This assumes feminist ideology (a) speaks for all women (b) is supported by all women.
That is not only ridiculous and completely false, it is also epic cringe, because you are implying women are a monolithic entity with no individuality or free will.
This assumes feminist ideology (a) speaks for all women (b) is supported by all women.
That is not only ridiculous and completely false, it is also epic cringe, because you are implying women are a monolithic entity with no individuality or free will.
"That's like asking what "democracy" is and thinking it applies the same in all situations, everywhere, all the time."
Democracy is a system of social organisation that has an objective definition. It is not open to interpretation.
"It's a legal, social, financial movement, and people argue about it all the time, yet it still exists"
If I had just arrived on planet Earth and asked what feminist ideology was, your description would leave me none the wiser.
"You're not very intelligent, and it shows in your rambling, low IQ drivel because you think "feminism" should be held to a different standard when people still fight over what "socialism" or "capitalism" should mean."
Socialism and capitalism have objective definitions.
"You don't know what "trans" is"
Trans (like 'feminism') has become a meaningless word because it is being used by different groups to describe different things. My criticism of feminism is that it attaches any policy to 'women' in order to drive that policy through, based on society's inherent sympathy and compassion for women.
'Trans' is now doing the same thing, attaching various policies (many of them contradictory) to 'transexual' in order to drive that policy through, based on society's inherent sympathy and compassion for transexuals.
In this sense feminism and trans are one and the same. I would argue that trans is basically 5th wave feminism. Having destroyed traditional families, traditional pair bonding and traditional gender roles and gender identities feminism has gone as far as it can within a binary framework. Feminism's social construct theory of gender and rejection of biology (sexual dimorphism) has taken society to a more genderless and non binary view of humans.
'Transexual' used to mean a person who wanted to live as a man or a woman. The idea being that their gender is fixed (and binary) but in opposition to their outward sexual characteristics, hence the desire for body modification to align the body with the gender (as best as can be achieved with crude medical interventions).
I would argue it was feminism that brought SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM to the concept of transexual, which flipped it on its head to create transgenderism, which implies gender is FLUID and ARBITRARY, rather than fixed and binary.
"you don't know how various feminists have fought it throughout history, you don't know who is funding it, you don't know that TERFs are the major opponents to it (and we'll win), you don't know anything."
I already acknowledged that many feminists fiercely oppose trans activism. Just as many second wavers fiercely opposed third wave feminism, and many first wave fiercely opposed second wave.
Feminists have ALWAYS opposed the social, economic and cultural effects of their previous feminist activism. That is PRECISELY the point I am making.
Anti feminists, feminist critics and MRA's have been arguing for YEARS that feminism's push for deconstructing gender and 'dismantling the patriarchy' (ie dismantling traditional gender roles, spaces, occupations, identities etc) is eroding the very boundaries that provide both sexes with PRIVAC, a DISTINCT IDENTITY and their own respective SAFE SPACES.
Today TERF's are just repeating all the complaints and arguments that MRA's have been making for years and years in this respect. MRA's wanted women to stay away from men;s shed's, the boy scouts, men's clubs, various male occupations and institutions. They did not like having their male spaces feminised so that they could no longer act as men and work as men like to work.
We've systematically driven men out of all of their safe spaces and even occupied their gender roles in movies, with women assuming the 'male lead' and performing the heroic and macho behaviour that no woman in real life ever performs (or has any desire to!).
Men's identity is intimately linked to their occupations (more so than their bodies) and we've taken that away from men.
TERF's are now getting a taste of their own medicine, and it is perfectly natural that they are also traumatised and upset about it.
But that does not mean it wasn't feminism that started this trend of deconstructing gender and mixing up the genders. It was. It's just that when the only victims were men feminists showed no compassion - in fact they relished in it and mocked the men who complained that their male identities and male spaces were being feminised and occupied by women. These mn were accused of being 'toxic' and 'fragile'.
Now the shoe is on the other foot. While the MRA's are saying "We did warn you this would happen"... the feminists are saying "OMG it's all men's fault!"
No it is not. It is feminism which created this appetite for total deconstruction of gender and erosion of boundaries.
"You appear to use the word "feminism" as a stand in for all of your personal issues or failings in life."
You are not making arguments. You are just belittling me.
""Trans" is a corporate amalgamation of big pharma interests, the medical industry, subversive billionaires, and social media narcissistic males like Dylan Mulvaney and Jeffrey Marsh."
In its current form yes. These are the same interests which funded and steered feminism for the last century. It is well documented that feminism was funded by the Rockefellers to break up the nuclear family, get women into the workplace (as taxpayers) and get children into the indoctrination camps to be indoctrinated with more radical feminism than their feminist parents.
