We are Borg. Our pronouns are they/them plural. We are the only valid instance of they/them pronouns. Resistance is futile
Keni
Sweet Seals For You, Always
Misplaced Lens Cap
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ

⁂
noise dept.
art blog(derogatory)
TVSTRANGERTHINGS

ellievsbear

blake kathryn

Janaina Medeiros
Not today Justin

#extradirty

Origami Around
$LAYYYTER

oozey mess

PR's Tumblrdome
Three Goblin Art
DEAR READER
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Netherlands

seen from North Macedonia
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Australia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
@borgqueens
We are Borg. Our pronouns are they/them plural. We are the only valid instance of they/them pronouns. Resistance is futile

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
tumblr I swear to god if your ads on mobile keep opening popup webpages because my FINGER touched them while I was SCROLLING because they are SO BIG that they FILL THE SCREEN AS I SCROLL PAST THEM I am going to MANIFEST SNAKES IN YOUR WALLS
This is what a rigged economy looks like.
So is nobody gonna talk about how being Super Online is rapidly becoming a marker of being lower class. I feel like just being able to afford to live an actual life filled with quality interaction and stimulation and not needing cheap online dopamine distractions is rapidly becoming something only people with money have access to.
The internet is now more of a net negative than anything else. We’re increasingly just getting rage-baited, fed misinformation and AI slop. Our attention being converted into ad dollars and brand deals.
Every social site is now optimized for businesses and the creator economy- not for human beings to connect or share their lives. The era of people just posting to share what they’re up to or expressing themselves to their friends and family is sooo far behind us.
It’s becoming clear: if you’re not an artist /creator/influencer, using online courses to learn or trying to sell products/build a business- the internet is doing nothing to enhance your life - while reducing your attention, focus and stealing valuable time.
I love the idea of using social media less. But, unfortunately, calling being "too online" a lower-class marker only works if you treat class as a lifestyle choice instead of a material condition.
People aren’t online because they failed to build a life. They’re online because work hours, distance and economic conditions eroded shared social spaces, it's a direct result of late stage capitalism. A structural issue, not just a personal choice.
The thing becomes clear when you realise that what replaced those social spaces was privately owned platforms. Plans, invitations, dating, subcultures, local events, even job/business opportunities now live there. People share everything about their lives on social media not just to consume, but to connect.
So logging off doesn’t just improve your attention span, it makes you socially harder to perceive, because participation itself is now mediated by attention systems.
The discomfort is real. But it’s not simply that people are throwing their lives down the drain, It’s that social existence has been reorganized into extractive infrastructures designed to trap you there.
Deleting social media IS free. I feel like this is one of these cultural issues that is major, but also very solvable. It’s just… hard. And uncomfortable. On an individual level. To put the screen down and not know what to do instead. To face the boredom or loneliness or reality.
Thinking about how there are ‘Offline Clubs’ spreading around Europe (of course Europe) and realizing how strongly there is a US problem of numbing and dumbing. How radical it can be to deactivate socials and truly truly organically think for yourself. This capitalistic society is breaking us down in every single way, of course we use the internet to seek our humanity… but this is one of the few things within our power to be conscious and intentional about.
Unfortunately one of my jobs involves checking social media all the time, sometimes I just want to be unplugged and I can’t. So much business stuff happens on social media, being unplugged makes you look incompetent and unaware in increasingly more jobs

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
No I don't want an AI summary of this email. No I don't want an AI summary of this text message. No I don't want an AI summary of this message. I can fuckin' read it myself. Ugh.
I don't want to ask AI a question. I don't want AI to write my sentences for me, at all ever. I don't want AI search bars to be the default and I don't want them to be in such a way that I can't opt out. I don't want this kind of AI in my life and there is no such thing as AI art, there is only theft of art from human artists by AI scrappers. I don't want any of this, I hate it. Maybe in a world that isn't driven by tech bro capitalism we can see machines doing all the dangerous inane things so humans can be free to pursue life and creativity. But that's not what's happening right now and I hate it.
Maybe in a world that isn't driven by tech bro capitalism we can see machines doing all the dangerous inane things so humans can be free to pursue life and creativity. But that's not what's happening right now and I hate it.
This is a level of intellectual honesty that more people need to have.
we're all familiar with 'this [meeting] could have been an email'
tiktok is an entire app of 'this could have been a text post'
no i don't want to see a 20 second close up of your stupid face. no i don't want to hear a sped up sample of a song or an ai voice over and over from some asshole's phone in public.
MY FINGERS BARELY EVEN TOUCHED YOUR STUPID FUCKING AD STOP REDIRECTING ME TO THE APP STORE
“Attempting To Read News In 2025” (medium: safari with ads, screencap, 2025)
If this shit happened in 2005 it meant your computer had a virus
The virus is called Capitalism

