Quote:Shame is "I am bad." Guilt is "I did something bad."

Quote:Feminist solidarity is a way of being that is embedded in cultural traditions and movements that resist women's socio-economic inequalities and patriarchal power. It unites women in, inter alia, a refusal to accept the ongoing prevalence of sexism and misogyny; the exploitation of women's labor, emotions, and bodies; physical and financial violence toward women; inequalities of work opportunities and entrenched gender pay disparities. Feminist solidarity is thus a form of organizing, which envisages a shared responsibility for the lives of others, working with care and intimacy, and toward social transformations that are made possible through “democratic engagement”. It builds resistance across intersectional borders and often manifests when traditional avenues for resistance have become blocked. It emerges from the capacity to affect and be affected, through care, compassion, and empathy with and for others and as a means to engender allyship. Historically, the role of solidarity [...] [has] brought women together despite their differences across race, sexuality, as well as political and socio-economic positions. It has, however, also been suggested that feminist activism has been disciplined, institutionalized, and intellectualized such that it no longer offers the necessary radical response to ongoing issues of injustice.

Quote:It unites women in, inter alia, a refusal to accept the ongoing prevalence of sexism and misogyny; the exploitation of women's labor, emotions, and bodies; physical and financial violence toward women; inequalities of work opportunities and entrenched gender pay disparities.

• What is female solidarity?
  
  
• How are women supposed to achieve female solidarity?
  
  
• Is female solidarity even possible?
  
  

Quote:For example, until 2019, Minnesota protected rapists who still lived with and had sexual relations with a spouse. That year, Governor Tim Walz signed a bill that put an end to this marital rape exception. Similarly, California and Idaho repealed their provisions for marital rape in 2021.

• Connecticut: “Spousal sexual assault is a class B felony and carries a prison sentence of between one and 20 years, in addition to a $15,000 fine.” (Woolf Law Firm) versus general sexual assault: “Any person found guilty under this section shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of at least ten years[.]” (Connecticut General Statutes, Sexual assault in the first degree: Class B or A felony.)
  
  
• Maryland: Maryland repealed its spousal defense for rape laws. (May 2023)
  
  
• Michigan: “Whitmer signed House Bill 4202 last week, which removed the loophole preventing prosecution if the spouse is mentally incapacitated. The two loopholes that remain are if your spouse is under the age of 16 or if your spouse is "mentally incapable."” (July 2023)
  
  
• Mississippi: “Two measures aimed at helping rape survivors get justice have unanimously passed the state House and are before the Senate, where they were killed without a vote last year. [...] House Bill 995, authored by Rep. Dana McLean, R-Columbus, would [...] remove a spousal defense for those who commit marital rape.” (February 2023) It looks like Bill 995 was passed and signed by the governor.
  
  
• Nevada: “[W]hen it comes to spousal rape under Nevada Revised Statute 200.373, forcible sexual intercourse between married couples is arguably lawful, provided it’s not achieved through force or threats of force.” (Law Offices of Martin Hart, Las Vegas criminal defense attorney)
  
  
• Ohio: “Members of Ohio’s General Assembly have tried to close a loophole that protects spouses from being charged with sex offenses for years without success. Bipartisan sponsors have once again introduced a bill that would eliminate exceptions for spouses in cases of rape, sexual battery, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, gross sexual imposition and sexual imposition, and expand circumstances when a person can testify against a spouse.” (May 2023) It still awaits passing the Senate. (December 2023)
  
  
• Oklahoma: “The state laws clearly outline the difference between rape and spousal rape. [...] It’s important to note, however, that Oklahoma law does not discuss the use of drugs or alcohol to influence a spouse’s decision to have sex.” (Jacqui Ford Law)
  
  
• Rhode Island: “The House of Representatives passed Rep. Robert E. Craven’s (D-Dist. 32, North Kingstown) legislation (2021-H 6155) which eliminates the marital sexual assault exception when a victim is incapacitated, disabled, or helpless.” (May 2021). Would then be awaiting the Senate. Unsure of current status. There is another news article about a Senate bill that awaits the House: “The Senate today approved legislation sponsored by Sen. Dawn Euer to allow criminal charges to be brought when a person is raped by their spouse while the victim is incapacitated. State law includes an exemption for spouses in the part of state’s first-degree sexual assault law that addresses situations when the victim is incapacitated, disabled or helpless. The bill (2021-S 0834) approved by the Senate today would eliminate that exemption.” (June 2021) Unsure of its status as well.
  
