Jeez

Got socially murdered. Again. Formerly swissjeez and sarahpawlson

[scifi0lver]

[weedp4nties]

Please do not shut up about trans women's blogs being terminated disproportionately. You have to care more about speaking out against this. You have to care more about the girls that have been termed to oblivion. You have to care more about the girls that haven't come back. You have to care more about trans women.

Don't let them get away with it!

[doginclusionaryradicalfeminism]

how I sleep knowing tumblr is taking away fetishists' fetish posting spots

[niiwa-angel]

These are the posts of the blogs getting banned, btw, just in case anybody is curious about what these men are doing to get termed

You're being "disproportionately banned" because you disproportionately post so much rape threats and porn. You blatantly go against the terms and conditions you agreed to when you made your account. It's not discrimination, it's the consequences of your actions.

[swisssjeeez]

[swisssjeeez]

[weedp4nties]

Please do not shut up about trans women's blogs being terminated disproportionately. You have to care more about speaking out against this. You have to care more about the girls that have been termed to oblivion. You have to care more about the girls that haven't come back. You have to care more about trans women.

Don't let them get away with it!

[doginclusionaryradicalfeminism]

how I sleep knowing tumblr is taking away fetishists' fetish posting spots

[niiwa-angel]

These are the posts of the blogs getting banned, btw, just in case anybody is curious about what these men are doing to get termed

You're being "disproportionately banned" because you disproportionately post so much rape threats and porn. You blatantly go against the terms and conditions you agreed to when you made your account. It's not discrimination, it's the consequences of your actions.

[swisssjeeez]

[capricorn-season]

[swisssjeeez]

The anti intellectualism is wild. You cannot have symptoms of something you don’t have. Like your diarrhea is not a colorectal cancer symptom unless you have colorectal cancer. It’s just diarrhea lmao.

[kayla-denker]

Hey, you, cis girl that's very (correctly) vocal about women being allowed to talk about their periods, do you include trans women in that?

I ask because every single time I've tried to talk about it to anyone that isn't a trans woman they get fucking angry. Which has caused me to have to just suffer in silence every single month. So I really relate to cis women when they talk about literally the exact same thing; being shamed by everyone around them their whole lives for talking about their periods, so they just suffer in silence every month as it negatively impacts their work and social lives. But I don't even feel like I can voice that I am literally dealing with the same exact thing because most of y'all react like you want to throw me in front of a bus for saying it, even those of you who act like your such big great transfem allies.

[swisssjeeez]

You’re male. You do not have a uterus or ovaries. You do not have a period or a menstrual cycle. Such an insanely weird thing to lie about.

[sichorean]

They're so fucking hypocritical

[swisssjeeez]

And they blocked me immediately lmaoooo

Note: I did not mention pheromones at any point??

[rneadowsoprano-deactivated20211]

Postmodernism has people like everything is okay as long as nobody is harmed btw ive changed the definition of harm and the criteria is very high now. And it’s ok to hurt people if they’re damaged enough to want to be hurt. We have no responsibility to not hurt people. But if you say words I personally think are bad that’s literally the worst possible thing one could do and you’re a fascist now. Like people will literally defend incest and then denounce someone as a fascist for using the word “degenerate” we genuinely live in the craziest society possible

[fuckmytransboylife]

Why do leftists try so hard to defend their bodyshaming of men? Why tf do you think ‘small penis’ jokes and shaming men for being short or fat or having a neck beard is okay, as long as the specific man you’re hurtling these insults towards is an asshole?

YOU’RE STILL BEING FATPHOBIC, INTERSEXIST, AND TRANSANDROPHOBIC, AND JUST GENERALLY BODY SHAMING ANYONE WITH THOSE TRAITS.

[doingitatmybirthdaydinner]

so I’m supposed to just not make fat jokes if a fat dude is being an asshole? hmm no that doesn’t sound right…

if you’re fat and short and have a small dick maybe be aware of that before being an asshole. you can’t be displaying regina george behavior when you look like an amberlynn reid frumpelstiltskin chuddington. like don’t throw stones from fat chud houses

[underthecocktree]

Fucking sick to my stomach. Tumblr user incestfreak69iluvincest has just been exposed for. I can’t even say it

[tactfulsaboteur]

aphobia

[celestinegreyfax]

Do cis women actually like trans women?