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
Have you guys noticed how much the internet/technology just does not listen to you anymore? I click “don’t show this artist” on Spotify and I get recommended a music video by them on the front page. I click “skip this update” on a pop up every time I open a file organization app and it’s right back there every time. I click unsubscribe on a newsletter and it keeps showing up in my inbox!! I click “delete my account” and the next time I open the website they suggest I “reactivate”.
Cart and horse have traded places, to slightly repurpose the old saying. The Internet used to be a place where ads were a necessary evil to support the cost of hosting a website or social network. The desires of users and creators were the driving force and the ads simply allowed them the space to happen.
Now, information, socialization, creative works, all the purported purposes of the internet, are a very distant second priority to unfettered monetization. The user experience doesn’t have to justify the amount of advertising we are bombarded with because we are no longer seen as users, as contributors and collaborators, or as customers to be catered to: we are the product. The advertisers are the customers, their user experience is paramount. Our user experience need only be not quite bad enough to make us cancel or click away.
A product does not need to give its consent to be sold.
Why do you seem upset about being a gender studies major?
I literally went into my degree with all the correct woke opinions and it was just so insane I managed to leave a TERF. everyone on here is like read the literature talk to real trans people. Yall. I did an entire 4 year degree in this if I’m not sold “educating” isn’t going to fix it. Honestly reading less and knowing less and not thinking too hard makes it way easier to go along with everything. It was actually having to think and unpack everything that made me realize this shit lowkey doesn’t add up.
There’s a reason that post modern gender study folx try to use the most confusing and inaccessible language possible. It’s because if they wrote what they were arguing in plain English the general public would realize they make no sense. But now by using fancy words, if you don’t understand or agree they can say that you’re just not sophisticated enough to understand. Oddly reminiscent of the bourgeoisie they try to find a way to bash every other page or so.
I’ll always be recommending this article:
The hip defeatism of Judith Butler
There’s definitely something very bourgeoise abt modern gender theory and “feminism.” Ironically, this version of “feminism” is considered to be correct while radical feminism is “white feminism.”
Something very dystopian that happened during some of my seminars is when outside speakers were brought in (mainstream journalists, black elder repro rights organizer from the south, indigenous elder promoting midwifery, etc.) my recitations would spend the entire section picking apart their language. They didn’t give a shit what they said their brains turned off after the they heard the word woman. Here is a group of one of touch undergrads literally ignoring these other (fascinating and important) perspectives. Even dismissing them as outdated! Feels like white feminism to me! Demanding everyone use the make up to date language which basically only people in academia will be aware of.
Then they tokenize these marginalized communities (two spirit, black women weren’t considered women etc) while actively silencing them and ignoring their issues to push their agenda! Then they gaslight us that *we* are the “white feminists.”
Like do you really think girls in Afghanistan are like damn wish these news outlets would say “people who identify as women.” Obviously not. You have to be incredibly privileged to think gender/trans/pronoun issues are the most pressing for modern feminism to address.
The struggle for distinction
“In short, luxury beliefs are the new status symbols.
They are honest indicators of one’s social position, one’s level of wealth, where one was educated, and how much leisure time they have to adopt these fashionable beliefs.
And just as many luxury goods often start with the rich but eventually become available to everyone, so it is with luxury beliefs.
But unlike luxury goods, luxury beliefs can have long term detrimental effects for the poor and working class. However costly these beliefs are for the rich, they often inflict even greater costs on everyone else.”
—
This week on the BBC, we saw a stand off by the two sides of the deepest and most harmful split I have ever seen in left politics, one that
