[radicio0]

⋆˚꩜｡ about me

my name is io and i’m 23.

i consider myself adjacent to radical feminism; i’m reluctant to identify wholly with radical feminism due to some areas of ambiguity, but i do think radical feminism generally “gets it right” regarding the circumstances of female oppression and how to combat it. i have other qualms with the community (i think the online movement borders on orthodoxy sometimes and this contrasts against our interest in accessibility for marginalised groups of women), but overall i’m on the same wave-length.

my specific beliefs are what you’d assume from radblr (gendercrit etc). my interest in radical feminism was piqued by commentary on the commercial sex economy so i align with people like bindel and mackinnon, and the topic encompasses the majority of what i read up on and dedicate time to talking about.

i think my other views go without saying but if anyone’s particularly interested they can drop an ask about a specific topic and i’ll try to provide something in-depth.

i quite enjoy debate and discussion and i don’t think it’s futile to articulate radical feminist ideas to those with dissenting perspectives.

i’m sure i’ll update this post with more information and resources in the future! ᡣ𐭩

[kiefbowl]

maybe one of the reasons tras think getting booted off tumblr for posting porn and pedo shit is deeply disturbing is bc deep down they believe it's a female privilege to be able to post tits and ass. like when you're so porn obsessed it's easy to get naked women on your phone and comp, you start thinking this is very normal. you start seeing the world as your porn palace. porn sites = internet. women are allowed to be porn, you won't allow me to be porn, therefore you don't think I'm a woman. etc. BUT they fail to see that women actually are not allowed to hang vag wherever. they won't believe it even if you tell them.

[radicio0]

there are white TIMs on tiktok calling that paris girl’s apology white woman tears btw

[dhakcjshkvjbd]

if we take gender ideology seriously, no one can really be cis. “woman” is a nebulous self-identity that is impossible to define and deeply personal and varied and means different things to each person, so how can anyone be “raised as a woman”? how can anyone’s womanhood be recognized or respected or affirmed more than any other’s, if every womanhood is a unique ethereal unknowable identity?

if I grew up being told to be quiet and servile because I’m female, but I define my womanhood as being daring and assertive and independent, how could I possibly be “cis”? the sexist stereotypes forced on me due to my biology are no more aligned with my ~personal womanhood~ than the sexist stereotypes expected of a male align with his idea of womanhood.

you’re left with 2 options: either embrace the fact that many (probably most) female people are also trans women, and leave behind your bioessentialist, genital-obsessed, exclusionary, fascist definition of trans women as an exclusively male category—or double down and say “ok ok, gender identity isn’t personal and impossible to define. It is just about misogynistic stereotypes and whether or not you want to be subjected to them.”

[gendiebrainrotreceipts]

Ooo they’re adding to the lore 🍿 🍿

[radicio0]

absolute gem of a reply hahaha

[madwomxxn]

They definitely have the charismatic leader(s) thing, it's transwomen in general. Their voices are obeyed above all others, they are always exalted in "queer" group dynamics, they're excessively fawned over and doted on by the in-group, they have mantras proliferated and chanted for them, criticism of them is forbidden, they can virtually do no wrong, patterns of their abuse/harm are constantly covered up and excused, they have all the grandiosity, control of information, they're given credit for huge achievements they didn't actually achieve to the point of mythology (ie the Stonewall myth "we owe them our rights"), they're allowed to rewrite history, naysayers are threatened, dogpiled, attacked etc

[pretty--poet-deactivated2018120]

my professor called andrea dworkin “anti-fun” and i feel like that is an accurate depiction of where liberal feminism is at right now

[lesbophobes-deactivated20220907]

>spent her life crusading against the sexual exploitation of women >”anti-fun”

i’m concerned about their idea of fun!

[blackswallowtailbutterfly]

According to my grandmother, who met her in person, she in fact had a wicked sense of humour.

[nomenculture]

Reminds me of what @savingseeds23’s has written about. Queer theory is all about being playful. It evades any serious discourse, and criticizes any serious discourse. It’s not meant to be a tool to analyze oppression. It functions as a toy.

