✨👇🏻✨👇🏻✨👇🏻✨👇🏻✨👇🏻✨
If woman-centred language is trans erasure, it's only because trans culture is about NOT acknowledging women.
trying on a metaphor

Kiana Khansmith

祝日 / Permanent Vacation

#extradirty
Jules of Nature

⁂
I'd rather be in outer space 🛸

ellievsbear
almost home
dirt enthusiast
$LAYYYTER
Three Goblin Art
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"

Discoholic 🪩
Misplaced Lens Cap
Mike Driver
ojovivo
KIROKAZE

seen from Morocco
seen from United Kingdom

seen from Ukraine
seen from United States
seen from Sweden

seen from Türkiye

seen from Türkiye
seen from Argentina
seen from United States

seen from Costa Rica
seen from Pakistan
seen from France
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States

seen from Sweden

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from Ireland
seen from T1
@a-broader--sensibility
✨👇🏻✨👇🏻✨👇🏻✨👇🏻✨👇🏻✨
If woman-centred language is trans erasure, it's only because trans culture is about NOT acknowledging women.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Here are some things that will happen if sex is NOT a mandatory category on the census
Within only a few years, we will stop knowing what the rate of sex-selective abortion of female fetuses is, or in what regions those rates are highest.
Within a few years, places that usually show a skewed sex ratio of adults due to highly gendered workplaces (for example, cities with oilfields and many temporary male workers, or capital cities with many women in low-level government jobs) will not be able to plan or budget according to known factors—for example, planning for female or male-specific healthcare, or prisons.
Within 10 or so years, we will lack any verifiable data on the oppression of women and girls. We will not know if they are underrepresented or overrepresented in certain jobs, we will not know what the wage gap is (or if it exists), and we will not be able to make data-based arguments for programs that support women and girls.
Within 20+ years, we will no longer even have verified proof that the sex ratio of human beings, is, on average, roughly 52:50 females to males, with male infants slightly outpopulating female infants, and female elderly people being much more populous than male elderly people.
This means that MRAs will finally achieve their dream—being able to make the spurious argument that, for example, women are not underrepresented in the highest levels of corporate and governmental power. Maybe women really are just 10% of the overall population, so it makes sense that they are 10% of XYZ’s board of directors, or cabinet ministers. Maybe women are actually dramatically, rather than slightly, overrepresented in certain fields (like law school), so we need to do affirmative action for males.
Prison planning will now be very difficult for all cities, not just the ones with highly dynamic sex ratios and temporary workforces. Likely, planners will just save money by building very few female prisons, and overcrowding them if necessary. This is assuming that male and female prisons are still segregated at all, though. If, in the MOGAI hell world, we decide to do mixed-sex prisons, female prisoners will likely commit suicide before or after being subjected to multiple sexual assaults a day, and constant harassment.
Data on male violence against women will become nonexistent. We will only have statistics about human violence against humans, which makes it difficult to know which humans need a special shelter with a secret address and a detailed plan to escape another human.
Obviously, the problems with health care planning will be tremendous. Even assuming that individuals still have proof of their sex, but that sex is not recorded on mandatory census forms, accuracy in allocating funds to sex-specific healthcare needs will be drastically reduced by lack of accurate data.
Census companies will take advantage of the growing corporate demand for census data. However, their data will be fractured, market-based, and targeted only at specific consumer populations. (For example, what percentage of people in income bracket $25-50,000 and neighbourhood LMN are male and female?) Some companies will deliberately engage in biased data-collection processes in order to skew data in the way their commissioning company wants.
Companies competing for government contracts will use skewed and dishonest private data sets to make it look like their particular services are absolutely necessary and urgent.
One thing will not change in this new world, however. Pimps and porn directors will still know who exactly their clients are, and what sex of performers they want to see. Prostitutes will still know where the men live. Strippers will know who yells verbal abuse at them, and tries to touch them. Johns will know that biologically female women are the people they want to abuse.
I really, really need you to hear yourself claiming that my argument—that we need to collect MORE data, not LESS—is invalid because it isn't supported by enough data.
If you are in favour of people supporting their arguments with data and statistics, then WHY are you okay with the government simply not collecting data on how many males and females there are?
🛏
This is a reference to my radical feminism ask post. The bed refers to "🛏 feminist topics I’m just tired of discussing."
ANY THING TO DO WITH TRANS. I'm just done with it. I'm so done. I have said everything I have to say. I have read and researched as much as I can. I have nothing left in my to continue this conversation. If you want to know my thoughts on transgender politics, you can read my previous posts but I am just not interested in continuing to discuss it.
your 3rd, 6th, and 9th most recent emojis describe how your september will go
❤️🩹
Ok, I know it's been a long time, but this heart is from my radfem ask box. The topic is dating as a radfem.
Here are my thoughts, briefly:
I don't have a problem with lesbian separatists and I think any woman who wants to live in a separatist way should have that opportunity, but I also don't think straight women should be guilted into not having a satisfying romantic relationship. I'm straight and I want to date men, and even though there are challenges that come up, I'm not willing to forgo romance in my life.
