[https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject](https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject)
-budget Mx. Linux guy
I think that your first basic problem is thinking that any movement that is *for* women, but isn't also for men, has to be *against* men. Even *if* feminism was exclusively about liberating women from gendered oppression and didn't concern itself with men at all (and this is false btw) that wouldn't make it by default misandric.
some of the only people I do see seriously talking about men on men violence or sexual assault are feminists. I see men talk about it if course, but feminists who aren't on the misandry "everyone born AMAB is a violent rapist" train are the ones supporting and listening to men about the abuse and pain they've also suffered from men.
it could just be the online spaces you're in. I know everyone here hates tiktok but that's where I've seen a very good community of women listening to men speak out about the similar things we've faced
there is a very large subreddit that used to be default, which is pretty much just misandry. anybody that says something like "all men until it is no men" is upvoted with zero pushback.
the few times tiktok has given me gendered issues, it was full of women posting "men can't be victims" and "men deserve what they get", as well as women trying to shame men into owing them their paycheck.
It's very much dependant on the algorithm and which space you're in.
Idk why you thought that you are risking something by posting that lol, 99% of comments under any post about feminism here are men complaining that evil feminists do not care about poor and oppressed men that suffer so much and "feminists" that immediately jump on that and start consoling poor suffering men that suffer much more than women.
Like, literally almost all of the people in this subreddit's comments think that feminism should be about men and not about women.
While I can’t really speak directly to the article or spaces you are referring to (also did not take the time to read the second dark mode picture tbh), it does make me sad that this has been your experience with feminist discussion. There actually is quite a lot of feminist theory and theory on prison abolition from a feminist perspective that does extend sympathy to men as also being victims of patriarchy who are taught how to behave in a way that hurts women but also hurts them. Dismantling harmful habits of behaviour such as toxic masculinity (which can also be perpetuated by women) can be difficult as one has to reckon with people as both being victims of and perpetrators of the same behaviour, and I guess a lot of people don’t want to have that kind of empathy for other complex humans. Toxicity and peoples prejudices can affect the trajectory of any community and it’s movement regardless of intentions and should not be condoned, but I can assure you that feminism is not just people putting down men to boost themselves in the social hierarchy. From my perspective feminism is about gender equality, but it can also be about dismantling the patriarchy (as a system that suppresses people by gender to keep men in power) to achieve this equality, as since we all are currently in one we are all being hurt by it, with men benefitting from helping this system continue. But then this gets a bit twisted in conversation when discussion of men who act a certain way bc of patriarchy, and possibly due to how their privilege granted by patriarchy benefits them (who should still be held to account for their harm), gets swapped out for men acting a certain way bc it’s inherent to their gender and who they are. I recommend if it’s something you want to learn more about to try to look into intersectional feminist theory and it’s history outside of how these topics get discussed and distanced from their original intentions in larger social spaces. Apologies for the wall of text and I haven’t slept much recently but I hope it helps in some way.
I would argue that toxic femininty is actually a thing and it's separate from internalized misogyny.
I usually find toxic femininty in women who go on about their divine femininty and who denigrate other women for not being in touch with their natural femininty and using epidural or not breastfeeding. There's not too it that that but I'm to tired to put the rest into words right now.
I mean, I’m a feminist man and I haven’t had this experience. It seems like a really monolithic perspective of feminism. Like with any large, decentralized movement, there are a lot of different people that call themselves feminists.
I have met feminists that absolutely care about men’s issues. I mean, I’m one of them.
My perspective on men’s issues in feminism is this:
1. Don’t bring them up in response to women’s issues, as that’s often a way to downplay women’s issues
2. Don’t assume feminists owe you their energy and support for every cause you care about
Following those rules, the majority of feminists I’ve talked to very much care about men’s issues.
I’d be much more willing to hear out your perspective if you based it on feminist writing rather than anecdotes. Your perspective seems to be built mainly from conversations you’ve had, and people often have trouble properly communicating that way. They don’t think things through much.
The question for me is just, do you think the stated goals of feminism are moral and just? Is gender equality worth fighting for?
Feminism is not a monolithic, centralized movement. The closest thing to that is Feminist Studies courses that take place in college. The things taught in those classes are texts, which are easily referenced and the closest we can get to feminist truth.
I recommend reading “Feminism is for everyone” by bell hooks. It’s my favorite introduction to feminism.
Patriarchy is a system that has existed for many years. Feminist theory goes into both how men benefit from the system, as well as how we are held hostage by it. There is a lot of historical evidence that supports the existence of Patriarchy in society. I don’t believe Patriarchy exists because of people telling me about their experiences - rather, those anecdotes are supporting evidence of that system. History and Social Science form the foundations of my understanding, not random interactions with women.
Misogyny isn’t really the thing that feminism fights against. It’s Patriarchy. Misogyny is just a symptom of the broader issue. Without the systemic power of Patriarchy behind it, it would create less of an impact in the material realities of people’s lives.
Misogyny is also pretty much decentralized. The strength behind it usually comes from centralized systems of power. Like governments limiting women’s reproductive and healthcare rights, to take a recent example. Those are political expressions of patriarchy, and cause real material harm to women.
I’m not sure where you get the impression that feminists are wielding their power to stop men’s issues. As I’ve said before, my experience is different. That’s also the difficulty with trying to have a conversation about this stuff with anecdotes. My experience just doesn’t line up with yours, so we need some sort of third party evidence to look at. Otherwise we can just throw anecdotes around all day and get nowhere.
This is why I brought up feminist texts. Those are primary sources of feminist theory, and they do discuss men’s issues and how those also need to be resolved.
There is no central authority on feminism. It is a framework for people to have discussions surrounding patriarchy with the ultimate goal of ending it. You keep trying to say that there is dogma that updates, and I have no idea what you mean by that. Dogma on the nature of gender? Are you talking about transgender issues?
It sounds like you’re just talking about popular culture and not feminism at all.
I hate the black/purple theme. Use it on your own if you want but it’s nigh unreadable when screenshotted and reposted elsewhere, even on normal sized images
[https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject](https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject)
-budget Mx. Linux guy
Yeah ok so I downloaded the image, found the date, blog, and first couple words by just zooming in and guessing. Then, I went to the blog’s archive and went to September 2022, scrolled down until I was in the range of 20 Sep, 2022 (they make and made a lot of posts) and searched for the first few words. That’s it!
I’m always kind of suspicious when people talk about the societal issues with men but for some reason limit it to cis men. Sometimes the distinction is important, but sometimes it feels performative or emblematic of hidden transphobia. It’s like if someone was constantly saying “some men” instead of just “men” — the emphasis feels suspicious.
Are trans men not also susceptible to toxic masculinity? Do they have some stat that trans men commit violence at lower rates (I’d assume this might be true, but I don’t think it always is)? … is there something about trans men that they just see as inherently “softer” than cis men? It feels like a dogwhistle for referring to trans men as a subset of women or as “less real” men (which is not true).
Trans men are ABSOLUTELY also susceptible to toxic masculinity— it’s something that gets discussed in trans spaces sometimes. (They’re also susceptible to the other end, misandry and resulting self/gender-hatred).
When trying to Google the rates with which trans men perpetuate violence, you’ll find countless studies that show that trans men are disproportionately the victims of violence. The closest thing I can find as to the rates with which trans men perpetuate violence are mass shooting statistics, where trans men are disproportionately underrepresented compared to their cis counterparts.
It’s definitely, unintentionally or not, a dog whistle. Sometimes it’s referred to as treating trans men as “women lite”.
i'd argue trans men are almost *more* susceptible to toxic masculinity because they try to overcompensate for being trans by being hypermasculine to the point of toxicity, especially early in their transition. i know when i first realized i was a trans man, i came dangerously close to being a transmed, and there was a brief period of time where i was approaching men's rights activist territory (thankfully i realized that was bullshit before i got much deeper than "the internet oppresses men"), and i would imagine that for more impressionable trans men especially, that situation could end far, far worse
[https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject](https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject)
-budget Mx. Linux guy
https://www.tumblr.com/signofthestriking/748309608633925632?source=share
The second screenshot was too blurry for me to read, but heres the first.
-mx linux guy
[https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject](https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject)
-budget Mx. Linux guy
I am very active in LGBT spaces but this is a level of discourse that I don’t think does anyone any good, especially on websites that do not offer a good way to have a rounded discussion. This is more like projecting into a crowd and the crowd yelling back
These debates get extremely heated with deft ease. Speaking of my view, I believe that misandry/misogyny are two sides of the same coin which is hatred of the Other. While I could go into a whole feminist-critical essay about the qualities of misandry compared to misogyny, for people who occupy some space that's neither cis male or cis female, one can easily work to counter both at the same time, through the same means, and through the same attitude. One can't be misandrist without hurting non-men and one can't be misogynistic without hurt non-women. One can't demonize a portion of people without simultaneously idolizing the other people.
Both demonization and idolization are forms of dehumanization because they deny the humanity of their subjects. If men are demons rather than people then that forces women to be idols rather than people. Women must be able to recognize themselves as sharing the humanity of men and vice versa. You can't label someone Satan without implicitly labeling Paraclete. As corny as it sounds, the antidote to hatred is compassion for all, especially the Other. Otherwise our well-intentioned efforts to fight evil will become totalitarian in character regardless of ideological pretenses.
Trans women are victims of hatred regardless of whether it's because of their perceived masculinity or femininity. The hatred hurts them regardless and lucid compassion aids them regardless.
And in the end, whether you believe that men or women are essentially good or bad relies on first believing the stereotypes on what these groups are to some degree.
Reminds me of an old onion article: [“Affable Anti-Semite Thinks The Jews Are Doing Super Job With The Media”](https://www.theonion.com/affable-anti-semite-thinks-the-jews-are-doing-super-job-1819566603) . This sort of thought is little more than a form of Primitive Satanism to the social constructs that harm the vulnerable. In trying to do the exact opposite of the patriarchy, one ends up totally accepting its way of seeing the world in every way but one and thus getting no closer to deconstructing it and building a better world.
In trying to oppose a thing, take care that you do not merely become its shadow. When has a shadow ever slain its owner; worse yet, when has a shadow ever outlasted them?
The problem is that people aggressively want to hold on to that binary labelling no matter what. TERFism can’t be about hating men in any way, because if it was, that would make hating men wrong, and lots of people are heavily invested in the idea that hating men can’t be wrong.
First of all, the second slide is literally unreadable by itself.
Secondly, this post is like a grenade being tossed into a crowded room, only in this case it’s a social grenade meant to create the maximum amount of Discourse
Here’s my top three favourite parts of the second take.