Big Pharma also benefits hugely from the plummeting mental health of women caused by feminist lifestyles and the mountains of anti depressants consumed as a result.
Then there is the multi billion dollar abortion industry. Then there is the multi billion dollar fertility industry, as feminist women tend to eschew motherhood and then suddenly get baby rabies in their late 30's when fertility is a problem (peak fertility occurs around the age of 24).
Then there is the multi billion dollar cosmetics and fashion industry which benefits from women trying desperately to find a man well after they've hit the wall (rather than finding one when they are youthful and desirable). Traditional women who marry young can afford to grow old gracefully having already secured a husband and children. They don't have to compete with women 10 years younger than them when trying to find a man to marry.
We know feminism (and now trans) is a boon for mega corporations because they all support it and promote it.
What they DON'T promote is traditional gender roles, nuclear family, stay at home mothers, strong individualistic capable men, home schooling and recognising that men and women are INHERENTLY DIFFERENT and need from their own spaces, activities and sub cultures.
People like Dylan Mulvaney and Jeffrey Marsh are just copying female entitlement and narcissism, as invented by feminists. It was 'sex positive feminism' in the 1990's (3rd wave) that sought to normalise sexual fetishes, sexual hedonism and sexual consumerism and mix it all up with vanity, ego and narcissism. It was 'sex positive feminism' that sought to detach sex from stable, long term relationships and reproduction and make sex a trivial affair.
Now here we are with body parts treated like lego bricks, and creepy guys using (a caricature of) female sexuality and female compassion to get close to children.
Female staff in the juvenile detention sector rape more underage males than any other form of rape. MRA's can;t stop it because feminism won't allow this kind of sexual violence and oppression to be recognised - because it shatters the 'female victim/ male perpetrator' narrative that feminism thrives on.
But by denying female predatory behaviour exists and pinning all sexual crimes on men (rather than being an even split) feminism has made women (and female sexuality) synonymous with safety and virtue. This is why creepy men now adopt female affectations and persona to slip by society's radar and get to children.
"It's not my job to educate unintelligent people like you. "
Actually it is. Feminist organisations and programs get billions of dollars in funding annually, much of it coming from taxes. The very least you could do as a feminist is to ENGAGE in civilised debates and discussions when you come across them, rather than hand wave all criticisms aside as if they were a bad smell.
A little more humility and you'd realise TERFs today are where MRA's were at a decade ago.
A little less ego and you'd realise the real battle is not between men and women (and never was), but between ordinary men and women and the technocratic, transhumanist ruling class.
Men and women are (and always were) naturally complimentary and hugely successful when working as a team.
It's not my job to teach ignorant people who can't read. LOL--male narcissism from Dylan Mulvaney and Jeffrey Marsh is actually females' fault--pure misogyny.
You didn't understand anything I said, and you're not smart enough to even accept it. I can't teach stupid people on Substack. You can't even properly read my statement on feminism--I said it's FOR FEMALES and females ALONE. Not ALL females accept it or call themselves "feminist," even the ones that take advantage of it while seeking male validation. You can't even read and understand that simple sentence.
Get a job. Unemployment is a hell of a thing. Get off your computer and do something with your life. You're not smart enough for this and it sounds like you're two minutes away from trooning out. Good luck in life because you sound like a friendless porn addict. Stop talking about concepts you aren't intelligent enough to comprehend. Be quiet.
I didn't write any ad hominems either. I am speaking honestly--you're not intelligent enough to speak because you're not educated enough on this topic. You have poor reading comprehension skills, and you don't understand any of my references or the history of this movement. You can't even properly read simple statements I made.
You seem to have problems with women in general, so that's a you problem. That's why you think Dylan Mulvaney is not a clear example of the pure male narcissism which drives "trans." He's the epitome of it. And yeah sure, nobody ever debates, disagrees, or offers differing views and definition of "socialism" and "capitalism"--everyone agrees on everything completely because it's objective and this has been true for all of history. LOL. See, this is what I mean. You're not intelligent and educated enough to speak on this
Women and men were never "complementary" as stated in your ahistorical nonsense. Men always felt more comfortable when women were subservient, personal servants, barred from any financial or social independence, unable to have protection from violence in the home, etc. That's exploitation and subjugation, not being "complementary." Now that they can't get away with treating their wives like a punching bag/waitress, they rage while swiping all day on Tinder (Tinder is 76% male btw).
Like I said, you aren't educated to speak on this. I can't give you a history lesson here. Pointing out lack of education and knowledge isn't ad hominem. It's simply true. I don't care about your personal struggles or history. It's just facts.
"Feminism is for females and females alone, yes."
This assumes feminist ideology (a) speaks for all women (b) is supported by all women.