What about porn?
Because porn is so normalized in our culture, and because people are so defensive if you criticize it outright, I address it in stages. I don't have one big huge Porn Conversation; it's a lot of short, casual conversations. I ask the man questions and let him probe his own brain for answers. Questions like, "Do you ever think about what happens to the real women in those porn videos?" or "Does it upset that you girls in the foster care system or sexually abused girls are so much more likely to do porn as adults than average?" I talk about what is real and what is fake in porn, and about how porn consumption can shape your sexual tastes by increasing your threshold for stimulation. And I also set firm boundaries with regards to not wanting to imitate something seen in porn, no choking, no BDSM, and I do not want to watch porn with him or discuss things he's seen in porn in a positive way.
But what if you had children? Aren't fathers the biggest perpetrators of child sexual abuse?
*Sigh.* This is one of those tough topics where I just have to say that I understand that many men are actually a risk to their own children. And I know some women whose ex-husbands are exposing the children to porn and other inappropriate content, and the children's aid services have done nothing. That being said, part of this is about your own judgment in choosing a partner, and your awareness of red flags. I guess I trust my judgment, even though it's not perfect, to not have children with a man unless I fully believe that he would never do something like that. And I also believe that if I ever found out my husband/partner was abusing a child, that would be an instant call to the police and get-out-of-my-house.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
This is my theory on how pedophilia is going to be normalized by deepfakes.
Step 1: (which has already occurred) Indoctrinate generations of women into accepting, enabling, and even encouraging a porn culture in which it is considered abnormal for a man to not watch porn. Create a pattern of escalating behaviour, in which men begin by watching fairly “normal” sex scenes, and then gradually seek out more taboo and violent scenes as their sensitivity to images of sex drops, and they require more stimulation to feel anything.
Step 2: (also already happened) While actual child porn seems to be the current moral and legal cutoff point at which people will say, “No more,” simulated child porn, using young-looking actresses one day past 18, or illustrations/animations is considered a morally acceptable substitute. Have “teen porn,” “daddy/daughter” and “incest” become some of the most popular genres on earth.
Step 3: (in the process of happening right now) Take simulated child porn to the next level by creating pseudo-real porn. For example, create deepfake videos of real child celebrities’ faces digitally edited onto the bodies of technically legal porn. Give men the tools they need to create these porn videos themselves, so that they can use photos of children they know personally to make videos for themselves, without needing strong computer skills. Men will share these videos online, and inevitably, some will become popular and widely circulated.
Step 4: Somewhere in the world, a man will be arrested for watching real child porn, and his legal defense will be that he thought it was fake. He may or may not be found guilty, but the case will make the news, and talking heads will start asking: Is pseudo-real child porn using images of real children wrong? Is it a man’s fault if he actually watches real child porn when he was trying to find fake child porn? Are these men considered pedophiles? Men everywhere, who watch these videos in private, will panic when they realize that it easily could have been them on trial, because they don’t know whether any of the videos they watched are fake.
Step 5: The left-wing “progressives” will take up the cause of protecting the “civil liberties” of a temporarily increasing number of men accused of watching/collecting child porn who claim it was an accident. They will claim it has begun a matter of right-wing anti-sex Christians trying to crack down on all porn, and therefore on sexuality as a whole. Left vs. right debates continue in the way they usually do, on cable news and in the newspaper, with both sides misrepresenting the others’ arguments and accusing the other of bigotry and hatred. The right-wing argument will be that deepfakes are “too far,” and people should watch porn that depicts adult-looking women. The left will argue that their civil liberties are being attacked, that their sexuality is being judged, and that “right-wingers” want to kinkshame them. No one on either side will argue on behalf of the actual children, who are unknowingly having their likeness raped on film, and how it will change the ways the men who watch these deepfakes interact with them in real life.
Step 5 and a half: Absolutely no media coverage will be given to the small group of radical feminists who oppose porn for feminist reasons. Hollywood and academia will portray the only anti-pseudo child porn arguments as coming from the traditional, patriarchal religious right wing. Neither left nor right wing conventional political journalists or bloggers will address the matter of escalating behaviour in sexual deviants, or that men who watch something in porn want to act it out in real life. Absolutely no one except de-platformed radical feminists will address the recruitment and treatment of the 18 and 19-year-old actresses who are actually involved in the production of the original porn videos.
Step 5 and ¾: Some fake feminists who are enthusiastically pro-porn will say that actresses are especially happy to perform in scenes that are tailor-made by the burgeoning deepfake industry for the purpose of digitally creating pseudo-child porn. They will argue that this is the very easiest type of porn to act in, because the women don’t even become recognizable as their faces are edited to look like someone else. None of these liberal feel-good feminists will ask themselves why porn is the only industry in which workers do not want to be recognized for their work.