  
• South Carolina: “What about third degree rape? This is still rape: a forceful, sexual assault against the will of the victim. Third degree rape is not a crime when spouses are involved. Let me repeat that. Under current South Carolina law, a husband’s third degree rape of his wife is not rape.” (November 2012) “Rape, or forcible sexual assault, is called Criminal Sexual Conduct ("CSC"). South Carolina's rape or CSC law is codified in S.C. Code § 16-3-652. This is a class "A" felony punishable by up to thirty years in prison. It is prosecuted in the Court of General Sessions by the Solicitor's office. [...] If the alleged victim of a rape is a current spouse the defendant may be charged under the Spousal Sexual Battery statute.” (James R. Snell Law Office) Meanwhile, in the Spousal Sexual Battery statute: “South Carolina's Spousal Sexual Battery law is contained in S.C. Code § 16-3-615. In order to be convicted the State must prove that during the time of a valid marriage one spouse sexually penetrated the other with the use of a weapon or aggravated force. There is a statutory requirement that the alleged incident be reported to law enforcement within thirty days. Those convicted (by guilty plea or trial) may be sentenced to up to ten years in the South Carolina Department of Corrections.” (James Snell Law Office)
  
  
• Virginia: “In any case deemed appropriate by the court, all or part of any sentence imposed for a violation under this section against a spouse may be suspended upon the defendant's completion of counseling or therapy, if not already provided, in the manner prescribed under § 19.2-218.1 if, after consideration of the views of the complaining witness and such other evidence as may be relevant, the court finds such action will promote maintenance of the family unit and will be in the best interest of the complaining witness.” (Code of Virginia, section on Rape)
  
  

Quote:It’s so absurd that “terf” has gained so much traction but it does make sense when you look at the complete upheaval of language that comes with any backlash.

First of all, the acronym makes radical feminist politics seem as though they are centred on trans people, so much so that this egregious “exclusion” becomes part of the movement itself. Radical feminism does not exclude people for being trans; in fact radical feminism is open to trans men as they have female biology in common which is the basis of women’s oppression.

Radical feminism is a women’s liberation movement that, at its root, seeks to abolish male supremacy. Radical feminism is, therefore, necessarily only about female people. Naming the agent/oppressor is something women have very rarely had the freedom to do. It is no mistake that there is a widespread attempt to shut down this absolutely mandatory and hugely effective method of fighting oppression.

Trans women are adult male people (this is not debatable. They are “trans” women because they were not born female). The idea that radical feminism is bad or wrong because it excludes people who claim to “belong” in the movement is itself based on a premise that radical feminists deny, because it is demonstrably untrue: that male-born people can become female-born people - or that there are no discernible, meaningful differences between male and female people. Both of these lies erase women’s oppression and completely annihilate any attempt at a class analysis (no accident).

Women are oppressed because men demand access to our bodies for sexual exploitation and procreation. This is how we identify that misogyny is sex-based. As an oppressed class, we have a right and an obligation to connect on that recognizable front in order to end this oppression. Radical feminism is not trans-exclusive. It is male-exclusive. Because it’s for females, only. Because males are the oppressor class to the female subordinate class, and this is not natural, good, or inevitable.

Quote:Something happened in my English class that I think perfectly sums up how so many people don't understand feminism.

At the beginning of each class, we have to talk about something in english for two minutes. This woman decided to talk about radical feminism in South Korea. She explained how feminists there decide not to date men, have sex with men, marry men and have kids with men anymore. It was very interesting and well explained, and I was happy to see another woman from my uni talking about feminism. From what I understood, she's not Korean but goes to Korea often and has a lot of radical feminists friends there.

Then another woman raises her hand and asks "don't you think these rules are a little bit tough?". I roll my eyes, but the other woman is confused. She frowns. "What rules? What are you talking about?". "I mean, the not dating men rule. Isn’t it a bit too tough?". "Well of course it's tough for the men but that's the goal isn’t? Feminism has to be a bit tough to men in order to work". She really didn't seem to understand what that other woman meant, and the other was apparently confused about it. "I mean for the women... for the Korean women. Aren't these rules too tough for Korean feminists? Isn’t there a way to help women without giving them such hard rules to follow?".

I was very annoyed (so was the woman who talked about this movement in the first place) because how can you miss the point so badly? How does she think feminism works? Does she believe some sort of higher power gives Korean women rules to follow and that they get thrown in jail if they date a man? How can you describe this movement as "rules"? They aren't rules. They would be rules if Korean women were forced to obey them, if they were punished for dating men. That's not the case. What's happening is that some women decide of their own free will to stop dating men (among other things). They don't follow any rules, they freely chose to do what they do. It's about women's freedom, about women deciding what they do with their life and body. But I guess people nowadays use this concept only to defend prostitution and makeup, without understanding it in reality, when it comes to women doing things that go against what the patriarchy wants them to do.