That is not only ridiculous and completely false, it is also epic cringe, because you are implying women are a monolithic entity with no individuality or free will.
"That's like asking what "democracy" is and thinking it applies the same in all situations, everywhere, all the time."
Democracy is a system of social organisation that has an objective definition. It is not open to interpretation.
"It's a legal, social, financial movement, and people argue about it all the time, yet it still exists"
If I had just arrived on planet Earth and asked what feminist ideology was, your description would leave me none the wiser.
"You're not very intelligent, and it shows in your rambling, low IQ drivel because you think "feminism" should be held to a different standard when people still fight over what "socialism" or "capitalism" should mean."
Socialism and capitalism have objective definitions.
"You don't know what "trans" is"
Trans (like 'feminism') has become a meaningless word because it is being used by different groups to describe different things. My criticism of feminism is that it attaches any policy to 'women' in order to drive that policy through, based on society's inherent sympathy and compassion for women.
'Trans' is now doing the same thing, attaching various policies (many of them contradictory) to 'transexual' in order to drive that policy through, based on society's inherent sympathy and compassion for transexuals.
In this sense feminism and trans are one and the same. I would argue that trans is basically 5th wave feminism. Having destroyed traditional families, traditional pair bonding and traditional gender roles and gender identities feminism has gone as far as it can within a binary framework. Feminism's social construct theory of gender and rejection of biology (sexual dimorphism) has taken society to a more genderless and non binary view of humans.
'Transexual' used to mean a person who wanted to live as a man or a woman. The idea being that their gender is fixed (and binary) but in opposition to their outward sexual characteristics, hence the desire for body modification to align the body with the gender (as best as can be achieved with crude medical interventions).
I would argue it was feminism that brought SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISM to the concept of transexual, which flipped it on its head to create transgenderism, which implies gender is FLUID and ARBITRARY, rather than fixed and binary.
"you don't know how various feminists have fought it throughout history, you don't know who is funding it, you don't know that TERFs are the major opponents to it (and we'll win), you don't know anything."
I already acknowledged that many feminists fiercely oppose trans activism. Just as many second wavers fiercely opposed third wave feminism, and many first wave fiercely opposed second wave.
Feminists have ALWAYS opposed the social, economic and cultural effects of their previous feminist activism. That is PRECISELY the point I am making.
Anti feminists, feminist critics and MRA's have been arguing for YEARS that feminism's push for deconstructing gender and 'dismantling the patriarchy' (ie dismantling traditional gender roles, spaces, occupations, identities etc) is eroding the very boundaries that provide both sexes with PRIVAC, a DISTINCT IDENTITY and their own respective SAFE SPACES.
Today TERF's are just repeating all the complaints and arguments that MRA's have been making for years and years in this respect. MRA's wanted women to stay away from men;s shed's, the boy scouts, men's clubs, various male occupations and institutions. They did not like having their male spaces feminised so that they could no longer act as men and work as men like to work.
We've systematically driven men out of all of their safe spaces and even occupied their gender roles in movies, with women assuming the 'male lead' and performing the heroic and macho behaviour that no woman in real life ever performs (or has any desire to!).
Men's identity is intimately linked to their occupations (more so than their bodies) and we've taken that away from men.
TERF's are now getting a taste of their own medicine, and it is perfectly natural that they are also traumatised and upset about it.
But that does not mean it wasn't feminism that started this trend of deconstructing gender and mixing up the genders. It was. It's just that when the only victims were men feminists showed no compassion - in fact they relished in it and mocked the men who complained that their male identities and male spaces were being feminised and occupied by women. These mn were accused of being 'toxic' and 'fragile'.
Now the shoe is on the other foot. While the MRA's are saying "We did warn you this would happen"... the feminists are saying "OMG it's all men's fault!"
No it is not. It is feminism which created this appetite for total deconstruction of gender and erosion of boundaries.
"You appear to use the word "feminism" as a stand in for all of your personal issues or failings in life."
You are not making arguments. You are just belittling me.
""Trans" is a corporate amalgamation of big pharma interests, the medical industry, subversive billionaires, and social media narcissistic males like Dylan Mulvaney and Jeffrey Marsh."
In its current form yes. These are the same interests which funded and steered feminism for the last century. It is well documented that feminism was funded by the Rockefellers to break up the nuclear family, get women into the workplace (as taxpayers) and get children into the indoctrination camps to be indoctrinated with more radical feminism than their feminist parents.
Big Pharma also benefits hugely from the plummeting mental health of women caused by feminist lifestyles and the mountains of anti depressants consumed as a result.
Then there is the multi billion dollar abortion industry. Then there is the multi billion dollar fertility industry, as feminist women tend to eschew motherhood and then suddenly get baby rabies in their late 30's when fertility is a problem (peak fertility occurs around the age of 24).