i think a lot of women have this idea that if you “just go along with it” you can avoid male violence. that if you “just give him what he wants” he'll go away. please understand that i’m not trying to victim blame when i say this. your agreeableness makes you a target. asking questions is a test to see how willing you are to reveal information about yourself, your vulnerability. to a predator, even a smile or polite nod is a sign of acceptance- of your willingness to be fold under pressure. being polite won’t say your life. tell that guy to fuck off
just... this is just ONE example of what i'm talking about
politeness won't stop a predator. if this man was just a bit more persistent or forceful, she may not have been able to stop him. i used to have this type of fawn/freeze response as well- you have to practice a new reaction. practice setting boundaries. practice saying no. practice telling them to fuck off. please. it is not 'rude' to not give in. no one is entitled to access your body, your home, or your time.
Same. Like, I always do the Freeze response type. Twice I've given guys my number— my real number (bc they check instantly to see if ur not lying :))))— when I didn't want to. Because I felt pressured. Scared.
(In one case, we were eating with other ppl and I didn't want to look rude, specially since he was one of the only person of the mental health clinic to be my age. This resulted in him texting me non stop the minute we were seperated. He even wrote a note and asked the nurses to pass it to me. That's when I mention the problem to the nurses and they took care of it.
Second case, the dude just admitted that he just followed me all the way from the tram we were in together to my bus station. Unprompted. A relatively isolated bus station. It was pretty obvious to anyone with an ounce of tact that I didn't want to give my number. Hell, if I asked someone their number and they hesitated? Id back off instantly. Anyway. I get on the bus and block him.)
But later I've had this creepy neighbor. Same building. At the beginning it's just talk. I don't mind. Then he asks if he can ride the elevator with me. I can’t exactly refuse him access to the communal areas, so I say yes. (It's only later that I realize he now knows where I live (which floor) and what my name is (watched me unlock my mailbox)).
Then he asks to come in.
I may be a scaredy cat, but there are some things I don't budge on. Never. I said no. He insisted. I said it's a matter of principle — I don't invite in men I just met.
Picture it. I was 21. He was 40+yo.
He keeps talking to me on other days, to the point where I wait outside, for the entrance light to be off. It's automatic, so if it's on that means he's there. Bc he's often there. Just when I come home from uni.
Later he suggests parting with une bise and I stupidly, stupidly say yes. He tries to kiss me (on the mouth). I back away. I shove him. I say in the most intimidating, severe tone I can muster: "You do that again and I'm calling the cops."
I was so proud of myself! It worked. He left me alone after that.
I go to the cops bc of the attempted kiss. They say there's nothing they can do, unless I call them while being assaulted.
Cool. Thanks.
Unfortunately there's always a fine line to walk between standing your ground enough that the guy register you as too much of as hassle, vs standing your ground "too much" and he decides to use violence. And obvsly you cant know in advance which r capable of violence n which ain't :/
I need everyone in radblr to go buy urself a copy of "Herland"(1915(?)) by Charlotte Perkins Gilman as soon as possible. Yall do not understand. I cannot believe this isn't like, basic radfem/female separatist literature already.
Same author as "The Yellow Wallpaper", three men find a land consisting of only women which is a literal utopia. The men question their own failures in patriarchal society while the women of this land politely exchange information with them about their own lands.
You have no idea how therapeutic this book is. men casually say "oh no man can do that!" and the women respond "oh, no man? can women do it?" and the men go "oh yeah, also no women". There's also such brilliant regular feminist thinking through the book;
"These women... were strikingly deficient in what we call "femininity". this led me very promptly to the conviction that those "feminine charms" we are so fond of are not feminine at all, but mere reflected masculinity- developed to please us because they had to please us, and in no way essential to real fulfillment of their great process."
Insane for 1915 and such a fucking relief and pleasure to read. I hope all the anons who have asked me about radfem books see this bc yall NEED IT
btw if anyone needs a pdf there is one in this radfem lit google drive: **fiction > classics > herland
btw i love you pdf google drive creators. modern day heroes.
I love this story. while reading be conscious of CPG's eugenicist beliefs and how they influence her idea of utopia.
Can OP or anybody respond to this:
I don't know anything about CPG nor have I read this book, but I am curious about how this eugenics claim plays into this book, because looking at the tags here that seems to be the main complaint. I have seen 90% of this site scream "eugenics!!!!!!!" when it's really not (because 99% of tumblr has zero genetics background and doesn't understand the basic concept of a "hertiable trait" or even what government is), so is this a fair claim about this book? It is eugenics in a white power/racial purity sort of way, or just a "we abort male fetuses" sort of vibe?
Is it primarily based around eugenicist themes or around feminist ones? I'm a bit on the fence about the desire to read a book like this if the former is true, even if it has a turn-of-the-century (let me guess) maternal feminist slant. I have enough issues with maternal feminism as it is, and that was the dominant type of feminism at that time. Add blatant racism into that, and I'm not really feeling the enthusiasm OP seems to have.
Any clarification is much appreciated!
honestly just read it and find out.
what are people so weirdly worried about being contaminated by literature?
if you believe human beings are all equally valuable then you’re not going to be converted to nazi ideology by reading nazi writing
just read the thing, you’ll find out what you like and don’t like about it, and then you’ll go on with your life
I read a lot of shit that falls into that category of "problematic" and I am not ever afraid of getting "contaminated" (wtf?), but I honestly don't feel like wasting hours of my time to be bombarded with 19th-century racist propaganda when there is plenty of other feminist lit I have on my to-read list which doesn't contain that, nor maternal feminism. Not everyone has the luxury of doing nothing but reading everything they want all day long. Some of us have to prioritize which books we can fit into our lives. I was genuinely curious about this book I had never heard of before based on OP's post and was debating adding it to my long list. That's all.
Why is that such a bad thing to ask about?
Why did you immediately make the assumption about me that I am some tender tumblrina who can't handle any sort of difficult subject matter? I am a lesbian radical feminist, ffs. All I do is get subjected to and read shit I don't agree with. I'm not worried about being converted or convinced of anything I casually read. That isn't the point, or my concern, at all.
I know it's more fun to be condescending on tumblr instead of having a real response, but the act is getting old. Why are fellow radfems so immediately defensive about any simple question?
I just wanted to know the validity of the "eugenics" claim here as tumblr has a tendency to overexaggerate. But I guess your refusal to admit it proves that it's a big theme. Or you also have not read it but wanted to feel superior on radblr.
sorry that I came off as condescending, I just finally realized soemthing that's been bothering me about tumblr discourse in general and popped off here, which it turns out wasn't the best venue for it, I didn't mean it to be personal, I didn't even look at who I was reblogging from tbh, so it really wasn't, but I can see how it felt that way, and i'm sorry about that.
I definitely understand about picking and choosing your literature, not wanting to waste your time, and trying to find out in advance. here's my review:
idk if 'eugenics' is really the word for what's wrong with the book? it's more like garden-variety racism. like we're told that the women in the book 'coudn't find' any men which is why they had to develop parthogenesis, which was very convincing because they went to a great deal of trouble to say how far they were way from civilization, and any other people, really, it seemed like a terrus nullius, but then suddenly later you find out tehy've been surrounded by native tribes the whole while which comes off, like, badly, really. I sighed. and put the book down. and then picked it up to finish it because I hate not finishing books, but my heart really was not in it after that.
there's a lot of interesting ideas of how women could work together, and until I hit the whole 'native men are not good enough to breed with' paragraph, i was kind of excited about the book, it felt like a breath of fresh air, esp w/r/t religious practice and women doing physical work. aside from the racist bit, it's short, if you can find a free pdf, why not? but idk if you want to spend money on the book.
not saying ur incorrect in any way, i might’ve just not read things right, but i interpreted that they couldn’t reach the native men? the only way the men in the story can get into the society is by plane, and they can’t escape when they try due to the height, and it seems the women also can’t get in or out of their bit of land.
i thought the native men were inaccessible due to the environment? like literally unable to contact one another?