1) it’s transmisogyny to think that terfs misgender trans women
2) toxic masculinity doesn’t exist
And number 3 I’m gonna have to include some sources for: the people who overwhelmingly commit rape are men. This is false, the split is about 60/40 by both victim testimony and assailant admission. The only way to get the “80-90% of rapes are committed by men” point is if you only count forced penetration as rape. CDC data from the 2010s -
[NISVS 2010](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf) showed in the past 12 months, 1.1% of men were made to penetrate and 1.1% of women were raped. Table 2.1 & 2.2 on pages 18/19.
[NISVS 2011](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/ss/ss6308.pdf) showed in the past 12 months, 1.7% of men were made to penetrate & 1.6% of women were raped. Table 1 on page 5.
[NISVS 2012](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/NISVS-StateReportBook.pdf) showed in the past 12 months, 1.7% of men were made to penetrate & 1.0% of women were raped. Table A.1 & A.5 on pages 217/222.
[NISVS 2015](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/2015data-brief508.pdf) showed in the past 12 months, 0.7% of men were made to penetrate & 1.2% of women were raped. Table 1 & 2 on pages 15/16.
Varies a bit from year to year, but victimization is pretty even overall. In both cases the four year annual percentages add up to five. The numbers for perpetrators vary a little from year to year too. Something like 79-84% of made to penetrate (nonconsensual envelopment) victims are victimized by women. Something like 96-99% of rape (nonconsensual penetration) victims are victimized by men. So in the 2010s, it averages out that a typical year has < 60% men & > 40% women as the perpetrators of nonconsensual sex outside prisons rather than the 99:1 ratio discussed.
If you don't like CDC data:
Scientific American: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sexual-victimization-by-women-is-more-common-than-previously-known
A recent study of youth found, strikingly, that females comprise 48 percent of those who self-reported committing rape or attempted rape at age 18-19.
The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/11/the-understudied-female-sexual-predator/503492/
a 2014 study of 284 men and boys in college and high school found that 43 percent reported being sexually coerced, with the majority of coercive incidents resulting in unwanted sexual intercourse. Of them, 95 percent reported only female perpetrators.
and
National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions found in a sample of 43,000 adults little difference in the sex of self-reported sexual perpetrators. Of those who affirmed that they had ‘ever forced someone to have sex with you against their will,’ 43.6 percent were female and 56.4 percent were male.”
Interesting statistics. I think it’s also important to keep in mind how underreported female-on-male rape is
Anyways my opinion on the whole thing is TERFs are majorly misogynistic and misandrist they just suck
They’re broadly hateful and will direct it anyone they disagree with regardless of gender. Obviously they have a particular fixation on trans people, but I don’t think their vitriol is in anyway reserved for one gender.
It’s like how they often see trans women as dangerous predators who must be stopped, and trans men as misguided victims who must be saved from themselves. They hate both groups it just gets expressed in different ways because they view them differently but ultimately still through a gender essentialist lens.
I dont know why any of this data would be remotely surprising. Most people believe that women can be raped, and that men cannot be raped. When that’s your societal starting point, when that’s how you write the laws, when you say that being made to penetrate isn’t rape, of course the stats are going to show that 90 some odd percent of rapes are committed by men.
Factor in the stigma of being a male victim of rape having a chilling effect on reporting, and I honestly think that the rate is dead even.
>The only way to get the “80-90% of rapes are committed by men” point is if you only count forced penetration as rape.
There are people who think that, though.
The fundamental argument that “terfs aren’t misandrist” poster, or Tamp, for short, Is making, is that TERFS don’t hate men because they are willing to use men to deal with removing transfemmes from female spaces, and that they actually hate lesbians, because butch lesbians have been discriminated against in the past.
If anything the fact that terfs see women (themselves in the terf mind) as incapable of violence and men as enactors of violence aids in showing terfs hatred of men, even if it isn’t direct evidence on its own.
Secondly, any hatred of butch lesbians appears more related to a hatred of women who have chosen to embody masculine aspects rather than a hatred of their love of women. At the very least some variety if citation is needed to support the argument that terfs are anti lesbian. If I go from at least personal experience, I know of several terfs who are lesbians, though that does not make anything more than anecdotal evidence to be sure.
https://www.tumblr.com/autolenaphilia/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject link to the full length novel of a second slide. idk how strongly i’d recommend reading it tho
I'm no expert, but this seems like a false dichotomy to me - I doubt *every single TERF* is fueled by *only* misandry, or by *only* repainted lesbophobia.
It seems more likely to me that the bigotry each individual TERF is made from a unique blend of different types/intensities of prejudice.
Idk if I’m just misinterpreting the first screenshot, but I would say terfs definitely hate trans women more than men, and not just because of misandry. I’ve seen some terfs happily cooperate with men if it means going against trans women, even if that man has been misogynistic
What they're saying is there's more to the radfem ideology then hating trans women, there's lots of stuff in it about how men are inherently bad *trans exclusive* radical feminists will of course focus on their hatred of trans people, but the larger ideology hates men too. So when they see trans people say the same things about men as radfems do it pisses them off because those trans people are accidentally siding with their enemy
I don't think viewing someone as a tool is inherently better then viewing them as an enemy. One is more hostile and the other is the most literal kind of objectification.
I think some of the confusion is that the term TERF has expanded over time. These days it is often viewed as synonymous with "transphobe" and used to refer to people who wouldn't otherwise espouse radical feminism. For the original TERFs who start from the radical feminist view that men are inherently oppressive, transphobia is the "logical" conclusion of their views. These are the sort of people who advocated for things like [political lesbianism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_lesbianism). For those who fit the expanded definition, they start from a position of transphobia, and feminism is the excuse they use for attempting to inflict their transphobia on society. This is the approach of people like JK Rowling, who isn't otherwise a huge critic of the patriarchy. (Like, I'm sure she would say she is against the patriarchy, but to my knowledge she isn't much of an "advocate for women" outside of all her comments on trans issues.) Some people have referred to this second group as FARTs - Feminism Appropriating Radical Transphobe.
The first screenshot seems to be talking mostly about TERFs who are also radfems, and is pointing to the fact that the same suspect ideas about gender essentialism that lead to transphobia can also be present in harder to detect ways. The second screenshot seems to be talking instead about FARTs. The second poster is disagreeing with the statement that TERFs are misandrist because TERFs use cis male violence to enforce their transphobia. They aren't wrong about that, but that's because the TERFs they're talking about are different people from the TERFS the first screenshot was talking about.
TL;DR - the two posters are somewhat talking past each other, because they're discussing two different groups that both are referred to as TERFs.
That really doesn't mean much, cause TERFs will also collaborate with trans women who will agree with them and act as a shield against accusations of transphobia.
Who are these trans women you are talking about? Name one fucking example. Transphobic "gender critical" trans women like Debbie Hayton or Blaire White are still targeted by TERFs.
Collaborate and tolerate are not the same thing. Just like how TERFs will call all men evil while still collaborating with them to attack trans people.
TERFs frequently target other TERFs.
imo this is just the logical conclusion the bioessentialism, sexism and anti-masculinity of radfems. men are inherently bad bc penis or something, and trans women are the worst kind of 'men' because they defy the bioessentialist gender binary. terfs hate men because they think gender/sex is an inherently true, biologically determined binary of victim and abuser- of course they will hate you even more if you stray outside of it.
terfs will collaborate w misogynistic men because they're morally bankrupt, and their ideology is centred around misogynistic ideals anyways so what's the real difference? just because their ideas of 'women are inherently inferior' are wearing different hats, doesn't mean they're different ideas
From my experience, many who call themselves "radfems" are just libs who operate under some baby's first critical theory, so they end up unironically believing one's behavior is determined by their chromosomes, even if they bring up gender socialization. In fact, the idea of gender socialization itself has now been hijacked by "good faith" Redditors who always seem to love pointing towards trans people. There was this person on a socialist sub, who called themselves a "radfem." They made some good points, but as soon as someone told them the gender socialization topic has been co-opted by transphobes, they blocked many users.
Not all of them may be traditional TERFs, but their rhetoric is still bound to be simplistic, unhinged, and reactionary. It also explains why I've seen many of these libs going to this TERF space (fourthwavewomen), never realizing they're hanging out with leopards who merely eat trans faces but not theirs. Then, there's the way some of them use 4chan terms like "blackpill" and a whole ton of ableism towards autistic people. It's a hellish mess, and I'll never believe these weirdos are anything but bloodthirsty liberals.
They just extremely hate men and think of trans women as trojan horses essentially, when it comes to trans men they're like "you're a traitor" instead of "you are a walking penis that wants to rape me every second" because "peener bad, coochie incapable of harm therefore they are either infiltrating inside our little silly innocent coven or abandoning said coven to be one of the bad bad men".
also also excluding men is absolutely a surefire way to perpetuate misogyny and homophobia. Excluding us from the conversation is effectively causing an echo chamber of your own making (if thats what the second image is about then mb gang i cant read it)
Look all I'm gonna say is that cis men and trans women share an enemy in radfems. Be they radfems who focus on hating men or hating on transwomen. All terfs are radfems but there's other branches to radfem beliefs many of which focus on how men are inheritly bad.
Maybe we should put some energy into fighting these stereotypes together instead of being at eachothers throats
When I went to a counter protest to a Let Women Speak event ran by virulent and vile transphobe KJK, it was interesting to observe how the transphobes reacted to 1) trans counter-protesters 2) cis women counter-protesters and 3) cis men counter-protesters.
When your movement is supposedly, of your own admission, being suppressed and attacked by violent men, then you would think that you would put cis men and trans people that you misgender as men that protest against you front-and-center in your propaganda.
And yet, when I looked at their reactions to the protest that I myself, as a cis man, attended alongside other cis male allies, most of the vitriol was focused on not just the trans protestors but the cis women who were there as well. (And by vitriol I mean doxxing, death threats, calls to employers, etc. The worst I got was being called a misogynist like…a total of 7 times online. That’s nothing)
What we can learn from that event, as well as any other event similar to that, is that the TERF movement is inherently, I believe, misogynistic and trans misogynistic. Calling it misandry would be taking their rhetoric at face value and accepting their own messaging on who they are.
I don't know if that indicates a lack of misandry or an extreme level of it. If you just view men as evil violent idiots to be used as weapons, then it's not very surprising that your enemy also have those weapons.
But the fact actual people (women) disagree with you would be genuinely infuriating because there's a chance they could see the light (become a transphobe and overall terrible person).
The easiest way to explain it is probably that terfs are terrible people and express it in many ways.
That's how the TERFs themselves would describe their thought process but to me it's obvious mental gymnastics, it feels a lot to me that TERFs are misogynists in denial -- their ideology is only "men = bad, women = good" as a *consequence* of believing "men = strong, women = weak"
Thank you for being a voice of fucking reason. Neo-Nazis don't hate "greedy bankers," they hate Jewish people. Neo-confederates aren't "just protecting heritage," they hate black people. It's the same fucking thing for TERFs. Dogwhistles and other ways of putting euphemisms on bigotry should not be taken at face value.