Then there is the multi billion dollar cosmetics and fashion industry which benefits from women trying desperately to find a man well after they've hit the wall (rather than finding one when they are youthful and desirable). Traditional women who marry young can afford to grow old gracefully having already secured a husband and children. They don't have to compete with women 10 years younger than them when trying to find a man to marry.
We know feminism (and now trans) is a boon for mega corporations because they all support it and promote it.
What they DON'T promote is traditional gender roles, nuclear family, stay at home mothers, strong individualistic capable men, home schooling and recognising that men and women are INHERENTLY DIFFERENT and need from their own spaces, activities and sub cultures.
People like Dylan Mulvaney and Jeffrey Marsh are just copying female entitlement and narcissism, as invented by feminists. It was 'sex positive feminism' in the 1990's (3rd wave) that sought to normalise sexual fetishes, sexual hedonism and sexual consumerism and mix it all up with vanity, ego and narcissism. It was 'sex positive feminism' that sought to detach sex from stable, long term relationships and reproduction and make sex a trivial affair.
Now here we are with body parts treated like lego bricks, and creepy guys using (a caricature of) female sexuality and female compassion to get close to children.
Female staff in the juvenile detention sector rape more underage males than any other form of rape. MRA's can;t stop it because feminism won't allow this kind of sexual violence and oppression to be recognised - because it shatters the 'female victim/ male perpetrator' narrative that feminism thrives on.
But by denying female predatory behaviour exists and pinning all sexual crimes on men (rather than being an even split) feminism has made women (and female sexuality) synonymous with safety and virtue. This is why creepy men now adopt female affectations and persona to slip by society's radar and get to children.
"It's not my job to educate unintelligent people like you. "
Actually it is. Feminist organisations and programs get billions of dollars in funding annually, much of it coming from taxes. The very least you could do as a feminist is to ENGAGE in civilised debates and discussions when you come across them, rather than hand wave all criticisms aside as if they were a bad smell.
A little more humility and you'd realise TERFs today are where MRA's were at a decade ago.
A little less ego and you'd realise the real battle is not between men and women (and never was), but between ordinary men and women and the technocratic, transhumanist ruling class.
Men and women are (and always were) naturally complimentary and hugely successful when working as a team.
It's not my job to teach ignorant people who can't read. LOL--male narcissism from Dylan Mulvaney and Jeffrey Marsh is actually females' fault--pure misogyny.
You didn't understand anything I said, and you're not smart enough to even accept it. I can't teach stupid people on Substack. You can't even properly read my statement on feminism--I said it's FOR FEMALES and females ALONE. Not ALL females accept it or call themselves "feminist," even the ones that take advantage of it while seeking male validation. You can't even read and understand that simple sentence.
Get a job. Unemployment is a hell of a thing. Get off your computer and do something with your life. You're not smart enough for this and it sounds like you're two minutes away from trooning out. Good luck in life because you sound like a friendless porn addict. Stop talking about concepts you aren't intelligent enough to comprehend. Be quiet.
You both need to be more respectful of one another in your disagreements or take it elsewhere. Your choice.
I have been nothing but courteous, patient and painstakingly attentive to Kat's comments.
Not a single ad hom from me.
Criticising feminist ideology is NOT a personal attack, even if it does personally offend feminists (which is not my intention).
I didn't write any ad hominems either. I am speaking honestly--you're not intelligent enough to speak because you're not educated enough on this topic. You have poor reading comprehension skills, and you don't understand any of my references or the history of this movement. You can't even properly read simple statements I made.
You seem to have problems with women in general, so that's a you problem. That's why you think Dylan Mulvaney is not a clear example of the pure male narcissism which drives "trans." He's the epitome of it. And yeah sure, nobody ever debates, disagrees, or offers differing views and definition of "socialism" and "capitalism"--everyone agrees on everything completely because it's objective and this has been true for all of history. LOL. See, this is what I mean. You're not intelligent and educated enough to speak on this
Women and men were never "complementary" as stated in your ahistorical nonsense. Men always felt more comfortable when women were subservient, personal servants, barred from any financial or social independence, unable to have protection from violence in the home, etc. That's exploitation and subjugation, not being "complementary." Now that they can't get away with treating their wives like a punching bag/waitress, they rage while swiping all day on Tinder (Tinder is 76% male btw).
Like I said, you aren't educated to speak on this. I can't give you a history lesson here. Pointing out lack of education and knowledge isn't ad hominem. It's simply true. I don't care about your personal struggles or history. It's just facts.
This person can't read and understand simple statements.
Yeah, this is what I'm talking about. Take it somewhere else.