Anyway, I find it interesting that this woman's first conclusion was that these were rules rather than free choices. This is why many people see radical feminism as a cult; they can't understand the idea of women making their own choices if those choices defy patriarchy. They think we must be some kind of cult that brainwashes them and forces them to obey and follow complicated rules, because how else can a woman decide to stop fucking men? A free woman would never do that.

• Emotional support animals for men. (The female "lead" essentially supports the main character throughout the entire movie. He also then breaks her heart at the end. She's also explicitly called a "pet" near the end, right along when he breaks her heart. Moral of the story: Men just use women.)
  
  
• Instruction manuals for men. (The female "lead" teaches the foreign main character how to live on her native inhospitable planet.)
  
  
• Knife testing tools for men. (A man tests some new knives he is gifted by slicing the neck of one of his female servants and repeatedly stabbing another in the stomach.)
  
  
• Snappable stress relievers for men. (A male ruler is upset over losing mineral resources and kills two female servants in rage. We hear the women screaming behind closed doors before everything goes quiet and the ruler's son enters and sees the women's dead bodies thrown in a corner.)
  
  
• Political treaties for men. (The daughter of another male ruler is now owned by the main character in an attempt to gain land rights.)
  
  
• Pets for men. (A man calls his female servants his "pets" and feeds them organ meats from other humans.)
  
  
• Medical kits for men. (The female "lead's" tears are necessary to bring the main character back to life.)
  
  
• Wise sages for men. (The Bene Gesserit, some sort of powerful magical sisterhood, who supposedly who have their own plans and political purposes, but mainly just focus around furthering the men in this movie. Advising men, encouraging men to be prophets, impregnating themselves with men's children.)
  
  
• Endorsements for men. (One of the Bene Gesserit, the main character's own mother, encourages others to consider her son a prophet, who will save the planet and such.)
  
  

• Impregnating themselves with disgusting men's children in order to have political power.
  
  
• Fighting in wars and having 💅badass💅 fight scenes. (It actually seems to just be the one female "lead" who is involved in the battles and fighting, it looks like it's mainly men otherwise.)
  
  

Quote:few things annoy me more than those women on tiktok saying “feminism lied to me I work 24/7 and I’m still not happy” like ma’am feminism didn’t lie to you, capitalism lied to you and told you that making money is more important than developing hobbies and meaningful relationships.

you can’t blame feminism for your unhappiness with hustle culture, but you can blame feminism for that fact that you weren’t forced to marry a 45 year old man at age 11. you can also blame feminism for the fact that you’re allowed to wear pants, open a bank account, post your opinions online, vote, own a firearm, etc. place the blame where it actually needs to go rather than helping men try to take away every single basic human right women and girls have left please I’m begging

Quote:once again I am saying that you not liking working your entire life away for barely any pay doesn’t mean you’d be happier being turned into a walking baby making factory by a man twice your age, it means you’re a normal human being

Quote:feminism isn’t what convinced me that being able to be financially independent is an absolute necessity, growing up in a “traditional” culture did, and it scares me when I see women take our ability to be independent for granted. I cannot stress enough how bad it actually is for the vast majority of trad wives (especially once they’re no longer young and hot anymore). they are used for their baby making abilities and then discarded like trash, but because they have no work history or education they have no choice but to stay with men who genuinely hate them. it is a fate worse than death imo and I fear those ✨aesthetic✨ trad wife positivity tiktoks are going to lead so many young women to their graves

Quote:for women, pattern recognition and gut feelings is survival instinct. recognizing that someone is behaving in some way like a predator you’ve known (etc) literally keeps you alive and healthy. that’s actually even the biological “point” of being triggered when you have ptsd – your body is giving you an intense signal to get the fuck away from something that has hurt you before. obviously, with ptsd its maladaptive, and the trigger itself doesn’t have to mean anything real or patterned if it was based on a very specific situation. but the most basic form of this is pure self protection. the nagging feeling that asks you to move across the street when a large figure is walking a little too close behind you. jumping out of your skin when you hear a raised and angry male voice nearby. a little pit of despair forming when you see rhetoric that seems eerily similar to the frameworks your rapist used to justify himself, deflect blame, or communicate his reasoning for violence against you. your body tensing and freezing when you start to feel guilty or pressured into sex. your heart beating a little faster when… your face getting red if… 

an unheatlhy response to this is to move through the world in fear (and GUILT for feeling fear) constantly with no way of making sense of it, individualizing violence, ignoring the way individual experiences of violence intersect with one another forming webs. a healthy response is retaining the ability to make connections and make meaning of the conditions under which women live – talking to other women and noticing which experiences you share. really actively allowing yourself to see what keeps happening. its healing to know you’re not alone. its self defense to believe yourself. listening to your body’s signals as best you can – and yeah, i know that trauma can often make that really hard, make your body feel distant and immaterial. but it really is still there, waiting for you.