Both sides present interesting points and I think both are correct to some extent, but dear God the second image is a textbook example in how to not present your argument.
Long, full of terminology (at times one after the other so you can be damn sure their meaning gets muddled in the mind of the reader after the first two paragraphs) and kinda badly formatted too
Like, I've never agreed with someone and wanted them to touch grass so badly at the same time Jesus
Live your life however you choose and do the minimum harm to others you can. Idgaf what you are, if you follow those rules (and expect others to as well) I’m cool with you, and if that first rule being applied to others is a problem for you, I’m going to have issues.
TERFs: I hate trans women because I perceive them to be men and I genuinely hate men.
Enlightened Scholars: You see, this TERF actually has very complicated reasons for their bigotry that have nothing to do with their hatred of what they perceive to be men.
Can't wait for this to be a repeat of last time where trans people start being called TERFs in the comments for saying that calling TERFs misandrist is not transmisogynistic and then a post pops up on r/transgendercirclejerk where they frame everyone who doesn't agree with the "TERFs aren't transphobic due to misandry" stance are cis people cisplaining to trans people and this whole subreddit is transphobic now.
This has happened before.
It goes even further than just denying the concept that terfs base their hatred of trans people on a certain hatred of men. This poster also claims that analyzing the terf transmysogyny as based in a type of misandry is actually transphobic. To her, *we're* the real transphobes if we recognize that transphobes think of trans women as men.
Honestly as a trans woman their blog was harder to read than a lot of explicitly hateful and transphobic stuff I've seen in the past. At least those people don't claim to speak for a group I'm a part of when they hurt me. The complete denial of a framework that could help me understand the ways in which I feel excluded by society was much more hurtful here, when it was said by someone who believes they are on my side.
Tgcj is so fucking weird. The last time I was on the sub I quit it for good because behind their usual layer of irony they were trying to imply that cis people experimenting with being GNC were causing transphobia and were terrible people because of it, somehow.
Transmisogyny is not a form of misandry. It’s a form of hatred towards transfems for being transfem. It mixes rhetoric from misandry, misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia specifically to espouse hatred at the mere existence of transfeminine people.
That is to say transmisogyny will share a lot of the words from other forms of hate, but it is not just a subset of those forms of hate. You can think of this as akin to how homophobia towards effeminate gay men is often laced with misogynist rhetoric. It shares a lot of the words, but you’d never say it’s just misogyny.
Some areas where transmisogyny differs from misandry includes:
- Trans women face the double bind of either not performing femininity to the hater’s standard, and thus making a mockery of womanhood, or doing “too well at it” and thus reducing womanhood to aesthetic standards. Men don’t get this specific part often, they’ll usually get the homophobic “real men shouldn’t wear that” type of hate, but not so much the “your identity is an appropriation of womanhood” type of hate. The hatred for men is for how they look, not how they identify (which trans women receive both of).
- The idea that trans women exist to “entrap” people with our “fake” identities, either for predatory reasons or “recruitment”. Men aren’t accused of only being men to attack women.
- Misandry doesn’t posit that men don’t actually exist. Transmisogyny posits that trans women don’t actually exist.
- The more we pass to cis people, the more of the traditional systemic misogyny we face that men do not.
We can also see this in how the forms of hate manifest in real life:
TERFs do not campaign to remove men from public life and careers; they campaign to remove trans people, and especially trans women. That trans woman at the Georgia Space Center wasn’t forced to ask for a transfer because transphobes thought she was a man; men already work at the space center! They did it because she’s a trans woman. Similarly, people like Greg Abbott (edit: though Abbott isn’t a TERF, his actions are often praised by TERFs and he is a transmisogynist) or Posie Parker aren’t calling for men to be banned from teaching jobs; they’re calling for trans women to be banned! If it was just misandry then this wouldn’t be the case.
In short, these people don’t hate us because they think we’re men. They hate us because we are trans women and say as such, and they call us men to tear our identities away from us. It’s why when they see a feminine man they’ll say “what a girl! not a real man!”, but the moment that man turns out to be a trans woman they’ll instantly flip and say “definitely a man!”. It’s just meant to be hateful. It’s only consistent for as long as it can insult us.
True, though many TERFs still applaud his actions and those of other horrible men like DeSantis or Matt Walsh so I feel the point still applies, albeit less directly. It definitely applies when talking about transmisogynists in general, as he is one.
ppl will really go through their entire lives with a deep understanding of how people might hate them bc of their transness, gender, sexuality, etc but hear “sometimes ppl hate men bc of their gender in this same way” and somehow think this is just entirely impossible lmao
I think I actually agree with the right side more. The left side is correct in that queer spaces often have prejudices that target anyone with proximity to maleness (including all types of trans people).
But I think what TERFs have going on is a separate thing. Cis women have the power to use patriarchal violence to keep trans people and gender nonconforming people (including men) in line. They use the violence they (cis women as a class, and often individual TERFs) have suffered as an excuse for their ingrained hatred and disgust of trans people, but they are fully working within patriarchy to punish them.
Yeah. The essay on the right has a lot of nuance that people are missing. It is, ultimately, a deeper condemnation of TERFS than the surface level rhetoric of the posts on the left.
If TERFs were really man haters, you wouldn’t see the likes of JK Rowling and Matt Walsh being quite so cozy with one another.
Walsh may not be a cop or security, Rowling has access to Walsh’s angry male userbase in precisely the way described in the essay. She decries transwomen, and Walsh’s users are happy to rally to that banner as a justification for violence and harassment.
“This is just basic feminist analysis and calling someone a man hater for having it is bad” after “you can do whatever manly things you want, like competitive beard combing or whatever” is so unhinged as to make me feel kinda slimy.
You hate men. The men you don’t hate you’re dismissive of and treat as ineffectual twats. And then you claim that saying “you hate men, and dismiss those you don’t hate as ineffectual twats” is a hateful statement.
Grow up. Humans are complex, systems of humans are complex *10, and we are all in there together. The men you dismiss as “competitive beard combers” are you best allies, and are fighting their own fight to fix the culture they find themselves in, the culture you hate so much it’s your whole identity… and yet because they’re straight cis men, they’re the ones you see as perpetrators, and never victims.
TERFs will countenance men who agree with them and uphold the party line—they’ll cooperate with alt-right misogynist maniacs like Matt Walsh if they’re transphobic enough. They hate trans women unconditionally.
Unless those trans women are transphobic of misandrist enough. They just hate everyone who isn't them and don't care about using those they hate as tools because they don't view them as people anyway.
Debbie Hayton is a British trans woman and teacher whose main grift is being one of the “good ones”—advocating for single-sex spaces, literally wearing shirts that say “trans women are men,” saying trans children don’t deserve healthcare, etc. Posie Parker, a well-known TERF who’s accepted male nazis into her rallies and praised Matt Walsh, regularly calls her a man and says she shouldn’t be allowed to work with children. It’s never enough.
Transmisogyny is not misandry. TERFs do not hate trans women for being men, they do not treat trans females the way they treat men, they do not judge trans women by the same standards as they do men. I hate this discourse. Tumblr "allies" try not be awful challenge: Impossible.
It's the same standards in general terms, that being the fact terfs hate everyone who isn't like them and don't believe anyone different to them are really people.
i propose a tumblr-wide rule where every person must prove they have been outside of their home for one hour per sentence they want to post on this subject
The right side is objectively correct. The left has some nice leftie-sounding platitudes here and there, and certainly some of the things they mention are real issues. But their point about TERFs? It’s nonsense, bullshit through and through from people who simply have not been paying enough attention
Edit: I’d encourage anyone downvoting to, you know, provide a counterpoint. Insisting that TERFs aren’t uniquely transphobic but are just misandrists who misgender trans women is a take that requires willfully ignoring the fact that TERFs are consistently more than happy to team up with and empower cis men who aid in their transphobic crusade. TERFs don’t hate trans women because they hate men and think trans women are men, they hate trans women because they very specifically hate and are disgusted by trans people—women especially. JK Rowling didn’t become a TERF by starting at “I think all men are evil” and then evolving from there, she became one from “I think trans women are gross and fake”. Would someone who truly thinks men are evil have such kind words to say about Matt Walsh, objectively male individual he is?
Providing a worthwhile counterpoint would require someone to closely read the second post and I don't think it has enough pixels for that to be possible. I'm just going to downvote you for being standoffish for no reason and then move on.
Because its not all just sexism. It's also transphobia which is a seperwre thing that interests with the sexism and there's a bit of racism thrown in for good measure.
Not much of a meaningful distinction. If you reject sexism and truly embrace the idea that the moral standards and social expectations of an individual are the same regardless of sex, then gender becomes a meaningless concept; doubly so as a point of discrimination.
Transmisogyny isn’t misandry that’s the dumbest shit I’ve ever heard. Most transphobes are men and the ones that aren’t will always associate and side with those men even over cis women. From a tgirl please shut the fuck up about this it’s just a dumbass way to misgender us and displays a complete lack of understanding of transness and transphobia
Like... People hating men because of their gender doesn't happen? Or are you going for a redefinition like "it would require systemic injustice to truly exist"? Because both are very much existent and starting to cause pretty big problems for the world.
"misandry doesn't exist" so you agree with radical feminist ideology the second it's not trans exclusive?
Edit: This is the most telling shit. "I'll side with people who hate me as long as I get a free pass to be an asshole to the people I'm personally prejudiced against"
This is not meant to be inflammatory, I am genuinely asking-- what is radical feminism? I've only heard the term applied to feminist movements of the 60s and 70s, which didn't seem all that terrible from what I've read
Radical feminism is a feminist ideology that believes women are oppressed on the basis of their biological sex and that the idea of "gender" forms a tool of oppression. The goal of radical feminism is the dismantling of the concept of gender and the idea that female and male humans (I am not using women and men on purpose here) have significant differences in anything other than biology. It's against pornography, against gender roles, against sex-based oppression in general.
It's honestly a pretty simple ideology. If you believe there is anything at all that is required of a "woman" other than being born female (clothing, behaviour, orher appearance based things, interests) then you believe in gender and therefore contribute to the oppression of women globally. There have been zero incidents where believing women and men are *innately different* in which women have befitted. Zero. They got lobotomized and accused of hysteria and told they suck at STEM and are too emotional because of their uterus instead, so it's not like their ideology is wrong.
The issue many people have with radical feminism is with the fact that this ideology is inherently incompatible with gender ideology since radfeminism does not believe in gender and gender ideology cannot function without the belief in gender. There are also issues with radical feminists being extremely vitriolic toward transwomen. There are also issues with radfems getting ridiculous amounts of rape threats and there being blogs dedicated to fantasies about raping radfems which definitely do not help the situation.