[pure]

noticing a pattern here…

pictured: the heritage foundation [x], a NAMBLA publication on feminism, praising patrick califia [x], a convicted madam who owned a brothel [x], gay rights and NAMBLA activist david thorstad [x], BDSM advocate patrick califia on age of consent laws (pg. 136) [x], jeffrey epstein’s zionist friend and lawyer [x], and a jeffrey epstein email brainstorming strategies about how to defend a sexual abuser [x]

[pure]

the epstein revelations have sent me down a rabbit hole looking at sex industry NGO’s. and i am seeing that a number of these organizations consider pimps, brothel-owners, and even children as sex workers too. these organizations have an influence over public policy. hm. this probably doesn’t mean anything.

[dahlia--pinnata]

“See, privileged able-bodied middle class American suburban cis white ladies?? We’ve been saying for years, eventually they’ll come for you too!” most of you have not been saying that actually. Most of you have in fact spent the last decade or so preaching that any degree of privilege effectively insulates a woman from oppression and violence and that otherwise privileged women who express a fear of being harmed by men are hysterical self-victimizers. A laughably unearned “I told you so” imo

[gatekeeper-of-witchcraft]

I love the transmisogyny/transandrophobia wars bc, other than the complete inability or unwillingness to see or describe this as another permutation of sexism, both sides describe anything they don’t like as “terf rhetoric” in the same way that repubs describe anything they don’t like as communist

bc both have a strict policy of refusing to engage in any material from those schools of thought, lest thou be guilty by association, and thus have no idea what radical feminists (or communists) actually believe

[gendiebrainrotreceipts]

The absolutely countless trans day of remembrance events and services in the uk seems kinda weird when iirc at most one trans person was killed here this year

[an-awkward-tangerine]

Same in France, at my uni there are events all over with dramatic emphasis on high numbers but there was 1 murder, and it was an immigrant, male prostitute killed by a client. Mind you the trans movement defend clients and pimps but EVERY YEAR the most lethal violence is against vulnerable men in prostitution.

[femsolid]

They say 350 trans people were killed in 2024. Worldwide.

As said above, the numbers are low. It's mostly gay men being killed by other men; the background context is often prostitution. This is why most of those murders happen in latin america (254 out of 350) where there are lots of impoverished gay men who end up as prostituted transvestites. People in prostitution have an in incredibly low life expectency. But hey, keep calling it "empowering" and "sex positive" and us feminists "sex worker exclusionary" or whatever. The countries where trans people have been killed the most are Brazil, Mexico, Colombia and the USA.

8 people in the entire continent of Europe, 9 in Africa, 37 in Asia. 0 in Canada, 0 in Spain, 0 in Portugal, 0 in England, 0 in Sweden... Those are very low numbers.

The 41 of the USA could be linked to the higher population and an easy access to guns. Though I suspect, in the USA as well, prostitution might play a part. And with prostitution often comes drug deals.

The stats confirm that, most commonly, the victim's profession is prostitute, he is a male and the place of the killing is "the street, a field, forest, roadway, under a bridge, construction site, empty lot, abandoned building, car, van, hotel, motel, night club, bar, client's residence, park". And the victim is most likely to be a man of colour because the murders happen mostly in countries where people of colour live. They're killed by other men of colour.

It's pimps and "clients" and drug dealers doing the killings. You can't defend prostitution and then claim to support trans people, it seems to me.

They say "oh it's because of terfs, and transphobia in the media!" It's got nothing to do with the media, generally, and it certainly has nothing to do with feminists, who, by the way, never kill anyone. Trans people have never been this popular and supported in their entire, and admittedly short, history. Of course it comes with a conservative backlash, but that's not what's driving those killings, most of the time. In fact, in most countries, there are no killings at all. Zero. More disturbingly, in some countries, it's more likely that a "trans woman" will be a murderer than a murder victim. As was the case in Canada, where a man winked at the security camera before getting into the elevator to see his girlfriend or ex, stabbing her 23 times and mutilating her face, and then suffocating their two little girls (5 and 2 years old). He was sent to a women's prison during the trial, during which he showed up with a blond wig and claimed to be an "examplary mother" and a "soccer mom". The jury disagreed, he was convicted and sent back to a men's prison.

So, not to be too cynical about death, but that's a really low number overall. 350 out of an estimated 413 million trans people? That's not even one a day. And if half of it is happening in the same few countries, it means in most of the world, it's not happening. To put things into perspective, men kill a woman or girl every 10 minutes in the world. And they do so in western countries as well, because the murders are not circumstantial. They are part of an oppressive system. And that's not counting the attempted murders.

