Anita includes “transwomen” in her list of most oppressedest women. What a slap in the face to women. I am starting to hear reformists criticize individualism and liberalism without doing anything to stop contributing to it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOmIIAact4s
I say I am pro-abortion because I believe the phrase “pro-choice” stigmatizes women who get abortions by not naming the procedure. I am as pro-abortion as I am any other medical procedure a person needs. There is the stupid comment liberals make that abortion is not the first choice and contraceptives are important as well. Well no duh. But as long as men stick their dicks into women with no real regard for the consequences it needs to be an option. It’s not that we want women to have unplanned pregnancies, its that us actual feminists understand how reality works.
“Exactly what “moralizing” is supposed to mean is never really clear, but by using context clues I’ve deduced it means anyone who has personal standards tethered to something other than orgasms.”
“Framing prostitution as sex work is a betrayal and a huge lie.”
I have found trying to communicate with some liberal student feminists is to smash into a brick wall.
A wall of deep denial, a wall of blocking their ears.
A wall that is built to silenced the multiple voices of exited women.
I will write a little of my contact with British student feminists, and hope it points how highly intelligent women can decide to be ignorant.
I also write this to say that I believe too women’s group in our universities have been infiltrated by the sex trade – mainly by English Collective of Prostitutes, Sex Workers Open University and International Union of Sex Workers.
These groups speak for the status quo of the sex trade, and have only a token if any interest in the welfare of the prostituted.
These groups speak the language of the sex trade profiteers and uphold the interests of the punters.
View original post 736 more words
Only girls wear dresses, duh!
“The insistence that women’s voices in particular – particularly when women are describing their lives and needs – require “trigger warnings” is patriarchal to the core. When people are offended by women speaking or writing, it’s rarely women who are the problem.”
I originally wrote this piece for Socialist Resistance – in response to an idea that came from them, not me – but asked to have it withdrawn in light of this editorial announcement. I think it’s important for women’s work to be represented fairly and I don’t consent to my work being presented in contexts which don’t reflect the actual commission. The insistence that women’s voices in particular – particularly when women are describing their lives and needs – require “trigger warnings” is patriarchal to the core. When people are offended by women speaking or writing, it’s rarely women who are the problem.
In this particular instance I think Socialist Resistance need to be honest about their editorial policies and their political principles. There is a word for people for whom discussions of female bodies, female labour and male violence cause “offence and distress.” That word is not “trans”, “queer”…
View original post 1,609 more words
“Marija Gimbutas traces the beginnings of patriarchal times at the beginning of the first invasions / colonisations and genocides, when men on horses from the east conquered the west and Mediterranean.”
“Postmodernism is the service of science denialism” Still waiting for the male dominated skeptical community to apply this to queer theory…
One of the more frightening conceptual aspects of pseudoscience is known as the crank magnetism effect. It occurs when someone, who promotes one kind of pseudoscience, becomes more likely of promoting other kinds of crankery. Someone who promotes HIV/AIDS denialism may also promote alternative medicine, someone who promotes conspiracy theories about 9/11 might also believe that chemtrails are real, someone who are against vaccines might advocate for conspiracy theories about condoms and so on. This might occur because of similar core beliefs, such as the alleged severe deceitfulness of the government or because of extreme religious beliefs, or perhaps because of the similar themes and content of many kinds of pseudoscience.
Cornelius Hunter, an intelligent design creationist associated with the Center for Science and Culture (previously named the Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture) at the Discovery Institute, is a good illustration of the concept of crank magnetism…
View original post 1,725 more words
Someone who incorporates male liberalism into their feminist analysis. They push for women to be in positions of power, as if that could ever help stop capitalist patriarchy and how it harms women as a class. Tokenism does nothing. They tout the male liberal line on transgenderism, porn, the sex trade etc. Which means they will advocate for federal gender identity protections, which actually would make female-only space a hate crime, therefore hurting genuine feminist organizing. They support full decriminalization or legalization of the sex trade as opposed to the Nordic Model on prostitution, claim that porn can be “feminist” and “empowering” instead of acknowledging that it is male violence against women. Refuse to out right condemn capitalism, deny that patriarchy is another word for male supremacy and that men as a class benefit materially from the subjugation of women. Instead they take a very useless individualist position.
“My body, my choice” was a specific phrase aimed at allowing a woman to resist a specific form of work (pregnancy) if she does not consent to it. It was never meant to override attempts to protect human beings from other forms of coercion, yet it seems to me that we are now particularly keen to jettison such concerns, if only in matters specifically relating to female bodies. http://www.newstatesman.com/lifestyle/2015/03/why-you-shouldn-t-sell-breast-milk
I saw a recent DNews video using this phrase to defend breast implants. It is frequently used to defend other forms of misogyny like porn, prostitution etc. and trivialize critical analysis of cultural/patriarchal phenomena that is violent and exploitative of women.