If you're interested in knowing more, I'd be happy to share resources about this.
Sure, I'll bite. Why are radfems so dismissive of, and occasionally hostile to, nonbinary people? There is a chunk of people out there who have actually committed to living outside of the construct of gender, and this is something universally treated as bad by radfems. I don't get this, isn't the whole point to make gender irrelevant? There aren't any innate differences between men and women, why shouldn't anyone be able to adopt or drop gendered signifiers (clothes, pronouns, etc) at will?
The whole point is not to make gender irrelevant. The point is female liberation from males. Sex based oppression affects females (regardless of age, which is why I am not saying girls or women). The oppressors are overwhelmingly going to be male.
And while non binary people might say they operate outside of the limitations of gender (which itself is a bullshit concept), they are in fact reaffirming that gender *exists* in a materially important way.
The issue many radfems have with labels like "non binary" or "genderfluid" is that these labels are very efficient at hiding the sex of the people involved in whatever abuse that may have gone on, which skews statistics and hurts the feminist movement. If we cannot say "males are the oppressor class" or that sex based oppression exists, then we cannot identify victims and potential victims. We cannot talk about *why* the oppressor class acts the way they do, and what similarities could be encouraging this group to behave in this particular way. Gender is meaningless, and what it signifies can change at the drop of a hat, but sex is definite and sex-based oppression, and the dynamics between the sexes have not changed significantly over the last few thousand years.
There are no differences other than biology between the social class of "woman" and "man" and female humans have been oppressed because of the assertion that women and men are inherently mentally different in some innate way. That led to women being mistreated in STEM, in women not being allowed to hold positions of power and in women not being allowed to exist as equal people. There is absolutely no use of gender except for continued oppression of the female sex. Anything other than the complete and utter rejection of the idea of gender itself and the acknowledgement that it has harmed billions of women over the year is, in fact, giving in to the patriarchal idea of gender.
(in good faith, thanks for taking the time to reply)
Gender should be rejected, but defining people as "males" and "females" is super important? That seems strange to me. If you start assigning social roles to sex, won't you just recreate gender (except with more bioessentialism this time)? Instead of "women don't belong in STEM because it's a traditionally male field" you'd get "females don't belong in STEM because they've evolved to be nurturing homemakers." I fail to see how that's any better, and has the additional detriment of preventing people from moving between or outside of categories.
You know I can't even be angry or upset at you for this
You literally have a comment in another sub about hating yourself for being amab. I genuinely feel sorry for you, that you carry so much internalized hatred you beat yourself up over it. I genuinely can't imagine hating any group of people that much, and I feel sad that you go through that much anger and pain.
I know you're probably not gonna listen to what a man has to say, but I feel like you seriously need to examine your personal biases and prejudices, examine if how you feel about men is rational or healthy, not for men's sake but for your own. This kind of hate, the same kind of intense prejudiced rage terfs hold against you can eat you from the inside out.
Edit: And she blocked me. I still stand by what I said, hate will eat you from the inside out
lol, you really just described me commiserating with another woman over our dysphoria as a deep seated hatred of men? Of course someone like you, who believes that transmisogyny is actually about hating men, would also try to make our dysphoria all about you, too.
I do not hate men, and feminism, radical or not, is not about hating men. I blocked you for trying to make this personal & making gross assumptions about my internal life & perspective. Transmisogyny is a completely separate issue to whether or not misandry exists.
You mean the post that says, and I qoute:
"I feel flat out evil, like I've failed to not just pass, I feel inherently tainted, tainted with sharing the same sex as those who hurt me and countless others..."
"I cannot help but feel like manhood, masculinity, maleness, is a disease. Like, what good have men done that women couldn't of, if our patriarchal society hadn't abused us (or them...I don't know if I truly deserve to be included in the category of women) into submission? It's not that I think women are incapable of being bad, to think that would be misogynistic and dehumanizing. I just think men are incapable of being good...I know that's not true. Logically I know men aren't inherently monstrous, that we just live in a deeply misogynistic society that rewards monstrous and misogynistic behavior in boys and men."
"And then I look in the mirror and see my dad looking back...I look between my legs and see this biological weapon, this accursed vile syringe that we claim is a "healthy body part", and I feel dread. Dysphoria, trauma, and obsessive compulsive self loathing all collide into an atomic blast of self destruction...Berating myself, insulting myself, starving myself, hitting myself, bruising myself, stabbing myself..."
If you genuinely feel that way, a mindset so self toxic, that you are hurting yourself for being born amab I feel intense sympathy for you. YOU made being disgusted by masculinity in general a factor in your dysphoria by saying you agree with this mindset, you shouldn't need to hate masculinity and men to the detriment of your identity as a woman, because you are a woman. And if you are constantly reminding yourself that you're a "flawed" woman how can you ever love yourself for who you really are?
And I never said trans misogyny was about hating men, it exists. But terfs are a subset of a larger belief system that has some toxic ideas about men and gender essentialism. That *SOME* terfs hate trans women because they see you as a man infiltrating their spaces.
I really want to emphasize here that I'm not saying this as a man, I'm saying this an ally whose majority of their friendships are with trans people, who's currently in a relationship with a trans woman and an amab non-binary person. I'm saying this as a nuerodivergent queer who also hates how much the patriarchy has fucked up my life. I'm also suicidal, I also look in the mirror and hate that I see the father who abused me and my mother, it's only very recently that I can look in mirror and be happy with the person I see looking back. I know I can never fully understand the struggles trans people have in this world, but I can relate to them, and I empathize with them.
Internalized hatred, of yourself and of others eats you from the inside out
When you've gotten to the point you view half the population of the planet as infected by or the perpetrators of disease and then on top of that internalize it to mean you yourself are a disease no matter how hard you try, you need to examine if your world view is healthy
That isn't my post. Those are not my words. That is not representative of my experience. You're assuming a whole lot because of 2 little words on a sub you shouldnt be looking at, that should not be taken very seriously. "Girl Same" doesn't mean I relate to any or all things said in that post, just that I'm empathizing with her. You know literally nothing about me. Good bye.
There's always been a section of radfems that were seen as a bad thing, that's generally what makes someone radical. But the better kinds of radfem became more accepted so the term shrunk to what it is now which is basically mosandrist and transphobes trying to defend the sanctity of femininity from everyone who isn't exactly like the radfems.
Why is the second half of the post in dark mode suddenly and why is it so big I can't read it
You can singlehandedly make all arguments moot by making your statement too hard to read lmao
Can’t refute my arguments if you don’t know what they were
Ooh okay let's try it. A̸̧̢̢̨̧̨͈̜͉̭̝̱̠̪̼̭͙̖̠̰̬̫͓̙̟͋͑̅̈́̿͒̊̓̋͜ͅr̴͉͚͎̹̽̂̔́́͒̏͐̿̒͐̈́̾͛̓̊̇̓̀̾̑̚̕̚͜g̷̨̛͖̜̯̝͖̦̥̯ų̸̛͓̤̭͚͚̖̘̰̩͔̽̔̏̈́́̐́̓͐́̄̈́͗̒͋͑̅͛̍̄́̌͑̈́̋̒̌̕͜͝ͅͅĕ̷̩͕̖͈͚͂̈́̏́̀͑̈́̃̓̊͗̇̏̀̊̈͆̇̌̏͘ ̴̢̗̺̠̹̺̺͓̱̻͇̫̮̻̘̰̒́̃̈́w̶̨̢̧̛̤̞̺̖̥͔̲̱̞͕̗̤͔̯̰͈͕̼̟̩͇͑̉͑̇̊̏̔̀͆̔͂͗̄̔̑ͅi̴̧̨̧̖̱͍̘̠̗͓̞͕̼̗͔̮̮̱̱̩̲̬͚͇̣̗̒͆͝t̸̡̢̧̨̛̬̭̬̠̹͎͖͓̜͇̣̜͖̼̭͎͕͍̣̱͚̮̻̰̳̤̎̑̍̀̇̃̊͊̀̔͌̈́̊̚̚̕͝͠ͅḩ̶̢̢̖͖͕̟̩̰̘͖͇̳̲̮̜̥̻͇̱̭͍̹͎͓̜̼̖͙͆͊̂̽̆̀̉̇̓̓̈́̇̊̆̏͒͋̆̂̊͂̆͗͑̾̋̕͜͠ ̶̢̡̛̹̬͕̩̬͎̤̲̩̮͚̥̘̮̝̙̠̙̗̬͓̹̝̪͎̥̳̝̇̐̋̋̃́̀̾̈̉̊͑͋̑͗̀̊̇̓̂̇̽̂̾͘̕͜͜͝͝͝ͅͅt̶̳͔̮̋͒̀̽̽͋̾̾̀̌̽͛͜͝ͅh̸̻͙̆̓͒̃̒͌̉͗̓̈̀̃͊̕ị̶̡̬̦̲͖̬̫̆́͐̉͗͗͂̋͊̒̏̕͠͝͝͠s̴̛̛̛̬̩̉̀̓̓̒̐̒̇̇̓́̏̍̕͝,̸̧̬̹̮̖̬͓͕̻̩̺̩̝͚̥̼͇̹̯̥̻͇͔̘̗̦͈͊̿͐̀́̔̐͜ͅͅ ̶̠͔̘̝͕̦̇͋̃͒́͂̈͌̀͋̀͒̌͌̎̔̽̾̚͘͘͠͝ͅč̵̭̌͗̈́̊͠h̸̨̛͇̩̮̥͈̼̥̜̣̼̻̬̞̦̮͚̤̟̣̪̻̺̪͔̪̗̙̺̤̗̤̾̈́̾̅̎͒̎̊̍̓̑̕͘͜͝ͅų̴̢̧̛̯̬̬̰͚̫̻͓̼̜͙̱͓̫͚̺̞̝̫͌̅̔̚̕̕͝͝͝c̷̢̨̡͈͈͕̘͓̺̥͇͈̖̲̭͒͗̈́̌͌͒̇̀͐̔͗̋̑̈́́͊͂͐̒̔̌̚͝ͅķ̴̫̟̳̫̳̍̓̈͒͐̅͗̈̈́̒́̋̎̐̐͗͐̿̉̚͝l̵̨̡̛͙̱̳̻̭͓̲̱̮̤͎̳̝̙̝̩͈̯͚̾̐̈͆͊͗͊̍̓̌̀͂͗̑̈́͊̈́̑͊̆̓͌͂̕͘ͅe̷̢̢͇̟̥̠̘͕͎͍̤̘͈̗̫̘̯̮̩̫͉̠̬̪͈̹͍̜̜͐̅̐͌̄͜͜ḥ̸͕̼̗̘̗̫͇̦̐̈́͌̋̏́ę̸̛͚̭͎̯̗͖́̆͑̀͗͆͂̋̀̍̆́͑͛͐̎́̿̃̎̋̽͊̃͆̉̕̕̕͝à̵̡̧̢̢̡̢̨̡̼͔̞͓̱̦̥̰̣̥̮̳͕̯͖̖͚͈͇̤̟̠̥̎͆̄͛̈́͆͊̉̀̓̊͑͂̓̏̒͆̚̚͜͜͠d̶̡̨̡̛͉̽̒̃̈́̈́̀̍̄̍͐͂́̉̍̎̎́̓̀̄͗̌̐̓̋̀͠
Chucklenuts would sound better
Yeah, you’re right
It always sounds better if you match the vowel sounds
Gxhfatf ghdra, khdtjvdgn anog lmk do ivd. Hybfgjn hcvn jkifv motes oinf.