[girlwithafishtalethe2nd]

We dont!!!! :>

[kkoffin]

not if they’re wannabe rapists! sure hope OP hasn’t recently posted any fetish posts about how raping some women should be allowed!

[radfem-hancock]

I actually have no issue with trans women as long as they're not pedophilic, incestuous, rapists!!! :D

[swisssjeeez]

OP you need to be executed.

[humphreybogie]

The greatest "radical feminist" minds of our time are busy explaining how retributional post-sex femicide is OK as long as it's against trans women

[11thfempachi]

You mean when a trans person lies about their sex to a person who doesn't want to sleep with a trans person and revealed they commited rape by deception to their partner afterwards?

[diana-lostandfound]

"Retributional" so you agree it's justified repayment because you're killing a rapist

[swisssjeeez]

You can’t femicide men lmaoooo

[blacklesbianprincess]

drag is proof that no matter the sexuality, men need women to prop themselves up and exploit to soothe their inferiority complex

[minotauri]

sources say there are muscles in the back of my neck. and they want to kill me

[humblekitten]

Marsha P. Johnson was not a trans woman. He was in a documentary two days before he died where he said “I’m a man”. In the 60s and 70s, he identified as a “gay transvestite”. His close friends used both male and female pronouns and he didn’t take offense to either. He didn’t even live as “Marsha” all of the time, he went back and forth between living as Malcolm and living as “Marsha”.

Sylvia Rivera wasn’t a trans woman either. In 1971 he called himself a “transvestite” and a “half-sister”. He wrote an essay titled “Transvestites: Your Half Sisters and Half Brothers of the Revolution” where he says that “Transvestites are homosexual men and women who dress in clothes of the opposite sex.” In an interview in 1995 with Randy Wicker and in a 2002 essay titled “Queens In Exile, The Forgotten Ones”, he variously calls himself a “gay man”, a “gay girl” (probably in the “gurl” sense, not the female sense), and a “drag queen.” He knew he was male…“The early 60s was not a good time for drag queens, effeminate boys or boys that wore makeup like we did. Back then we were beat up by the police, by everybody. I didn’t really come out as a drag queen until the late 60s.” He did not identify with the word transgender…“People now want to call me a lesbian because I’m with Julia [his mtf partner], and I say, “No. I’m just me. I’m not a lesbian.” I’m tired of being labeled. I don’t even like the label transgender. I’m tired of living with labels. I just want to be who I am.”

Lastly, Marsha Johnson has alleged that Sylvia Rivera lied about being at the Stonewall riots, Rivera might not have been there at all. This is backed up by Stonewall historian David Carter who says that Rivera’s claim to have been at the riot was a “fabrication” and that Rivera’s various tellings of the story were riddled with inconsistencies. The true story, backed up by Marsha’s roommate Randy Wicker and gay activist Doric Wilson, is that Rivera had fallen asleep in a public park after taking heroin and he only learned about the riots after Marsha Johnson found him, woke him up, and recounted the events. According to Carter, no credible witness has ever been found who saw Rivera at Stonewall during the riots.

Marsha P Johnson documentary

Silvia Rivera documentary

[the-land-of-women]

‘I don’t feel like a girl’ ‘I don’t feel like a boy’ well great they’re not feelings, now you can stop worrying about it ❤️

[gothra]

