I’m glad the “het-partnered women are braindead leashed-bitches semen-dick-slaves and women are stupid” (literally all real things i’ve seen these people say, and be proud of saying) “radfems” have started calling themselves something, “blackpill”, bc now I can easily tell them to fuck off, and state that I’m openly opposed to their misogynistic bullshit.
Far as I’m aware, you’re a radfem if you agree with radical feminist literature and theory, not because you get the most likes or because you’re the most extreme. The “radical” means “root”, not extremist. If you refuse to read radical feminist literature bc you don’t agree with the authors maybe that’s a good sign you aren’t a radfem to begin with. Hot take: Hating men doesn’t inherently make you a feminist. Being a feminist may make you hate men, but misandry doesn’t automatically mean you’re part of a women’s liberation movement, especially when you hate most women and talk about them like they’re dogs. There’s a difference between criticism of heterosexual relationships and this gross misogynistic purity culture and sexual-shaming. I want to stress, I have no issue with sensible criticism of het-partnerships and culture.
If you don’t think “women are stupid” and “het-partnered women are dick-slaves, leashed by men via their semen” then congrats!! This post isn’t about you, and you don’t need to get defensive! If you do think these things, feel free to get mad, but I won’t take you any more seriously than any other non-radfem who’s angry about my posts. If you’re angry, I’m assuming you agree with those two statements. If you don’t know what this post is talking about, please scroll on, enjoy ur day, and ignore this.
I really didn’t want to get involved with this kinda stuff. I don’t want to spend my time fighting feminists I mildly disagree with when there’s bigger issues and worse “enemies”, but at this point I don’t consider anyone who took “leashed bitches” seriously or thinks 90% of female population to be stupid to be a “feminist” of any sort, for what I thought were obvious reasons. At this point they’re hurting the movement honestly more than most other individual threats, directly pushing women away from or out of radfeminism from the inside.
Explain in 5 sentences how can you be a "liberated woman" while still partnering with your supposed oppressor, letting him fuck you and sharing your resources with him, I'll wait
did i say you could? or did i say “calling het-partnered women leashed sluts and saying women are stupid is not radfem”? and bonus round: did i not literally say “I have no issue with sensible criticism of het-partnership”
blackpill do literally anything besides put words in other peoples mouths challenge impossible. it’s literally insane how yall can’t do anything but strawman. “calling women whores is bad” “OH SO YOU ARE A HOMOPHOBE? OH SO YOU THINK HET PARTNERING IS GREAT?” what the actual fuck is wrong in ur heads. this is why no one bothers arguing with you anymore, it’s a waste of time.
News flash! Radfem doesn't equal female separatist! I've made a post about this a while ago, if anyone is interested here's the link to it.
The gist is that separatism is a tool of radical feminism, a strand, but not a core tenet. If your definition of radical feminism would have excluded its founders then maybe you're not a radical feminist? You can call yourself a separatist feminist, that's fine too. :)
Why are yall so obsessed with defending men
ALL MEN are evil, they all benefit from patriarchy and they all deserve to die
when did anyone defend men? did i miss something? or is it that you genuinely believe not calling women “sluts” and “braindead leashed bitches” is “defending men”? are you serious? are we fucking serious???
There’s no need to strawman me, you say that you can be a radfem and date men - which you can’t bc see my original post. It’s not my fault that yall are such birds that you freak out the second someone insults your precious moods
please highlight where i ever said or even implied that
and did you notice the part, already reiterated once in this post, where i said i do not have an issue with criticism of het partnership?
also i think you might wanna sit the “strawman” argument out this time bc i’m not sure bringing it up will end in your favour
You’re still failing to actually address my point which is about what I’d expect.
You think women can be in het relationships and I think you can’t call yourself a radfem if you’re not 4b.
You can keep snarking at me all you want it doesn’t change the fact that you’re wrong :)
once again, did i say women “can” be in het relationships, or just that you shouldn’t call them “braindead leashed bitches” for it? and was i not in fact, very specific about that?
i also don’t think women should wear makeup but i don’t think they should be called some insane sexually degrading slur for it. what the actual fuck about “don’t call women sluts and bitches” is so fucking hard for yall? we are so literally not talking about men, we are talking about what slurs you throw at women.
Yeah no dude just keep strawmannig me bc you’re mad. I never said any of that.
You’re like the magats making up shit to be mad about lmao
you never said any of what exactly? you never said anything about what the post is about??? idk if you noticed the highlighted text above but there’s no need to take issue with the post unless you think women should be called those things, so what exactly have you said? something entirely irrelevant? and my original point stands that no one was talking about defending men?