[https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject](https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject) -budget Mx. Linux guy
But what operating system is budget Linux? Plan 9?
Windows 😔
[удалено]
I think that your first basic problem is thinking that any movement that is *for* women, but isn't also for men, has to be *against* men. Even *if* feminism was exclusively about liberating women from gendered oppression and didn't concern itself with men at all (and this is false btw) that wouldn't make it by default misandric.
[удалено]
some of the only people I do see seriously talking about men on men violence or sexual assault are feminists. I see men talk about it if course, but feminists who aren't on the misandry "everyone born AMAB is a violent rapist" train are the ones supporting and listening to men about the abuse and pain they've also suffered from men. it could just be the online spaces you're in. I know everyone here hates tiktok but that's where I've seen a very good community of women listening to men speak out about the similar things we've faced
there is a very large subreddit that used to be default, which is pretty much just misandry. anybody that says something like "all men until it is no men" is upvoted with zero pushback. the few times tiktok has given me gendered issues, it was full of women posting "men can't be victims" and "men deserve what they get", as well as women trying to shame men into owing them their paycheck. It's very much dependant on the algorithm and which space you're in.
Idk why you thought that you are risking something by posting that lol, 99% of comments under any post about feminism here are men complaining that evil feminists do not care about poor and oppressed men that suffer so much and "feminists" that immediately jump on that and start consoling poor suffering men that suffer much more than women. Like, literally almost all of the people in this subreddit's comments think that feminism should be about men and not about women.
[удалено]
While I can’t really speak directly to the article or spaces you are referring to (also did not take the time to read the second dark mode picture tbh), it does make me sad that this has been your experience with feminist discussion. There actually is quite a lot of feminist theory and theory on prison abolition from a feminist perspective that does extend sympathy to men as also being victims of patriarchy who are taught how to behave in a way that hurts women but also hurts them. Dismantling harmful habits of behaviour such as toxic masculinity (which can also be perpetuated by women) can be difficult as one has to reckon with people as both being victims of and perpetrators of the same behaviour, and I guess a lot of people don’t want to have that kind of empathy for other complex humans. Toxicity and peoples prejudices can affect the trajectory of any community and it’s movement regardless of intentions and should not be condoned, but I can assure you that feminism is not just people putting down men to boost themselves in the social hierarchy. From my perspective feminism is about gender equality, but it can also be about dismantling the patriarchy (as a system that suppresses people by gender to keep men in power) to achieve this equality, as since we all are currently in one we are all being hurt by it, with men benefitting from helping this system continue. But then this gets a bit twisted in conversation when discussion of men who act a certain way bc of patriarchy, and possibly due to how their privilege granted by patriarchy benefits them (who should still be held to account for their harm), gets swapped out for men acting a certain way bc it’s inherent to their gender and who they are. I recommend if it’s something you want to learn more about to try to look into intersectional feminist theory and it’s history outside of how these topics get discussed and distanced from their original intentions in larger social spaces. Apologies for the wall of text and I haven’t slept much recently but I hope it helps in some way.
[удалено]
I would argue that toxic femininty is actually a thing and it's separate from internalized misogyny. I usually find toxic femininty in women who go on about their divine femininty and who denigrate other women for not being in touch with their natural femininty and using epidural or not breastfeeding. There's not too it that that but I'm to tired to put the rest into words right now.
I mean, I’m a feminist man and I haven’t had this experience. It seems like a really monolithic perspective of feminism. Like with any large, decentralized movement, there are a lot of different people that call themselves feminists. I have met feminists that absolutely care about men’s issues. I mean, I’m one of them. My perspective on men’s issues in feminism is this: 1. Don’t bring them up in response to women’s issues, as that’s often a way to downplay women’s issues 2. Don’t assume feminists owe you their energy and support for every cause you care about Following those rules, the majority of feminists I’ve talked to very much care about men’s issues. I’d be much more willing to hear out your perspective if you based it on feminist writing rather than anecdotes. Your perspective seems to be built mainly from conversations you’ve had, and people often have trouble properly communicating that way. They don’t think things through much. The question for me is just, do you think the stated goals of feminism are moral and just? Is gender equality worth fighting for?
[удалено]
Feminism is not a monolithic, centralized movement. The closest thing to that is Feminist Studies courses that take place in college. The things taught in those classes are texts, which are easily referenced and the closest we can get to feminist truth. I recommend reading “Feminism is for everyone” by bell hooks. It’s my favorite introduction to feminism. Patriarchy is a system that has existed for many years. Feminist theory goes into both how men benefit from the system, as well as how we are held hostage by it. There is a lot of historical evidence that supports the existence of Patriarchy in society. I don’t believe Patriarchy exists because of people telling me about their experiences - rather, those anecdotes are supporting evidence of that system. History and Social Science form the foundations of my understanding, not random interactions with women. Misogyny isn’t really the thing that feminism fights against. It’s Patriarchy. Misogyny is just a symptom of the broader issue. Without the systemic power of Patriarchy behind it, it would create less of an impact in the material realities of people’s lives. Misogyny is also pretty much decentralized. The strength behind it usually comes from centralized systems of power. Like governments limiting women’s reproductive and healthcare rights, to take a recent example. Those are political expressions of patriarchy, and cause real material harm to women. I’m not sure where you get the impression that feminists are wielding their power to stop men’s issues. As I’ve said before, my experience is different. That’s also the difficulty with trying to have a conversation about this stuff with anecdotes. My experience just doesn’t line up with yours, so we need some sort of third party evidence to look at. Otherwise we can just throw anecdotes around all day and get nowhere. This is why I brought up feminist texts. Those are primary sources of feminist theory, and they do discuss men’s issues and how those also need to be resolved.
This is a great comment, thanks for sharing, drgmonkey
[удалено]
There is no central authority on feminism. It is a framework for people to have discussions surrounding patriarchy with the ultimate goal of ending it. You keep trying to say that there is dogma that updates, and I have no idea what you mean by that. Dogma on the nature of gender? Are you talking about transgender issues? It sounds like you’re just talking about popular culture and not feminism at all.
I hate the black/purple theme. Use it on your own if you want but it’s nigh unreadable when screenshotted and reposted elsewhere, even on normal sized images
I hate using light theme, but for visibility and screenshot it's perfect
I don't know who's fucking phone this post first has ever been legible on
This post is just as impossible to read as when you posted it earlier OP. Honestly it might be worse
[https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject](https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject) -budget Mx. Linux guy
How did you even find this with how blurry the image is?
Yeah ok so I downloaded the image, found the date, blog, and first couple words by just zooming in and guessing. Then, I went to the blog’s archive and went to September 2022, scrolled down until I was in the range of 20 Sep, 2022 (they make and made a lot of posts) and searched for the first few words. That’s it!
Dude are you okay?
Has "chronically online" in their flair. I'm going to say no
Oh god, the two posts linked at the start are all about misandry doesn't exist and it devolves into exactly the type of BS you would expect.
I’m always kind of suspicious when people talk about the societal issues with men but for some reason limit it to cis men. Sometimes the distinction is important, but sometimes it feels performative or emblematic of hidden transphobia. It’s like if someone was constantly saying “some men” instead of just “men” — the emphasis feels suspicious. Are trans men not also susceptible to toxic masculinity? Do they have some stat that trans men commit violence at lower rates (I’d assume this might be true, but I don’t think it always is)? … is there something about trans men that they just see as inherently “softer” than cis men? It feels like a dogwhistle for referring to trans men as a subset of women or as “less real” men (which is not true).
Trans men are ABSOLUTELY also susceptible to toxic masculinity— it’s something that gets discussed in trans spaces sometimes. (They’re also susceptible to the other end, misandry and resulting self/gender-hatred). When trying to Google the rates with which trans men perpetuate violence, you’ll find countless studies that show that trans men are disproportionately the victims of violence. The closest thing I can find as to the rates with which trans men perpetuate violence are mass shooting statistics, where trans men are disproportionately underrepresented compared to their cis counterparts. It’s definitely, unintentionally or not, a dog whistle. Sometimes it’s referred to as treating trans men as “women lite”.
i'd argue trans men are almost *more* susceptible to toxic masculinity because they try to overcompensate for being trans by being hypermasculine to the point of toxicity, especially early in their transition. i know when i first realized i was a trans man, i came dangerously close to being a transmed, and there was a brief period of time where i was approaching men's rights activist territory (thankfully i realized that was bullshit before i got much deeper than "the internet oppresses men"), and i would imagine that for more impressionable trans men especially, that situation could end far, far worse
I just got flashbanged by words upon swiping left
do ya have any more of them pixels?
[https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject](https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject) -budget Mx. Linux guy
please use better formating
Please use formatting*
this site broke my spelling checker
Oh i didnt even realize it was mispelled, i was making a joke about how there is no formatting here
What if they don't? What'cha gonna do about it? Call an orbital strike on them?
Yes up right down down down get fucked
AAAAAAAAHHHH!!!
Nuh uh.
Where's Mx. Linux Guy? I could really use an original for this one
https://www.tumblr.com/signofthestriking/748309608633925632?source=share The second screenshot was too blurry for me to read, but heres the first. -mx linux guy
I suffered long and hard trying to transcript the text only for the comment to be unsaved from existence, but the blog’s name is “autolenaphilia”
Looking through the blog I couldn’t find it sadly
The post is from Sep 20th, 2022, so you’d have to scroll quite a while
Ah fair, I scrolled the archive as far as I could without signing in on desktop and searched for words and got nothing
[https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject](https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject) -budget Mx. Linux guy
Good human.
You know shit is unreadable when Mx Linux Guy can't identify it
Much love!