Step 6: Eventually, the neoliberal, anything-goes “left wing” will win the deepfakes debate decisively, as they always do. People will blame the porn hosting websites, or the internet service providers or the “dark web” for allowing real child porn to surface, but men will be thoroughly reassured that it is not their responsibility to check if the pseudo-child porn they are watching is actually real, because how could they? And when a man is horny, how dare you make him wait while he verifies that the porn he’s watching isn’t actual footage of child rape?
Step 7: Almost all men are now watching deepfake child porn, except for the men who prefer some other violent fetish. Because it is so normalized, people will start making jokes when they see a very attractive or compliant child that probably, there is porn of that child’s face on the internet. Preteen girls will be groomed online into providing photos of their faces that are especially clear and easy to edit into these videos, and then humiliated once they deliver. Boys will watch the deepfake videos of their female classmates online, and show them to each other. Children, but mostly girls, will start finding out about the deepfake videos of them that are getting popular, and they will be bullied at school. Parents of these kids will try to demand these videos be taken down, but they will be told there’s nothing anyone can do, because it was their fault for putting innocent pictures of their childrens’ faces on Facebook. Girls in these videos will commit suicide, and everyone will blame “bullying,” a gender-neutral phenomenon that obviously pre-dates the existence of deepfakes. Anyone who connects the normalization of pseudo-child porn to the despair felt by little girls who get pornified against their will will be accused of being a right-wing Christian bigot who hates gays.
Step 7 and a half: Preteen and teen girls will dress even sexier and wear make-up meant that makes them look older. This will be an attempt to avoid looking childish enough to be targeted for deepfakes, but instead this behaviour will only further reinforce adult mens’ perceptions of them as acceptable objects of sexual consumption. This self-perpetuating cycle of grooming, and backlash to sexual grooming via further grooming will set the stage for the next two steps. Some more extreme left wingers will try to push for legalization of actual adult-child sexual activity (i.e. child rape), but will be told “not yet” by more centrist members of their movement.
Step 8: The perception that “all men” are attracted to kids anyways, that pedophiles are just normal people, that pedophilia isn’t even a sexual orientation but an innocent kink, will set in. Women who fight back will be told that they just don’t understand men’s libidos, that they’re vanilla, or they just hate the sexualization of children because they’re old and jealous.
Step 9: The left wing decides that it’s now the right moment to make their big push for legalizing sexual relationships between adults and children. Maybe it will take a few years of cable news anchors yelling at each other and indignant internet blog posts, but they will win, as they always do, as sexual libertarians always do, as men always do. Child rapists might even become a protected group, like gay people or transgender people. Everyone celebrates. The little children celebrate because their liberal parents tell them to, but they don’t really understand what has just happened, because they’re children.
me: this is why we need to fight back against a trend that ends in child sexual abuse
a male who sees himself as space cowboy: it hurts my feelings that you acknowledged that 98% of child sexual abuse is committed by men, and really, that’s what’s important here
all men are not attacted to kids; why would the left wing be responsible for this change in culture? your vision of the future has definite problems; i suspect you are a right wing zealot; i am also against the use of younger models in porn to indicate they are pyounger teens.
Oh my god… you literally… just proved some of her post…
“I suspect you are a right-wing zealot.”
LITERALLY WHAT DID I JUST FUCKING SAY?
WHAT DID I J U S T SAY?
Shout-out to all radfems trying to patiently explain biological sex to genderites who are pretending not to know what “female” means.
Here’s a hint for gender-believers: if you can draw a distinction between cis women and trans women, AFAB and AMAB, or TME and TMA, you already know which humans are which sex.
They probably "shut up instantly" because they're trying to stop themselves from socking you in the jaw
this is sending me over the fucking edge fkjdhdhdldhs
Honestly, troon stuff rarely makes me chuckle anymore but I just can’t keep a straight face for “system” people.
I love not being in a cult because I can freely consume whatever media and art I want, feel confident enough in my political beliefs to engage with people that disagree with me, and say ‘fuck off’ to anyone who tries to control my media diet or choice of friends.
hello, I was the person who asked abt 'sexualizing' vs 'sexy' clothing etc. to clarify, it stemmed from the music industry where I could see the problem (women being forced to sexualise themselves) but couldn't reconcile the arguement 'what abt when ppl want to be sexy?'. now i realize that what I call 'sexy' itself is still sexualisation bc its only for other ppl (men). the only type of 'sexy' that would be oriented towards the woman artist would be singing abt sex where she is respected/given pleasure/treated well/centered/etc and not her clothes/makeup/twerking/etc.
I really appreciate the response! I loved seeing u back on the blog :)
Thanks, anon! It was a great ask. I do actually think there is such a thing as genuinely sexy music made by women, that reflects actual female desire. It tends to be genuinely arousing, rather than feeling canned or stale. Here are some examples of songs written and performed by women that I consider to be authentically sexy, not deadened and stylized:

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
🐥!
🐥 is the ask for a radfem perspective on being nurturing or being a caregiver. I've organized this topic into several key questions and answers.
As radical feminists, are we critical of women acting as nurturers?
No, we are critical of women acting as martyrs. We want women to take care of the children who are their responsibility, but we want them to do so in an environment that supports their own health and growth as individuals. That means that mothers, nannies, nurses, babysitters, teachers, social workers, and so on need time off to rest and to take up hobbies. We want caregiving and nurturing to be a part of a balanced life, not the entirety of life.
We are also critical of men who don't nurture, and who should. That means we want to see fathers and male teachers/nurses, etc. picking up the mantle of their own responsibility. We also want to see men taking care of their aging parents and not foisting all eldercare responsibilities onto their sisters or wives.
Are women born nurturing, or does patriarchy force them into being nurturers?
It depends on the person you ask. Personally, I believe that it's a mixture of both. I think it makes evolutionary sense that women in general would more naturally take to looking after children (especially babies), but I think the martyrdom and self-abnegation aspect is a function of patriarchy. I also think that the extent of caregiving responsibilities is a part of patriarchy—like maybe the average women wants between 0 and 3 children, whereas patriarchy influences women to take on 4+ children and see childbearing as a contest. This ends up negating genuine loving care for children, because when your time and resources are overstretched, you become a worse parent. A truly loving caregiver understands that they cannot provide the attention and support a child needs while also reproducing every 2 years from 18 to 50.
Should women care less for children and/or the elderly?
No, see question 1. I think that women should think more deeply about the ways that their care work has been impacted by assumptions about the "naturalness" of women being caregivers, and I think that men should step it up and do more caregiving. But I do not, in any way, endorse abandoning children or disabled people or elderly people to their fates.
Should women do less caregiving work for adult, able-bodied men (such as husbands and brothers)?
Women should think about the degree to which this kind of caregiving is reciprocated. They should ensure that the care and nurturing they extend to men who are their equals in age/intelligence/ability is either fairly compensated in the workplace, or reciprocated in their personal lives.
Just a reminder
My ask box is always open, and I encourage you to drop an emoji ask:
👛toxic femininity
🌓 feminist approach to periods
❤️🩹dating as a radfem
📬 being online as a radfem
🎼 feminist music or women in music
⌛️ aging and older women
🐥 feminist perspective on being nurturing/caregiving
🛏 feminist topics I’m just tired of discussing
👰🏻♀️ weddings/marriage/desire to marry
🎀 thoughts on gender reveals
🦑surprise me with a question UNRELATED to feminism
🎼 is taken, so I’ll add some more prompts!
🤡 worst aspects of clown world
👶🏻 thoughts on anti-natalism
💂🏻 British v. North American radical feminists
🥨 what’s making me feel salty at the moment
🎼
Please. I live for 90s punk and goth and late 2000s melodic rock but they are so male dominated.
🎼 is the feminist music ask.
Okay, here are some thoughts:
Do feminists have to listen to feminist music? No, we're normal people living in the real world, and we like to decompress and rock out just like anyone else. Only allowing yourself to listen to on-message music is like...evangelical Christianity or cult shit. Listen to whatever you want. I think that if you are a feminist, you will naturally gravitate towards include female voices and perspectives in your music rotation, but it's okay to just relax and listen to pop and whatever else you like!
Is XYZ artist feminist? Firstly, see question 1—it's okay to listen to un-feminist music. But if you're critically thinking about who makes music that could be described as feminist, I would ask yourself the following questions about this artist.
-Are they known to have seriously harmed women in their personal or professional lives?
-Do their lyrics show that they consider "women's domain" issues (such as domestic work, birth, abortion, periods, abuse, etc.) to be interesting or important enough to write about? For example, Carole King's song "That's The Way I Always Heard It Should Be" expresses her feelings of ambiguity towards the idea of getting married and raising a family. The song shows that women have complex inner lives and don't automatically crave marriage.
-Do any of their songs express ideas that are critical of patriarchy, or that show love and respect for women and women's history? One example I can think of would be Ani Difranco, who explicitly addresses topics like the right to abortion in her music.
What should I listen to when I have cramps? 🦀 😖
You should listen to "Crimson Wave" by Tacocat.
What if I like music that is explicitly misogynistic or by openly woman-hating artists (like Eminem)?
The important thing is to remember that feminism is not a consumer identity defined by which products you shop for, or which posters are hanging on your walls. I would worry less about what you're listening to on Spotify or whatever, and more about how you are contributing to women around you in your real life. Obviously, don't go around blasting "Kim" or whatever to little girls, but prioritize making a difference for real women, not molding yourself to some image of the perfect media consumer. Media consumption is fundamentally passive and can never be a form of activism.
Just a reminder
My ask box is always open, and I encourage you to drop an emoji ask:
👛toxic femininity
🌓 feminist approach to periods
❤️🩹dating as a radfem
📬 being online as a radfem
🎼 feminist music or women in music
⌛️ aging and older women
🐥 feminist perspective on being nurturing/caregiving
🛏 feminist topics I’m just tired of discussing
👰🏻♀️ weddings/marriage/desire to marry
🎀 thoughts on gender reveals
🦑surprise me with a question UNRELATED to feminism
do you ever see some Very Nice trans-inclusive posts from a blog and go check out their page and then after an intensive analysis going back Several Months and checking a few of the blogs that they follow for exclusionary rhetoric before you move right on over to your Shinigami Eyes extension and click the lil “mark t-friendly” button, or is it just me?
Can you imagine being this insane? Can you imagine living such a paranoid life style that you see a post designed specifically to validate your movement and then combing through months of that person’s posts to make sure there’s no wrong think posts.
Absolute lunacy. Get a life.
And stop using an application made by a pedophile rapist.
Imagine writing this and thinking that it makes you sound like a normal, well-adjusted, friendly person who is part of a valuable and important social movement instead of a psycho cult member.
Did TRAs read 1984 as an instruction manual, or am I missing something? Surveillance culture hurts everyone (yes, trans people included).