Girl bye I’m not gonna keep entertaining you. Either learn to read or block me I really don’t care
why are we pretending like op didn't just say that separatism is "slut-shaming" and use the age-old libfem argument: "radical feminist is root feminist, that means we don't need to be radical, so yea I will invite men into women's spaces" "Far as I’m aware, you’re a radfem if you agree with radical feminist literature and theory, not because you get the most likes or because you’re the most extreme. The “radical” means “root”, not extremist. If you refuse to read radical feminist literature bc you don’t agree with the authors maybe that’s a good sign you aren’t a radfem to begin with." so not engaging in the sexist charade of serving men is "extreme"
"There’s a difference between criticism of heterosexual relationships and this gross misogynistic purity culture and sexual-shaming. I want to stress, I have no issue with sensible criticism of het-partnerships and culture."
I hate this argument so much "radical feminism is root feminism"
ok? and the root of the problem is men, so why are you dating them. you turned a perfectly good topic about how we shouldn't use misogynistic language to describe other women into a subtle anti-separatist dog whistle. you should've just ended it at "don't call women bad words" instead of subtly changing the topic to include boyfriends under the guise of radical feminsts
“There’s a difference between criticism of heterosexual relationships and this gross misogynistic purity culture and sexual-shaming. I want to stress, I have no issue with sensible criticism of het-partnerships and culture.”
you people are genuinely so insistent on putting words in the mouth of anyone who criticises you in the slightest.
i could not have more explicitly said that there is a difference between separatism and misogyny, and that i have no problem with separatism. i so unbelievably explicitly DID NOT say “separatism is slut-shaming”. i explicitly said the polar opposite.
i also, as already screenshotted and highlighted, stated that this post is exclusively about calling women these sexually degrading insults. again, i really could not have been more explicit. i never “subtly changed the subject to include boyfriends”. i would love to see a single thing i ever said that implied that.
and now i want to clarify: i have no hope that you will stop strawmanning, putting words in my mouth and entirely making things up. i respond to this only because i’d like the rest of radblr to see how fucking delusional your side has gotten and how utterly pathetically easily offended yall get when someone says “let’s not sexually degrade women”. this is merely an example and a spectacle. feel free to continue hallucinating things i’ve allegedly said, but my point is made regarding how your accusations are entirely baseless.
"you people are genuinely so insistent on putting words in the mouth of anyone who criticises you in the slightest." first of all, it "criticizes". second of all, criticizing me from what? are you trying to imply that I called a woman any of these things? now you're just lying on top of projecting because you know you're embarrassing yourself.
no matter how much you say "i have no problem with separatism" it means nothing when you just say that to avoid criticism with your obviously incorrect implication that "separatism is not radical feminism and it's extreme." "but where did i say that where did i say that" do you need to reread what you wrote? "This post is exclusively about calling women these words"
except it's not because YOU MADE IT about the definition of radical feminism and chose to muddy that description in a specific way that allows men to access it through het-partnered women. when will you stop lying? everything you said is a lie. you say that im making these "fake accusations" towards when i just sent a screenshot of what YOU said. what happened to "i don't want to argue with women" i check you blog and you have yet o even argue with a man
I'm sorry but you look so fucking stupid trying to start beef just because you lack any reading comprehension and keep ignoring what everyone is actually saying because you know youre wrong
also, like, this is such a tra response? idk about @goddessrevolt but i'd rather live in a basement of misery and hatred by myself then share it with a man
i was gonna leave this alone but i cannot get over this. holy fucking shit, go eat a burger and jerk off to the American flag. it all makes sense now - ur one of many Americans struggling with literacy. you in fact, read so little that non-American spelling is so unfamiliar to you that you think it’s incorrect. and you are SO confident it’s incorrect no less. you still wanna argue it’s not projection when you say i have no reading comprehension and i can’t read?
i wonder if you will also defend this mistake until you’re red in the face and thoroughly laughed at?
btw i think you meant “first of all, it’s ‘criticises’” if you wanna even try that game. there’s a host of other spelling and grammar errors though ur response but i think it verges on cruelty to embarrass you any further on this matter.
if you seriously aren’t trolling, go read a book. preferably not an american one.
oh my god i had to stop reading at “it’s CRITICIZES” i can’t read the rest of that reblog. any creditability she had or point she was trying to make wasn’t really happening anyway BUT THEN. THE AMERICAN JUMPED OUT 😭😭😂😂 the confidence is hilarious
Argumentum at burgerum and it's valid
yall will not fucking believe this
