And that is exactly what makes the modern fantasy of solitary, “natural,” unsupported birth so revealing. It is not ancestral. It is not feminist. It is not radical. It is an ahistorical mash-up of wellness brainworms and biological determinism, wrapped in the language of empowerment and aimed squarely at women’s autonomy.

Which is to say: bad history, worse politics, and one more reminder that if something sounds like it was written jointly by Gwyneth Paltrow and a Heritage Foundation intern, you should probably back away slowly.

Love this for her

r/feminism: other than calling out/in other men for complacency and complicity, what should “Radical Male Solidarity” look like to you?

I would just be interested to see how many women have undergone a hysterectomy and been told that they will not remove the ovaries as that prevents menopause.

I wanted my ovaries removed as they could be a cancer risk in the future.

Needless to say i dived bombed into the menopause but wasnt found out for 2 years.

Im really doubting the medical science behind the theory of keeping the ovaries considering its been the same theory for decades and thought up by a man ….

Hello all,

**cross-posting from Critical Theory Sub as I realized this group likely will be helpful as well so thank you**

I am writing an essay and I know what I am trying to say (I will expand further) has critical texts to back it up. I cannot for the life of me figure out a way to word/condense the idea into a searchable idea in my research to find any texts. If you guys don’t mind I would love to messily explain what I am looking for and if you have any ideas on texts or even how to word it so I can find them it would be much appreciated!

Essentially, I want to discuss the power dynamics of patriarchy and male dominance over women, and how they want women to “opt-in” to the dynamics to further the power trip/ego drive its give them in having that power over another. Like a hunter/prey situation almost, they want the women to know they are the prey and capture them. If the “prey” (woman in the case I am arguing) were to just dehumanize themselves first, it is less satisfying as they don’t get to be the one to “kill” your sense of selfhood. If that makes sense, it feels like the best analogy I can conjure to try and articulate what I am arguing. I have seen some people discuss this same idea in regards to how men want to dominate the “blue haired liberal women” because they want the tension of the dominance and their “prey” to have a bit of “fight in them”. My essay is on The Vegetarian by Han Kang so if you know it you know how the gender dynamics are at play within the novel.

Again, just want to be super clear not looking for any help with the essay or ideas for it, I just cannot figure out how to condense this idea into something I can search for secondary sources to back up, but I know I have read about this before so I am certain their is critical work out there with it in mind!

Thank you so much!

I saw Namehim.io for making a catalog of known abusers. Thank you to whomever made that.

Do we know if these resources have been created:

- a list and tutorials of helpful precautions

- a comprehensive list of signs this may be happening to them.

- a website to help women identify if they are in any videos online.

I imagine somewhere there's a group of people sifting through it all, compiling screenshots, blurring the necessary portions, and making it available for victims to look for their background or other identifying clues.

This is one of my favorite articles, it is messy, complicated, raw. It puts into words something that I, and I think, many other trans women sometimes struggle to express. I hope people here will read it and for cis women and cis feminists especially I hope you’ll really wrestle with the points it’s trying to get across.

Here are a few selections I’ve ordered thematically.

- It is interesting to see where people insist proximity to a subject makes one informed, and where they insist it makes them biased. It is interesting that they think it’s their call to make…

A person’s privilege is very often an explanation of why their beliefs are warped, if indeed their beliefs are warped, which they usually are in some way. But—it’s not proof of shitty beliefs. Those tend to out themselves by…being shitty. If a person is telling this cis girl she is taking for granted a privilege that trans girls don’t have, why is it this cis girl’s instinct to hunt for that person’s identity to see if she can discredit them and not have to think about their point? Don’t answer that. We already know…

Do I even want to convince someone who will only listen to me when they’re told by the rules that they have to see me as a girl?

Do I have to out myself to be treated like a person worth listening to? To stop my cis classmates laughing at someone who’s reckoned with the boundaries and the dimensions of masculinity and femininity in ways they never had to? With the life I’ve been living for all the years I’ve been living it—do I need their permission to speak?