I’ll never forget when I was arguing with a person in favor of total prison abolition and I asked them “what about violent offenders?” And they said “Well, in a world where prisons have been abolished, we’ll have leveled the playing field and everyone will have their basic needs met, and crime won’t be as much of an issue.” And then I was like “okay. But…no. Because rich people also rape and murder, so it isn’t just a poor person thing. So what will we do about that?” And I don’t think they answered me after that. I’m ashamed to say I continued to think that the problem was that I simply didn’t understand prison abolitionists enough and that their point was right in front of me, and it would click once I finally let myself understand it. It took me a long time to realize that if something is going to make sense, it needs to make sense. If you want to turn theory into Praxis (I’m using that word right don’t correct me I’ll vomit) everyone needs to be on board, which mean it all needs to click and it needs to click fast and fucking clear. You need to turn a complex idea into something both digestible and flexible enough to be expanded upon. Every time I ask a prison abolitionist what they actually intend to do about violent crime, I get directed to a summer reading list and a BreadTuber. It’s like a sleight-of-hand trick. Where’s the answer to my question. There it is. No wait, there it is. It’s under this cup. No it isn’t. “There’s theory that can explain this better than I can.” As if most theory isn’t just a collection of essays meant to be absorbed and discussed by academics, not the average skeptic. “Read this book.” And the book won’t even answer the question. The book tells you to go ask someone else. “Oh, watch this so-and-so, she totally explains it better than me.” Why can’t you explain it at all? Why did you even bring it up if you were going to point me to someone else to give me the basics that you should probably already know? Maybe I’m just one of those crazy people who thinks that some people need to be kept away from the public for everyone’s good. Maybe that just makes me insane. Maybe not believing that pervasive systemic misogyny could be solved with a UBI and a prayer circle makes me a bad guy. But it’s not like women’s safety is a priority anyway. It’s not like there is an objective claim to be made that re-releasing violent offenders or simply not locking them up is deadly.

[a-lesbian-feminist]

I've done a lot of reading about prison abolition, particularly academic sources, and the general idea is that crimes will still happen, but the communty will essentially sort it out on their own.

A lot of prison abolition frameworks rely on what we know about how societies met their own and each others needs before currency. So, if someone needed milk, they'd take eggs from their chicken and trade it with the person who has a cow. This ensured that everyone's physical needs were usually met.

Prison abolitonists won't say it, but their idea of how rape should be handled is exactly how these early agricultural societies handled it. It was a "majority rules" system. Meaning, if the community liked the women more, the man would be ousted or punished. And if the community liked the man more, the woman would be ousted or punished.

The general goal of prison abolition is not a society in which everyone is safe and has their individual needs met. It's a society that's stable and can maintain itself, where most people have their physical needs met enough to reproduce and continue the society.

This is why they can never give you a straight answer. Because the prison abolition framework doesn't aim to abolish rape, it aims to keep it as quiet as possible. Their solution is to keep men only raping their own wives and daughters, and for those women and girls to have enough other needs met that they'll shut up about it for fear of not having those other needs met.

Most prison abolitionists do not actually understand their framework, because they don't read the academic sources and they don't know how their ideal society would function. But the academics know exactly what it would look like, and it's a regressive society where instead of a justice system making prisons to keep the violent men contained, each household has a woman to keep that household's men contained.

If you want to know what prison abolition looks like, don't ask a prison abolitionist who says "I don't know what that would be like". Look at examples of early agricultural communities where their primary goal is survival. That's what it would look like, because in the absence of large scale people management, all of the social duties fall to women.

[countcait]

And you don't even need to go back that far. The concept of a secular "public civil force" originated in England in the 18th century. Before that, proto-police were the private hires of nobles or the church/dominant religious force, or else a part of the local military. For the vast majority of history, commoners largely settled most of their disputes among themselves, usually in a way that was heavily dependant on religious ideology. A rape victim might get community justice, but like others were saying in this thread, that depended on the standing of the rapist within the community.

Like it or not, a lot of the historical gains made for women's freedom have come from the penal system. A husband is no longer the untouchable iron fist of the law within his own home, an outside force can step in and stop him from beating his wife and children to a pulp. They can lock him away where he'll never hurt anyone again. That's revolutionary. It took until 1993 for marital rape to become illegal in the US, but it still happened. A woman can freely say no to sex with her husband and seek legal recourse if he rapes her. Again, revolutionary.

I think prison abolition is another example of far-leftists falling in love with the idea of tearing down an imperfect system without putting a single coherent thought toward the reality of rebuilding afterward.