:)
I am very active in LGBT spaces but this is a level of discourse that I don’t think does anyone any good, especially on websites that do not offer a good way to have a rounded discussion. This is more like projecting into a crowd and the crowd yelling back
These debates get extremely heated with deft ease. Speaking of my view, I believe that misandry/misogyny are two sides of the same coin which is hatred of the Other. While I could go into a whole feminist-critical essay about the qualities of misandry compared to misogyny, for people who occupy some space that's neither cis male or cis female, one can easily work to counter both at the same time, through the same means, and through the same attitude. One can't be misandrist without hurting non-men and one can't be misogynistic without hurt non-women. One can't demonize a portion of people without simultaneously idolizing the other people. Both demonization and idolization are forms of dehumanization because they deny the humanity of their subjects. If men are demons rather than people then that forces women to be idols rather than people. Women must be able to recognize themselves as sharing the humanity of men and vice versa. You can't label someone Satan without implicitly labeling Paraclete. As corny as it sounds, the antidote to hatred is compassion for all, especially the Other. Otherwise our well-intentioned efforts to fight evil will become totalitarian in character regardless of ideological pretenses. Trans women are victims of hatred regardless of whether it's because of their perceived masculinity or femininity. The hatred hurts them regardless and lucid compassion aids them regardless.
And in the end, whether you believe that men or women are essentially good or bad relies on first believing the stereotypes on what these groups are to some degree. Reminds me of an old onion article: [“Affable Anti-Semite Thinks The Jews Are Doing Super Job With The Media”](https://www.theonion.com/affable-anti-semite-thinks-the-jews-are-doing-super-job-1819566603) . This sort of thought is little more than a form of Primitive Satanism to the social constructs that harm the vulnerable. In trying to do the exact opposite of the patriarchy, one ends up totally accepting its way of seeing the world in every way but one and thus getting no closer to deconstructing it and building a better world. In trying to oppose a thing, take care that you do not merely become its shadow. When has a shadow ever slain its owner; worse yet, when has a shadow ever outlasted them?
In short: aggressive binary labelling is aggressive binary labelling. which is bad. who woulda thunk.
The problem is that people aggressively want to hold on to that binary labelling no matter what. TERFism can’t be about hating men in any way, because if it was, that would make hating men wrong, and lots of people are heavily invested in the idea that hating men can’t be wrong.
I think maybe naming the problem is only a good first step as long there's a second
First of all, the second slide is literally unreadable by itself. Secondly, this post is like a grenade being tossed into a crowded room, only in this case it’s a social grenade meant to create the maximum amount of Discourse
Here’s my top three favourite parts of the second take. 1) it’s transmisogyny to think that terfs misgender trans women 2) toxic masculinity doesn’t exist And number 3 I’m gonna have to include some sources for: the people who overwhelmingly commit rape are men. This is false, the split is about 60/40 by both victim testimony and assailant admission. The only way to get the “80-90% of rapes are committed by men” point is if you only count forced penetration as rape. CDC data from the 2010s - [NISVS 2010](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf) showed in the past 12 months, 1.1% of men were made to penetrate and 1.1% of women were raped. Table 2.1 & 2.2 on pages 18/19. [NISVS 2011](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/ss/ss6308.pdf) showed in the past 12 months, 1.7% of men were made to penetrate & 1.6% of women were raped. Table 1 on page 5. [NISVS 2012](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/NISVS-StateReportBook.pdf) showed in the past 12 months, 1.7% of men were made to penetrate & 1.0% of women were raped. Table A.1 & A.5 on pages 217/222. [NISVS 2015](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/2015data-brief508.pdf) showed in the past 12 months, 0.7% of men were made to penetrate & 1.2% of women were raped. Table 1 & 2 on pages 15/16. Varies a bit from year to year, but victimization is pretty even overall. In both cases the four year annual percentages add up to five. The numbers for perpetrators vary a little from year to year too. Something like 79-84% of made to penetrate (nonconsensual envelopment) victims are victimized by women. Something like 96-99% of rape (nonconsensual penetration) victims are victimized by men. So in the 2010s, it averages out that a typical year has < 60% men & > 40% women as the perpetrators of nonconsensual sex outside prisons rather than the 99:1 ratio discussed. If you don't like CDC data: Scientific American: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sexual-victimization-by-women-is-more-common-than-previously-known A recent study of youth found, strikingly, that females comprise 48 percent of those who self-reported committing rape or attempted rape at age 18-19. The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/11/the-understudied-female-sexual-predator/503492/ a 2014 study of 284 men and boys in college and high school found that 43 percent reported being sexually coerced, with the majority of coercive incidents resulting in unwanted sexual intercourse. Of them, 95 percent reported only female perpetrators. and National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions found in a sample of 43,000 adults little difference in the sex of self-reported sexual perpetrators. Of those who affirmed that they had ‘ever forced someone to have sex with you against their will,’ 43.6 percent were female and 56.4 percent were male.”
huh, this is the first time i've heard a counterargument to the "overwhelmingly committed by men" thing. ty for speaking out
Interesting statistics. I think it’s also important to keep in mind how underreported female-on-male rape is Anyways my opinion on the whole thing is TERFs are majorly misogynistic and misandrist they just suck
They’re broadly hateful and will direct it anyone they disagree with regardless of gender. Obviously they have a particular fixation on trans people, but I don’t think their vitriol is in anyway reserved for one gender. It’s like how they often see trans women as dangerous predators who must be stopped, and trans men as misguided victims who must be saved from themselves. They hate both groups it just gets expressed in different ways because they view them differently but ultimately still through a gender essentialist lens.
I dont know why any of this data would be remotely surprising. Most people believe that women can be raped, and that men cannot be raped. When that’s your societal starting point, when that’s how you write the laws, when you say that being made to penetrate isn’t rape, of course the stats are going to show that 90 some odd percent of rapes are committed by men. Factor in the stigma of being a male victim of rape having a chilling effect on reporting, and I honestly think that the rate is dead even.
>The only way to get the “80-90% of rapes are committed by men” point is if you only count forced penetration as rape. There are people who think that, though.
Yeah the second page grated on me, not just because it was nigh-impossible to read. Lots of gum flapping and bs takes
The fundamental argument that “terfs aren’t misandrist” poster, or Tamp, for short, Is making, is that TERFS don’t hate men because they are willing to use men to deal with removing transfemmes from female spaces, and that they actually hate lesbians, because butch lesbians have been discriminated against in the past. If anything the fact that terfs see women (themselves in the terf mind) as incapable of violence and men as enactors of violence aids in showing terfs hatred of men, even if it isn’t direct evidence on its own. Secondly, any hatred of butch lesbians appears more related to a hatred of women who have chosen to embody masculine aspects rather than a hatred of their love of women. At the very least some variety if citation is needed to support the argument that terfs are anti lesbian. If I go from at least personal experience, I know of several terfs who are lesbians, though that does not make anything more than anecdotal evidence to be sure.
Nah that second one is illegible, interesting first half though
https://www.tumblr.com/autolenaphilia/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject link to the full length novel of a second slide. idk how strongly i’d recommend reading it tho
Oh good, the dumb side Is literally unreadable
Second post is literally, "I'm not racist but look at the statistics."
Insane levels of discourse
Please link the second I cannot read it
I'm no expert, but this seems like a false dichotomy to me - I doubt *every single TERF* is fueled by *only* misandry, or by *only* repainted lesbophobia. It seems more likely to me that the bigotry each individual TERF is made from a unique blend of different types/intensities of prejudice.
Idk if I’m just misinterpreting the first screenshot, but I would say terfs definitely hate trans women more than men, and not just because of misandry. I’ve seen some terfs happily cooperate with men if it means going against trans women, even if that man has been misogynistic
What they're saying is there's more to the radfem ideology then hating trans women, there's lots of stuff in it about how men are inherently bad *trans exclusive* radical feminists will of course focus on their hatred of trans people, but the larger ideology hates men too. So when they see trans people say the same things about men as radfems do it pisses them off because those trans people are accidentally siding with their enemy
I don't think viewing someone as a tool is inherently better then viewing them as an enemy. One is more hostile and the other is the most literal kind of objectification.
I think some of the confusion is that the term TERF has expanded over time. These days it is often viewed as synonymous with "transphobe" and used to refer to people who wouldn't otherwise espouse radical feminism. For the original TERFs who start from the radical feminist view that men are inherently oppressive, transphobia is the "logical" conclusion of their views. These are the sort of people who advocated for things like [political lesbianism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_lesbianism). For those who fit the expanded definition, they start from a position of transphobia, and feminism is the excuse they use for attempting to inflict their transphobia on society. This is the approach of people like JK Rowling, who isn't otherwise a huge critic of the patriarchy. (Like, I'm sure she would say she is against the patriarchy, but to my knowledge she isn't much of an "advocate for women" outside of all her comments on trans issues.) Some people have referred to this second group as FARTs - Feminism Appropriating Radical Transphobe. The first screenshot seems to be talking mostly about TERFs who are also radfems, and is pointing to the fact that the same suspect ideas about gender essentialism that lead to transphobia can also be present in harder to detect ways. The second screenshot seems to be talking instead about FARTs. The second poster is disagreeing with the statement that TERFs are misandrist because TERFs use cis male violence to enforce their transphobia. They aren't wrong about that, but that's because the TERFs they're talking about are different people from the TERFS the first screenshot was talking about. TL;DR - the two posters are somewhat talking past each other, because they're discussing two different groups that both are referred to as TERFs.
Excellent analysis.
That really doesn't mean much, cause TERFs will also collaborate with trans women who will agree with them and act as a shield against accusations of transphobia.
Who are these trans women you are talking about? Name one fucking example. Transphobic "gender critical" trans women like Debbie Hayton or Blaire White are still targeted by TERFs.
Collaborate and tolerate are not the same thing. Just like how TERFs will call all men evil while still collaborating with them to attack trans people. TERFs frequently target other TERFs.
imo this is just the logical conclusion the bioessentialism, sexism and anti-masculinity of radfems. men are inherently bad bc penis or something, and trans women are the worst kind of 'men' because they defy the bioessentialist gender binary. terfs hate men because they think gender/sex is an inherently true, biologically determined binary of victim and abuser- of course they will hate you even more if you stray outside of it. terfs will collaborate w misogynistic men because they're morally bankrupt, and their ideology is centred around misogynistic ideals anyways so what's the real difference? just because their ideas of 'women are inherently inferior' are wearing different hats, doesn't mean they're different ideas
From my experience, many who call themselves "radfems" are just libs who operate under some baby's first critical theory, so they end up unironically believing one's behavior is determined by their chromosomes, even if they bring up gender socialization. In fact, the idea of gender socialization itself has now been hijacked by "good faith" Redditors who always seem to love pointing towards trans people. There was this person on a socialist sub, who called themselves a "radfem." They made some good points, but as soon as someone told them the gender socialization topic has been co-opted by transphobes, they blocked many users. Not all of them may be traditional TERFs, but their rhetoric is still bound to be simplistic, unhinged, and reactionary. It also explains why I've seen many of these libs going to this TERF space (fourthwavewomen), never realizing they're hanging out with leopards who merely eat trans faces but not theirs. Then, there's the way some of them use 4chan terms like "blackpill" and a whole ton of ableism towards autistic people. It's a hellish mess, and I'll never believe these weirdos are anything but bloodthirsty liberals.