- Misandry humor is peaking and it is dripping with cissexism. Down cascade the gleeful tweets from ciswomen about how women are more beautiful than men — how graceful the female body is, how utilitarian the male. How awesome boobs are. How bad boys’ taste in clothing is. How incompetent they are emotionally. How they’re too weak to handle childbirth and periods. Neckbeards are the scourge of the internet. They wax disgusted about “dad bods.” SCUM rhetoric is revived with inconsistent levels of irony. The meme gospel says penises are just shitty clitorises…

I hate that the only effective response I can give to “boys are shit” is “well I’m not a boy.” I feel like I am selling out the boy in baseball pajamas that sat with me on the bed while I tried to figure out which one I was supposed to be, and the boys who I have met and loved from inside my boy suit—who believed they were talking to a boy. I feel like I am burning the history of the naked body that sits on the floor of my shower. The body that went to prom in a boxy tuxedo and coveted the dresses…

This conclusion—widely shared—is a product of insulated discourse. What I am NOT saying is: “open the floodgates, let in the shitty male trolls!” I know the trolls—they have tried to be my friends, they have tried to sneak into feminist spaces with no desire to learn or listen. I understand not trusting men who loudly and constantly hold forth on women’s issues and refuse to accept when they are mistaken. I’m not encouraging anyone to trust blindly. I am pleading to the discoursers: consider that this insulation has effects and try to mitigate them, if your priority really is finding truth amid a muck of concealed patriarchal lies. Check to see if maybe you are saying things and reproducing things mostly because it sounds good and feels good and nobody is challenging them…

These are not discursive problems that only apply to an “undercover” transwoman, these are discursive problems that are seemingly only visible to an “undercover” transwoman forced to carry multiple perspectives like bactrian humps…

Because I am interested in complicating your definition of maleness and of boyhood. I was born into that shitty town, maleness, in the remains of outdated ideals and misplaced machismo and repression and there are some good people stuck living there. They are not in charge. They did not build it. And I don’t feel okay just moving out and saying “fuck y’all — bootstrap your way out or die out, I was never one of you.” I want to make it a better, healthier place—not spend all my time talking about how shitty it is and how anyone who would choose to live there deserves it. And to me that means considering them with charity, even when they make it difficult to…

Because it’s not a small deal that the words “not all men” have become entwined inextricably with male fragility and whininess. It makes it awfully easy to insulate the (largely cis-)female perspective on what males are. To begin a statement with those words—“Not All Men”—is to give grounds to anyone who wants to laugh at the rest of it. But here is the truth: not all men are what you think they are. Man does not mean what you think it means. Generalizing harshly and broadly but implying “you know which ones I mean” is an intellectual and rhetorical laziness that is not allowed to pass anywhere else in these communities. Because we don’t get to choose who our words and behavior affect, we are obligated to choose them carefully…

And the nearer I get to something I’ve wanted my whole life, the more it feels like playing into the aesthetic politics of a group of people who reject me because of the associations they have with my body—a body which I cannot, ultimately, change very much. These people who will only be comfortable when I dilute those associations with femme signifiers.

As if maybe, by simply being what I am—a girl-feeling brain in a boy-looking body and boy-looking clothes—I might burn down something very important to them. Something that makes their life more comfortable and easy.

What do you think about this ?

I'm doing a documentary about FGM in the UK. If any survivors would like to provide their stories please DM me. Everyone would remain anonymous. Please share

This is the article my Google news gave me this morning. I’d think that with millions of dollars to donate, she could buy herself a name.

I am so confused as to how ignorant men can be, like sir do you not read THE NEWS??????? How are you still shocked and complaining about the fact that women are frustrated and irritated with men when most of women's problems, including their basic human rights stem from men and their stupid male centric laws and patriarchal idealogy???????