of infertile heterosexuals. it sucks, especially with the pressure, but these emotions do not shake the anti surrogacy stance in the slightest. of course anti surrogacy woman are angry at men that they think they have a right to the female body. surrogacy is on the same coin as prostitution, gay men who participate in surrogacy are the same as johns. they don’t think they’re bad people, they think that the women are consenting out of the goodness of their hearts, and not because of money, female socialisation, and/or family/friend group pressure, and they feel entitled to the female reproductive system.

tone policing and asking women who are fighting against their bodies being sold to have sympathy for the men buying their bodies because they have their own problems is absolutely male socialisation. no other group is asked to have this much consideration for the group exploiting them. and considering that a huge amount of radfems are lesbians and anti surrogacy, then “but the guilt since we can’t have kids” isn’t an excuse. homosexuality isn’t the common denominator for these expectations, being male is. many lesbian radfems even criticise and scrutinise the much less invasive and less ethically questionable sperm donation. 

in the ideal radfem world, not only would there be virtually no unwanted children born, but there’d be virtually no children up for adoption as a result. therefore, in the world that radfems are aiming for, unfortunately, most gay couples would have zero children at all, let alone biologically related ones. if this isn’t the world you want then maybe this isn’t the movement you should be orbiting. 

you can feel your feelings, but what matters most is not only the exploited women, but the resulting children. if there are straight women talking about how it’s disgusting that gay men are raising children, then that’s homophobia, but women saying “you men don’t get to feel entitled to women’s bodies just because you’re gay” is not homophobia. you  seem aware that straight women still oppress gay men, but the very thought of feeling upset that you can’t use the female body to get what you want is part of patriarchy and male privilege. you telling women we are required to be sympathetic to men because nature cock blocked them from biological parenthood is not it. whatever reason that men feel bad for not being able to produce offspring, that’s not our problem to deal with, we’re busy trying to stop a global human and infant trafficking and exploitation trade. 

homophobia is awful and obvious a point of intersection, but the homophobia intersection in feminism is meant for lesbians, not to deal with male specific issues. since you understand the nuance and complexity of emotions (i don’t mean this sarcastically, i genuinely mean it), why don’t you advocate as a sympathetic anti surrogacy advocate, and talk to gay men considering surrogacy from an empathetic but ethically opposed standpoint? gay men still have male socialisation, so they don’t listen to women, but you they might. maybe groups could be started where gay men (and possibly lesbians) talk about these issues and unfortunate things they may miss out on, but comfort each other and accept. that’s what infertile and sterile women do, there’s so many female infertility support groups. the vast majority don’t do surrogacy or even adopt, they just support each other and teach each other to find happiness elsewhere. males don’t seem to form this level of support or grouphood with each other. not to mention that infertile women face the exact same stigma surrounding offspring historically, and it used to even be one of the only reasons divorce could occur under religion, and there’s even a historical term for it (barren). maybe you guys could ask for advice and such from such women who are open about their experiences?

although i’m blunt and some of my words are harsh, i don’t mean this in an attacking or aggressive way, especially towards you specifically, just disagreement. i hope you understand what i’m trying to say. i tend to write a lot more than i mean to. i’m not mad at you, and i don’t want this to turn into a heated argument.

[elitisthomosexual]

@hidetothink​ I am completely against surrogacy, but I had to respond to this homophobic drivel here.

males can’t have babies, that’s just life

there’d be a lot of gay men that want to have a family, but can’t because biology

your emotions that come with not being able to have kids are valid, just like that of infertile heterosexuals

No male can have a baby, so why are you implying that non gay men can have families and gay men can’t? What is the biological difference in the sex of gay men vs non gay men? Their reproductive function is the same, they produce sperm and that’s about it. Either no male can have a family or all sperm producing males can. Infertile heterosexuals are not remotely the same as fertile homosexuals.