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
I wish it was about people liking me. I’m cool with people not liking me. It’s more about staying quiet because if I don’t I’ll never be allowed a career.
↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑
It’s not about losing friends anymore—I can make new friends. It’s about my career and money and being able to be financially independent. I wouldn’t mind losing a few friends to this if it didn’t mean never being able to make a living.
NOT GAY AS IN HAPPY BUT QUEER AS IN - Michael Gray Bulla
[image description: a poem text that reads,
“NOT GAY AS IN HAPPY BUT QUEER AS IN
bared teeth. As in celebration. As in carving the body out of the carcass. Not gay as in rainbow cop car for a policed pride parade, thin cis men washing the walls white – not gay as in NO FATS, NO FEMMES – but trans as in -cendence. Queer as in scribbling sharpie over the shadow of the she I was never going to be. Fag as in piercing my ears with my lover’s Mars earrings. Tranny as in tracing the chest’s twin lines, the ricochet of the real name, the loving someone else even when you don’t love yourself – Transfag as in T-dick. Shot & chaser. Building bodies out of boats untethered to the banks of bend yourself until you break so I won’t be made uncomfortable. Transfag as in fuck your “female erasure.” Transfag as in stomping your boots to the beat of I am here, real, alive. Not gay as in gunshot, left to bleed on the concrete, save only yourself, sneering. But queertransfag as in echoing in every hallway. Scratched out of the history books. Pushed to the back of every line. Making our own lines anyways. Writing our books. Building hallways. Queertransfag as in wrapping the wound. Celebrating the scar.”
/end id]
This is the young woman who calls gay men “fags” and says “fuck your female erasure” and talks about like, stomping her boots and how she’s not “gay as in gunshot, left to bleed on the concrete,” like I’m sorry that you weren’t the target of anti-gay hate crimes that were vicious and violent and left actual gay people physically bleeding on the street, but this is homophobic and ignorant as fuck, not to mention female-hating. “Fuck your female erasure,” like way to align yourself with Ancient Greek philosophers and every doctor who decided to conduct a genital exam on unconscious women without consent. This shit is cringey and pathetic and childish, and I’m tired of it. Grow up, learn gay history and women’s history and get over your damn self. No one cares that you pierced your own ears or drew on a washroom stall in Sharpie, Jesus.