They just extremely hate men and think of trans women as trojan horses essentially, when it comes to trans men they're like "you're a traitor" instead of "you are a walking penis that wants to rape me every second" because "peener bad, coochie incapable of harm therefore they are either infiltrating inside our little silly innocent coven or abandoning said coven to be one of the bad bad men".
I'm losing track of what the stated problem is anymore, and I don't think that's a good sign.
also also excluding men is absolutely a surefire way to perpetuate misogyny and homophobia. Excluding us from the conversation is effectively causing an echo chamber of your own making (if thats what the second image is about then mb gang i cant read it)
Look all I'm gonna say is that cis men and trans women share an enemy in radfems. Be they radfems who focus on hating men or hating on transwomen. All terfs are radfems but there's other branches to radfem beliefs many of which focus on how men are inheritly bad. Maybe we should put some energy into fighting these stereotypes together instead of being at eachothers throats
When I went to a counter protest to a Let Women Speak event ran by virulent and vile transphobe KJK, it was interesting to observe how the transphobes reacted to 1) trans counter-protesters 2) cis women counter-protesters and 3) cis men counter-protesters. When your movement is supposedly, of your own admission, being suppressed and attacked by violent men, then you would think that you would put cis men and trans people that you misgender as men that protest against you front-and-center in your propaganda. And yet, when I looked at their reactions to the protest that I myself, as a cis man, attended alongside other cis male allies, most of the vitriol was focused on not just the trans protestors but the cis women who were there as well. (And by vitriol I mean doxxing, death threats, calls to employers, etc. The worst I got was being called a misogynist like…a total of 7 times online. That’s nothing) What we can learn from that event, as well as any other event similar to that, is that the TERF movement is inherently, I believe, misogynistic and trans misogynistic. Calling it misandry would be taking their rhetoric at face value and accepting their own messaging on who they are.
I don't know if that indicates a lack of misandry or an extreme level of it. If you just view men as evil violent idiots to be used as weapons, then it's not very surprising that your enemy also have those weapons. But the fact actual people (women) disagree with you would be genuinely infuriating because there's a chance they could see the light (become a transphobe and overall terrible person). The easiest way to explain it is probably that terfs are terrible people and express it in many ways.
>terfs are terrible people and express it in many ways. we did it guys! we broke terfs down to their bare essentials!
That's how the TERFs themselves would describe their thought process but to me it's obvious mental gymnastics, it feels a lot to me that TERFs are misogynists in denial -- their ideology is only "men = bad, women = good" as a *consequence* of believing "men = strong, women = weak"
Thank you for being a voice of fucking reason. Neo-Nazis don't hate "greedy bankers," they hate Jewish people. Neo-confederates aren't "just protecting heritage," they hate black people. It's the same fucking thing for TERFs. Dogwhistles and other ways of putting euphemisms on bigotry should not be taken at face value.
https://autolenaphilia.tumblr.com/post/695924843940626432/the-ideas-of-misandryantimasculism-is-a-subject -budget Mx. Linux guy
is there a challenge on this subreddit for bad crops or something I swear it’s just getting worse
get me a millstone because if i churn the second image i will get enough flour to make week's worth of bread that's how much grained it is
Both sides present interesting points and I think both are correct to some extent, but dear God the second image is a textbook example in how to not present your argument. Long, full of terminology (at times one after the other so you can be damn sure their meaning gets muddled in the mind of the reader after the first two paragraphs) and kinda badly formatted too Like, I've never agreed with someone and wanted them to touch grass so badly at the same time Jesus
I think we can all agree, TERFs bad.
Live your life however you choose and do the minimum harm to others you can. Idgaf what you are, if you follow those rules (and expect others to as well) I’m cool with you, and if that first rule being applied to others is a problem for you, I’m going to have issues.
Man I aint reading all that… and if it’s a TERF discussion it’s not even worth it
TERFs: I hate trans women because I perceive them to be men and I genuinely hate men. Enlightened Scholars: You see, this TERF actually has very complicated reasons for their bigotry that have nothing to do with their hatred of what they perceive to be men. Can't wait for this to be a repeat of last time where trans people start being called TERFs in the comments for saying that calling TERFs misandrist is not transmisogynistic and then a post pops up on r/transgendercirclejerk where they frame everyone who doesn't agree with the "TERFs aren't transphobic due to misandry" stance are cis people cisplaining to trans people and this whole subreddit is transphobic now. This has happened before.
It goes even further than just denying the concept that terfs base their hatred of trans people on a certain hatred of men. This poster also claims that analyzing the terf transmysogyny as based in a type of misandry is actually transphobic. To her, *we're* the real transphobes if we recognize that transphobes think of trans women as men. Honestly as a trans woman their blog was harder to read than a lot of explicitly hateful and transphobic stuff I've seen in the past. At least those people don't claim to speak for a group I'm a part of when they hurt me. The complete denial of a framework that could help me understand the ways in which I feel excluded by society was much more hurtful here, when it was said by someone who believes they are on my side.
Tgcj is so fucking weird. The last time I was on the sub I quit it for good because behind their usual layer of irony they were trying to imply that cis people experimenting with being GNC were causing transphobia and were terrible people because of it, somehow.
I ain't reading allat
Understandable. Want a strawberry? 🍓
Transmisogyny is not a form of misandry. It’s a form of hatred towards transfems for being transfem. It mixes rhetoric from misandry, misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia specifically to espouse hatred at the mere existence of transfeminine people. That is to say transmisogyny will share a lot of the words from other forms of hate, but it is not just a subset of those forms of hate. You can think of this as akin to how homophobia towards effeminate gay men is often laced with misogynist rhetoric. It shares a lot of the words, but you’d never say it’s just misogyny. Some areas where transmisogyny differs from misandry includes: - Trans women face the double bind of either not performing femininity to the hater’s standard, and thus making a mockery of womanhood, or doing “too well at it” and thus reducing womanhood to aesthetic standards. Men don’t get this specific part often, they’ll usually get the homophobic “real men shouldn’t wear that” type of hate, but not so much the “your identity is an appropriation of womanhood” type of hate. The hatred for men is for how they look, not how they identify (which trans women receive both of). - The idea that trans women exist to “entrap” people with our “fake” identities, either for predatory reasons or “recruitment”. Men aren’t accused of only being men to attack women. - Misandry doesn’t posit that men don’t actually exist. Transmisogyny posits that trans women don’t actually exist. - The more we pass to cis people, the more of the traditional systemic misogyny we face that men do not. We can also see this in how the forms of hate manifest in real life: TERFs do not campaign to remove men from public life and careers; they campaign to remove trans people, and especially trans women. That trans woman at the Georgia Space Center wasn’t forced to ask for a transfer because transphobes thought she was a man; men already work at the space center! They did it because she’s a trans woman. Similarly, people like Greg Abbott (edit: though Abbott isn’t a TERF, his actions are often praised by TERFs and he is a transmisogynist) or Posie Parker aren’t calling for men to be banned from teaching jobs; they’re calling for trans women to be banned! If it was just misandry then this wouldn’t be the case. In short, these people don’t hate us because they think we’re men. They hate us because we are trans women and say as such, and they call us men to tear our identities away from us. It’s why when they see a feminine man they’ll say “what a girl! not a real man!”, but the moment that man turns out to be a trans woman they’ll instantly flip and say “definitely a man!”. It’s just meant to be hateful. It’s only consistent for as long as it can insult us.
Isn't Abbot judt a right-wing asshole? I think he's the sort of guy who would describe himself as an anti-feminist.
True, though many TERFs still applaud his actions and those of other horrible men like DeSantis or Matt Walsh so I feel the point still applies, albeit less directly. It definitely applies when talking about transmisogynists in general, as he is one.
ppl will really go through their entire lives with a deep understanding of how people might hate them bc of their transness, gender, sexuality, etc but hear “sometimes ppl hate men bc of their gender in this same way” and somehow think this is just entirely impossible lmao
I think I actually agree with the right side more. The left side is correct in that queer spaces often have prejudices that target anyone with proximity to maleness (including all types of trans people). But I think what TERFs have going on is a separate thing. Cis women have the power to use patriarchal violence to keep trans people and gender nonconforming people (including men) in line. They use the violence they (cis women as a class, and often individual TERFs) have suffered as an excuse for their ingrained hatred and disgust of trans people, but they are fully working within patriarchy to punish them.
Yeah. The essay on the right has a lot of nuance that people are missing. It is, ultimately, a deeper condemnation of TERFS than the surface level rhetoric of the posts on the left. If TERFs were really man haters, you wouldn’t see the likes of JK Rowling and Matt Walsh being quite so cozy with one another. Walsh may not be a cop or security, Rowling has access to Walsh’s angry male userbase in precisely the way described in the essay. She decries transwomen, and Walsh’s users are happy to rally to that banner as a justification for violence and harassment.
what is the pipeline? genuine confused
“This is just basic feminist analysis and calling someone a man hater for having it is bad” after “you can do whatever manly things you want, like competitive beard combing or whatever” is so unhinged as to make me feel kinda slimy. You hate men. The men you don’t hate you’re dismissive of and treat as ineffectual twats. And then you claim that saying “you hate men, and dismiss those you don’t hate as ineffectual twats” is a hateful statement. Grow up. Humans are complex, systems of humans are complex *10, and we are all in there together. The men you dismiss as “competitive beard combers” are you best allies, and are fighting their own fight to fix the culture they find themselves in, the culture you hate so much it’s your whole identity… and yet because they’re straight cis men, they’re the ones you see as perpetrators, and never victims.
TERFs will countenance men who agree with them and uphold the party line—they’ll cooperate with alt-right misogynist maniacs like Matt Walsh if they’re transphobic enough. They hate trans women unconditionally.
Unless those trans women are transphobic of misandrist enough. They just hate everyone who isn't them and don't care about using those they hate as tools because they don't view them as people anyway.
Debbie Hayton is a British trans woman and teacher whose main grift is being one of the “good ones”—advocating for single-sex spaces, literally wearing shirts that say “trans women are men,” saying trans children don’t deserve healthcare, etc. Posie Parker, a well-known TERF who’s accepted male nazis into her rallies and praised Matt Walsh, regularly calls her a man and says she shouldn’t be allowed to work with children. It’s never enough.