surrogacy is on the same coin as prostitution

The most common form of surrogacy is through forced hetero marriage contract. Hetero men buy a bride/live-in-servant, sometimes even a girl child, that they impregnate at will and have absolute rights over the progeny she produces while she can be discarded easily. One surrogacy is private and exclusive under punishment of death often if the exclusivity is violated, the other is a short term contract. Both are bad.

many lesbian radfems even criticise and scrutinise the much less invasive and less ethically questionable sperm donation

Many eh? Lesbians or “polilez“? What is invasive about sperm donation? What is ethically questionable? Is it what conservatives and traditionalist homophobes find ethically questionable too? That a child will be raised outside of the heterosexual couple unit (even though sperm donation doesn’t mean the sperm donor is anonymous or won’t be in the life of the kid necessarily)? Do hetero radfems criticize/scrutinize reproduction through sex with random men that you won’t meet again? Or is that considered natural and a personal reproductive choice?

therefore, in the world that radfems are aiming for, unfortunately, most gay couples would have zero children at all, let alone biologically related ones

Gay couples as in male gay couples or same sex couples in general? Would social fatherhood still be a thing in the world radfems aim for? Will it be exclusive to non gay men because they made a direct in vagina donation instead of a cup donation? How do you plan to stop lesbians (or other women) from having kids with the sperm of gay men and maybe even rasing the kids as a team with them or even giving them kids to raise on their own? Are you really against patriarchy because you seem to only be against gay fatherhood? 

what matters most is not only the exploited women, but the resulting children

What is best for children? The hetero couple parenting unit? When research after reasearch shows that lesbian couples make the best homes and gay men make far and beyond better parents than hetero men? You radfems talk about global issues all the time, but it’s like you don’t even listen to yourselves. Child brides, forced marriages, forced pregnancies, trafficked children and women, hetero domestic abuse so high for pregnant women that is high on the top causes of death, countless murdered babies because they were not sons, countless attempted murdered babies and seriously abused/malnurished/neglected kids because they are not sons or despite being sons, unwanted pregnancies, unwanted babies, hetero sexual abuse of girls with the cover of the whole family, so much child exploitation etc and you still think that has nothing to do with the hetero couple unit being judged and found lacking?

Do not pretend you care for the kids when you say similar stuff as conservative homophobes, that all children need a father and mother (and of course they have to be in a hetero relationhsip too) to grow up healthy.

the homophobia intersection in feminism is meant for lesbians

LMAO feminism? The movement who supports that the most oppressed women are the ones who love men and want to be with them and the most privileged are the lesbians? When many feminists don’t even acknowledge that lesbians can experience homophobia (especially not from non lesbian women, it’s all horizontal aggression don’t you know?) and that it’s just all misogyny? That feminism? Or the other kind with the feminist-but-not-a-manhating-lezbo feminism? Or the other with the TWAW and if you say no to sex with all of them then you deserve to die you fascist?

maybe groups could be started where gay men (and possibly lesbians) talk about these issues and unfortunate things they may miss out on, but comfort each other and accept

What exactly we may miss out on again? Reproduction that we don’t need hetero or bi people to achieve or something else? What do we need to accept? Non gay people’s homophobia and thinking they have a monopoly on having children? You seem to be thinking that we are less than biology wise? Maybe even unnatural? Do you think homosexual people are unfortunate for being homosexual?

I say all the above as a woman who is against surrogacy and who will never act on her fertility nor plans to adopt kids.

[nakimushiga-ru]

'how happy are women in relationships with men' seems to be thought of as the metric for how feminist a society is, rather than to what extent women are legally and financially emancipated from men, what power they have that doesn't come from men. because they don't want the latter if it would threaten the former

[nakimushiga-ru]

if the argument is "white feminists in the usa are not ending x problem in another country" then sure. malaysian accountants are not solving lung cancer in tibet. french dogs are not solving astigmatism in south africa. if your argument is that "oppressed groups living away from their oppressor will not make them safer" then what are you smoking because i will start doing drugs today if it would allow me to be as detached from reality as you

[nakimushiga-ru]