The thing is, trans people get lumped in "LGBT" stats, but when you look at it, it's gay men who are attacked the most, then lesbians, then bisexuals and then, far below, a tiny number of transvestites. Yet they call it a "holocaust."

If you try to find the statistics of gay people being killed, you'll have to dig, because most of the articles that come up are about trans people, despite being the least likely to be killed.

I type: "how many GAY people killed in 2024" on google and get:

Article 1: LGBTIQ people Article 2: Transgender Day of Remembrance, Transgender people Article 3: Murders of trans people Article 4: 350 transgender people murdered this year Article 5: Hates crimes motivated by gender identity Article 6: Suicide rates for queer and trans people Article 7: LGBTQ hate Article 8: LGBT homicide Article 9: Violence against transgender and gender-expansive people Article 10: 350 transgender people murdered in 2024 Article 11: LGBT victimization in the USA Article 12: LGBTQI+ Article 13: LGBTQ people Article 14: Trans Day of Remembrance

It's ridiculous.

[revoltinggirl-urethra]

semantics are the ultimate vessel to objective truth . keep splitting hairs and youll reach the atom !

[revoltinggirl-urethra]

99% of all pedants stop cross referencing definitions right before they construct the infallible observation ‼️‼️‼️

[rdthoughtdaughter-deactivated20]

The same old story. ‘I am soooo sexy!’

The subject has nothing to do with one’s desirability, the topic of bathrooms is a part of a bigger question of women’s vulnerable spaces, female only spaces.

But yet once again, the topic is swayed to the sexiness and shag. That’s a powerful display of fighting for one’s rights.

Womanesque womanly woman.

[realwomanstuff]

It's crazy that they keep calling it feminism to frame our boundaries regarding sex-segregation in terms of like... "Aren't you scared that your husband will want to fuck me?" Like "ooooo your hypothetical MAN AND LEGAL OWNER might want me more than you because I'm pornier than thou." It's absurd. It is weird, sexist, objectifying, male-centered on multiple levels. Also if you said this to someone in person, that would be sexual harassment.

[animentality]

[glaucusstrix]

This is what happens. Bait and switch, and not the first, second or even third time, you fools.

[witchescollection]

im literally going insane here, wikipedia is not currently being restricted in the UK (and is very up in air if it will - and would certainly be challenged if so)

youtube has had age restrictions since at least 2017. the only recent change is that they're now using AI to identify the age of individuals (they did a similar thing in 2020 but with videos).

spotify is indeed restricted. you now have to do a face scan, and then potentially show ID to be able to access 18+ music videos. the reason spotify seems to be doing this is right before the online safety act was enacted, there were several expose pieces about how it has a porn problem (despite not allowing pornographic content), and so it might be in response to that backlash alongside the act that they've put these measures in place. you're account on spotify will only be deactivated if you attempt to access 18+ content, it's facial recognition scan deems you underage, and you don't confirm your age with your ID.

as for the police monitoring task force, i'm not entirely sure what this post is referring to. ofcom are the body that are actively enforcing the online safety act, but they're not police.

there is a new national police unit in the uk for monitoring anti-migrant speech on social media (which from my understanding is reported into them, they're not just scrolling facebook for their job) in response to the horrific attack in Southport last year, especially as counter terrorist police originally predicted the threat to be "low".

there are absolutely valid criticisms to worry about this new police force, but it is worth remembering the context of the response the british population gave, and the riots, last year to put it in context. there has to be some accountability for this sort of issue, even if you don't think arresting people for what they say on the internet is fair.

additionally, the online safety act has always covered more than pornography, and does some amazing work at finally recognising some horrible issues on a lot of internet platforms (such as encouraging self-harm, and epilepsy trolling). it puts pressure on platforms to remove sexual exploitation (including CSA), fraud, promotion of suicide, eating disorder promotion, and content promoting the inhalation/ingestion of harmful substances.

of course, it's a lot harder to defend pro-ana and pro-suicide content than it is pornography, so folks tend to ignore that bit because it's inconvenient.

[animentality]

[radicio0]

Have you considered that porn is easy to vilify because it is a mass distribution of coercive rape recordings

[correctopinionhaver]