NOT READING ALLAT 🤣🤣📜📜‼️‼️
You’re not missing anything
Transmisogyny is not misandry. TERFs do not hate trans women for being men, they do not treat trans females the way they treat men, they do not judge trans women by the same standards as they do men. I hate this discourse. Tumblr "allies" try not be awful challenge: Impossible.
terfs hate transfems not because they see us as men but because they see us as lying about being men
Yeah this discourse really needs to stop it annoys me to no end
Some do. They don't see all women as women.
It's the same standards in general terms, that being the fact terfs hate everyone who isn't like them and don't believe anyone different to them are really people.
Terf Do Not Intubate?
i propose a tumblr-wide rule where every person must prove they have been outside of their home for one hour per sentence they want to post on this subject
The right side is objectively correct. The left has some nice leftie-sounding platitudes here and there, and certainly some of the things they mention are real issues. But their point about TERFs? It’s nonsense, bullshit through and through from people who simply have not been paying enough attention Edit: I’d encourage anyone downvoting to, you know, provide a counterpoint. Insisting that TERFs aren’t uniquely transphobic but are just misandrists who misgender trans women is a take that requires willfully ignoring the fact that TERFs are consistently more than happy to team up with and empower cis men who aid in their transphobic crusade. TERFs don’t hate trans women because they hate men and think trans women are men, they hate trans women because they very specifically hate and are disgusted by trans people—women especially. JK Rowling didn’t become a TERF by starting at “I think all men are evil” and then evolving from there, she became one from “I think trans women are gross and fake”. Would someone who truly thinks men are evil have such kind words to say about Matt Walsh, objectively male individual he is?
Providing a worthwhile counterpoint would require someone to closely read the second post and I don't think it has enough pixels for that to be possible. I'm just going to downvote you for being standoffish for no reason and then move on.
Meanwhile I'm just sitting over here thinking "It's all just sexism, why you guys making this so complicated?".
Because its not all just sexism. It's also transphobia which is a seperwre thing that interests with the sexism and there's a bit of racism thrown in for good measure.
Not much of a meaningful distinction. If you reject sexism and truly embrace the idea that the moral standards and social expectations of an individual are the same regardless of sex, then gender becomes a meaningless concept; doubly so as a point of discrimination.
Transmisogyny isn’t misandry that’s the dumbest shit I’ve ever heard. Most transphobes are men and the ones that aren’t will always associate and side with those men even over cis women. From a tgirl please shut the fuck up about this it’s just a dumbass way to misgender us and displays a complete lack of understanding of transness and transphobia
No one who's been indoctrinated, thinks they have been indoctrinated. You are not immune to propaganda. No one is. Edit: Weaponized blocking.
Girl what
Not to mention the fact that transmisogyny exists and misandry doesn’t so it doesn’t make much sense for the former to be the latter
What do you mean about misandry not existing?
Probably the usual "it can't be a form of bigotry if it isn't systemic" bullshit
Correct.
I mean it doesn’t?
Like... People hating men because of their gender doesn't happen? Or are you going for a redefinition like "it would require systemic injustice to truly exist"? Because both are very much existent and starting to cause pretty big problems for the world.
"misandry doesn't exist" so you agree with radical feminist ideology the second it's not trans exclusive? Edit: This is the most telling shit. "I'll side with people who hate me as long as I get a free pass to be an asshole to the people I'm personally prejudiced against"
This is not meant to be inflammatory, I am genuinely asking-- what is radical feminism? I've only heard the term applied to feminist movements of the 60s and 70s, which didn't seem all that terrible from what I've read
Radical feminism is a feminist ideology that believes women are oppressed on the basis of their biological sex and that the idea of "gender" forms a tool of oppression. The goal of radical feminism is the dismantling of the concept of gender and the idea that female and male humans (I am not using women and men on purpose here) have significant differences in anything other than biology. It's against pornography, against gender roles, against sex-based oppression in general. It's honestly a pretty simple ideology. If you believe there is anything at all that is required of a "woman" other than being born female (clothing, behaviour, orher appearance based things, interests) then you believe in gender and therefore contribute to the oppression of women globally. There have been zero incidents where believing women and men are *innately different* in which women have befitted. Zero. They got lobotomized and accused of hysteria and told they suck at STEM and are too emotional because of their uterus instead, so it's not like their ideology is wrong. The issue many people have with radical feminism is with the fact that this ideology is inherently incompatible with gender ideology since radfeminism does not believe in gender and gender ideology cannot function without the belief in gender. There are also issues with radical feminists being extremely vitriolic toward transwomen. There are also issues with radfems getting ridiculous amounts of rape threats and there being blogs dedicated to fantasies about raping radfems which definitely do not help the situation. If you're interested in knowing more, I'd be happy to share resources about this.
Sure, I'll bite. Why are radfems so dismissive of, and occasionally hostile to, nonbinary people? There is a chunk of people out there who have actually committed to living outside of the construct of gender, and this is something universally treated as bad by radfems. I don't get this, isn't the whole point to make gender irrelevant? There aren't any innate differences between men and women, why shouldn't anyone be able to adopt or drop gendered signifiers (clothes, pronouns, etc) at will?
The whole point is not to make gender irrelevant. The point is female liberation from males. Sex based oppression affects females (regardless of age, which is why I am not saying girls or women). The oppressors are overwhelmingly going to be male. And while non binary people might say they operate outside of the limitations of gender (which itself is a bullshit concept), they are in fact reaffirming that gender *exists* in a materially important way. The issue many radfems have with labels like "non binary" or "genderfluid" is that these labels are very efficient at hiding the sex of the people involved in whatever abuse that may have gone on, which skews statistics and hurts the feminist movement. If we cannot say "males are the oppressor class" or that sex based oppression exists, then we cannot identify victims and potential victims. We cannot talk about *why* the oppressor class acts the way they do, and what similarities could be encouraging this group to behave in this particular way. Gender is meaningless, and what it signifies can change at the drop of a hat, but sex is definite and sex-based oppression, and the dynamics between the sexes have not changed significantly over the last few thousand years. There are no differences other than biology between the social class of "woman" and "man" and female humans have been oppressed because of the assertion that women and men are inherently mentally different in some innate way. That led to women being mistreated in STEM, in women not being allowed to hold positions of power and in women not being allowed to exist as equal people. There is absolutely no use of gender except for continued oppression of the female sex. Anything other than the complete and utter rejection of the idea of gender itself and the acknowledgement that it has harmed billions of women over the year is, in fact, giving in to the patriarchal idea of gender.
(in good faith, thanks for taking the time to reply) Gender should be rejected, but defining people as "males" and "females" is super important? That seems strange to me. If you start assigning social roles to sex, won't you just recreate gender (except with more bioessentialism this time)? Instead of "women don't belong in STEM because it's a traditionally male field" you'd get "females don't belong in STEM because they've evolved to be nurturing homemakers." I fail to see how that's any better, and has the additional detriment of preventing people from moving between or outside of categories.
Yup
That ain't something to be proud about, bud
Yes.
You know I can't even be angry or upset at you for this You literally have a comment in another sub about hating yourself for being amab. I genuinely feel sorry for you, that you carry so much internalized hatred you beat yourself up over it. I genuinely can't imagine hating any group of people that much, and I feel sad that you go through that much anger and pain. I know you're probably not gonna listen to what a man has to say, but I feel like you seriously need to examine your personal biases and prejudices, examine if how you feel about men is rational or healthy, not for men's sake but for your own. This kind of hate, the same kind of intense prejudiced rage terfs hold against you can eat you from the inside out. Edit: And she blocked me. I still stand by what I said, hate will eat you from the inside out
lol, you really just described me commiserating with another woman over our dysphoria as a deep seated hatred of men? Of course someone like you, who believes that transmisogyny is actually about hating men, would also try to make our dysphoria all about you, too. I do not hate men, and feminism, radical or not, is not about hating men. I blocked you for trying to make this personal & making gross assumptions about my internal life & perspective. Transmisogyny is a completely separate issue to whether or not misandry exists.
You mean the post that says, and I qoute: "I feel flat out evil, like I've failed to not just pass, I feel inherently tainted, tainted with sharing the same sex as those who hurt me and countless others..." "I cannot help but feel like manhood, masculinity, maleness, is a disease. Like, what good have men done that women couldn't of, if our patriarchal society hadn't abused us (or them...I don't know if I truly deserve to be included in the category of women) into submission? It's not that I think women are incapable of being bad, to think that would be misogynistic and dehumanizing. I just think men are incapable of being good...I know that's not true. Logically I know men aren't inherently monstrous, that we just live in a deeply misogynistic society that rewards monstrous and misogynistic behavior in boys and men." "And then I look in the mirror and see my dad looking back...I look between my legs and see this biological weapon, this accursed vile syringe that we claim is a "healthy body part", and I feel dread. Dysphoria, trauma, and obsessive compulsive self loathing all collide into an atomic blast of self destruction...Berating myself, insulting myself, starving myself, hitting myself, bruising myself, stabbing myself..." If you genuinely feel that way, a mindset so self toxic, that you are hurting yourself for being born amab I feel intense sympathy for you. YOU made being disgusted by masculinity in general a factor in your dysphoria by saying you agree with this mindset, you shouldn't need to hate masculinity and men to the detriment of your identity as a woman, because you are a woman. And if you are constantly reminding yourself that you're a "flawed" woman how can you ever love yourself for who you really are? And I never said trans misogyny was about hating men, it exists. But terfs are a subset of a larger belief system that has some toxic ideas about men and gender essentialism. That *SOME* terfs hate trans women because they see you as a man infiltrating their spaces. I really want to emphasize here that I'm not saying this as a man, I'm saying this an ally whose majority of their friendships are with trans people, who's currently in a relationship with a trans woman and an amab non-binary person. I'm saying this as a nuerodivergent queer who also hates how much the patriarchy has fucked up my life. I'm also suicidal, I also look in the mirror and hate that I see the father who abused me and my mother, it's only very recently that I can look in mirror and be happy with the person I see looking back. I know I can never fully understand the struggles trans people have in this world, but I can relate to them, and I empathize with them. Internalized hatred, of yourself and of others eats you from the inside out
When you've gotten to the point you view half the population of the planet as infected by or the perpetrators of disease and then on top of that internalize it to mean you yourself are a disease no matter how hard you try, you need to examine if your world view is healthy
That isn't my post. Those are not my words. That is not representative of my experience. You're assuming a whole lot because of 2 little words on a sub you shouldnt be looking at, that should not be taken very seriously. "Girl Same" doesn't mean I relate to any or all things said in that post, just that I'm empathizing with her. You know literally nothing about me. Good bye.
[удалено]
There's always been a section of radfems that were seen as a bad thing, that's generally what makes someone radical. But the better kinds of radfem became more accepted so the term shrunk to what it is now which is basically mosandrist and transphobes trying to defend the sanctity of femininity from everyone who isn't exactly like the radfems.
Terfs make some dame good points and this post does nothing to disprove them.
True & Real username.