I think a lot of it comes down to the fact that osa women can benefit from being in a relationship with a man, and they don't want to admit that. The social benefit of being partnered with a man, the potential economic benefit, in many countries where same sex marriage is illegal, the government benefits of being married, the emotional benefits, etc

It's like they look at the potential negative impacts (assault, physical, emotional and financial abuse, etc) and weigh it against the potential benefits, and their attraction to men, and the social pressure to be in a relationship with a man, and decide that a relationship is worth the risk

After all, they can see the signs, and choose a good man, nevermind that every woman is just as intelligent as them, and also thought she chose a good man. There is a connecting factor here, and it is men in general.

i know this. they don't want to admit the benefits of het privilege outweighs (for them, and them only) the negatives of patriarchy, no matter how many wars men start, no matter how many children die.

it's when women mention horrific examples like child brides, and then argue that being away from oppressors would not solve anything. blatantly untrue. and using the "some people don't have a choice" as a reason for why women should devote their energy to fuelling patriarchy instead of towards helping the people who don't have a choice, who don't have power. it's nauseating, i find it honestly sickening.

but it's the world heterosexuals want! it's what they've created, it's what they continue to create, they freely admit they don't want any alternative

[nakimushiga-ru]

a short list of things most women who identify as radfem don't/pretend not to understand:

patriarchy

misogyny

sexuality

gender

heterosexism

social constructs

separatist action

privilege

agency

[nakimushiga-ru]

Any arguments against full separatism from moids is a real mask of moment for me tbh — hetfems n bihets want to keep fucking their oppressors and don’t want to separate from them so they’ll keep inventing billions of alternative ‘solutions’ yet in the end all it does is highlight how much they don’t care about women or feminism in general because guess what?? those solutions will never ever ever save nor prioritize lesbians; surprise! we are women too! and their instances of being with men endangers us. n somehow they say this isn’t class traitor behaviour?? they want to fuck their oppressors so they’re against separatism which inadvertently forces lesbians to be around males and get victimized, harassed, raped and tortured, if not killed. some feminism lmfao.

it was from women who said separatism won't help child brides. i don't know what i'm missing - they don't want girls to be kept away from men and not married off? or they do but they think that's not separatist action because it's not women playing acoustic guitar in a north american forest? or they don't want to talk about finding safety away from men because they prefer patriarchy, but don't want to admit it for some reason?

they want to eliminate symptoms of the problem without addressing the root cause, and that can't be done in this case. the majority of women care more about men than they care about other women or girls, they pretend to care about these awful things happening to girls, while in the same breath encouraging women to engage in behaviour that endangers us all. traitors like you say

[nakimushiga-ru]

i don't know why i expect better. makes me sound like an asshole but i regularly underestimate how stupid most people are. not uneducated - but unwise. maybe the quickest way to get a reality check on that is looking up anything about 1. haircare and 2. crystals. women in the thousands parroting unscientific nonsense they've convinced themselves is true, but hey at least they're getting sponsored for it

[nakimushiga-ru]

it's so upsetting! women's apathy to men's cruelty is so upsetting. men will keep on terrorising and killing but collectively women refuse to end the cycle

[nakimushiga-ru]

it's so frustrating to see people say 'that wouldn't work!' about something that already works, make no attempt to give an alternative they think would work, bring up horrific examples of abuse, accuse others of being chronically online, and then say 'nah i'm leaving this blog to focus on fandom stuff'

[nakimushiga-ru]

then giving the example of child brides..... men do that sort of thing and this is part of your argument why women should, given the choice, keep producing them? it's not convincing me

[nakimushiga-ru]

"how would separatism help [women and girls exploited by men]" answer: because they would be away from those men and therefore not exploited by them. do you have any more ridiculously stupid questions

[nakimushiga-ru]

i would welcome more s.c.u.m. type solutions but what exploitation, abuse or oppression is solved without the exploiter/abuser/oppressor being separated from the exploited/abused/oppressed. what is your solution