when i see someone urging women (using really convincing language) to repress their ability to recognize patterns and listen to our bodies and express our realities, i think, in what way would this person benefit from us repressing trust in our own perceptions? why am i being asked to take theirs on as my own? an open ended question without a black and white answer. but sometimes, a feeling is enough.

Quote:

Quote:“On Oct. 5, a Lynchburg, Virginia grand jury indicted Julianna Tourmaline Fialkowski, 25, on charges of felony rape; abduction with the intent to defile; enticing another into a dwelling with intent to commit a felony; strangulation; and misdemeanor assault.

Fialkowski’s bail was set at a staggering $8 million.

Nowhere in the court documents or police report does it state Fialkowski was born Joseph David Fialkowski.

Women-on-women rape and violent crime rates are rising sharply in American cities thanks to pro-trans legislation that allows men to violate female boundaries and invade female public spaces.

As far as the news media and the courts are concerned, a woman inflicted horrific violence upon another woman.

Fialkowski gained Internet fame last year when he and his trans supporters bullied a judge into approving his name change to Julianna — despite the fact that he still has male genitals and he is clearly heterosexual.

Joseph Fialkowski’s felony charges stem from an incident on August 17 when he abducted a trans teenager and held her against her will. The teenage victim is a biological female who suffers from gender dysphoria and presents as a male in public.

Fialkowski was also arrested in April on eight counts of producing child pornography.”

And here’s where the trans-ing of history becomes another problem. Not only are people concerned with changing women’s gender throughout history so as to make it seem like more men have accomplished great feats (be they women who passed as men to succeed or men who identify as women who change the books on “first woman to…” because either way, men are getting all the credit now) now they are increasing the rates of woman-on-woman violence by skewing the numbers.

Trans woman-on-women violence is MALE-on-woman violence, but since women are no longer allowed to name the problem or their rapists, history is being skewed to show that women are perpetrating more sexually violent crimes when in fact it’s men masquerading around as pretend women committing these acts.

A male is a male is a male is a male. Later I will post some statistics showing how violence committed by trans women is just as high as violence committed by gender conforming men–and why shouldn’t it be, really? If we make the smallest effort and do the slightest bit of critical thinking, we realize that both types of men were raised as men, treated like men, grew up to be entitled like men, and are violent like men.

Men are the problem, no matter their “gender identity,” and they are beginning to do more than be just a nuisance to feminism–they are now attempting to (and succeeding at) changing the statistics of violence against women to make it seem like women are just as violent as men. It’s a dirty tactic not unlike those used by MRAs, the only difference is that if a rapist scumbag “identifies” as a woman, he’ll not be plastered everywhere with “WATCH OUT FOR THIS MAN,” instead he’ll be plastered everywhere with “DON’T  MISGENDER ME IT’S A LITERAL ACT OF VIOLENCE.”

We must stop letting males dictate our history and voices. We must name the problem, before it’s too late.

Quote:Radfems have been trying to raise the alarm for years.

Quote:Let me re-emphasize that:  Radfems have been warning about the obvious, commonsense, consequences of including men who transgender into “women” being registered as “female” sex offenders when these trans"women" commit sexually violent crimes.  The obvious, commonsense consequence of this is the skewing of statistics that makes it seem as though women are, more often than they actually are which already isn’t that often, committing sex crimes at higher rates when the reality is that male transgenders are the ones committing these crimes.  We saw this as likely to happen awhile back and whatdoyouknow: it is.  Remember that study that documented the fact that trans"women" maintain male-patterned violence post-transition (because they’re still male and male socialized)?  Next prediction: as this worsens and gets more media attention, or even now as its already bad and the results of male transgenders being registered as female/women when they commit violent crimes is making news - MRAs who have been trying for years to paint women as either more sexually violent than men or just as sexually violent as men can start citing statistics and data that include trans"women" who’ve committed crimes of male sexual violence, such as raping women, as “proof” of their bogus claims.  I’m so angry and so tired of this bullshit and the fact that so many “feminists” have yet to realize what the real-life consequences and pitfalls are of the acceptance of trans politics and how this is harming actual women and women’s rights/liberation.  I can’t deal.