ok, because of the radfem library link, I see that it's actually a trilogy, i thought it was only the one book Herland. And, already in chapter 3 of 'moving the mountain', I think the third book of the trilogy? we get this passage (among other more oblique references):
“That’s exactly what we’ve done; we’ve improved the people and lowered the birth-rate at one stroke !”
“They were beginning to talk eugenics when I left.”
“This is not eugenics — we have made great advances in that, of course; but the chief factor in this change is a common biological law — ‘individuation is in inverse proportion to reproduction,’ you know. We individualize the women — develop their personal power, their human characteristics — and they don’t have so many children.”
“I don’t see how that helps unless you have eliminated the brutality of men.”
So Gilman was definitely in the eugenics rabbithole, and there's a lot of talk of 'improving' the human race. It is uncomfortable to hear.
Utopian writing in general is difficult to read, because it necessarily is about 'making things better' which may or may not include room for human freedom and human rights, and the freedom of people to choose their lives. 'It's for your own good!' is definitely a red flag for me.
as solanasdworkinlorde said above, everyone has to prioritise your time, so ig only read if you're willing to wade through the ideology, there might be some good ideas in there. I have the benefit of having lots of time to listen to an AI reader read me books while getting my work done, so for me it's worth it to listen through, but I could see why others would want to skip it.
this is Chapter V now:
"You see, John, the women have specialized — even in motherhood.” Then he went on at considerable length to show how there had arisen a recognition of far more efficient motherhood than was being given; that those women best fitted for the work had given eager, devoted lives to it and built up a new science of Humaniculture; that no woman was allowed to care for her children without proof of capacity.
“Allowed by whom?” I put in.
“By the other women — the Department of Child Culture — the Government.”
“And the fathers — do they submit to this, tamely?”
“No; they cheerfully agree and approve. Absolutely the biggest thing that has happened, some of us think, is that new recognition of the importance of childhood. We are raising better people now.”
I was silent for a while, pulling up bits of grass and snapping small sticks into inch pieces.
“There was a good deal of talk about Eugenics, I remember,” I said at last, “and — what was that thing? Endowment of Motherhood?”
“Yes — man’s talk,” Owen explained. “You see, John, we couldn’t look at women but in one way — in the old days; it was all a question of sex with us — inevitably, we being males. Our whole idea of improvement was in better breeding; our whole idea of motherhood was in each woman’s devoting her whole life to her own children. That turbid freshet of an Englishman, Wells, who did so much to stir his generation, saw women only as females and wanted them endowed as such. He was never able to see them as human beings and amply competent to take care of themselves.“Now, our women, getting hold of this idea that they really are human creatures, simply blossomed forth in new efficiency. They specialized the food business — Hallie’s right about the importance of that — and then they specialized the baby business. All women who wish to, have babies; but if they wish to take care of them they must show a diploma.”
I looked at him. I didn’t like it — but what difference did that make? I had died thirty years ago, it appeared.
“A diploma for motherhood!” I repeated; but he corrected me.
“Not at all. Any woman can be a mother — if she’s normal. I said she had to have a diploma as a child-culturist— quite a different matter.”
“I don’t see the difference.”
“No, I suppose not. I didn’t, once,” he said. “Any and every mother was supposed to be competent to ‘raise’ children — and look at the kind of people we raised! You see, we are beginning to learn — just beginning. You needn’t imagine that we are in a state of perfection — there are more new projects up for discussion than ever before.
We’ve only made a start. The consequences, so far, are so good that we are boiling over with propositions for future steps.”
“Go on about the women,” I said. “I want to know the worst and become resigned.”
“There’s nothing very bad to tell,” he continuedcheerfully.
“When a girl is born she is treated in all ways as if she was a boy; there is no hint made in any distinction between them except in the perfectly open physiologicalinstruction as to their future duties. Children, young humans, grow up under precisely the same conditions. I speak, of course, of the most advanced people — there are still backward places — there’s plenty to do yet.
“Then the growing girls are taught of their place and power as mothers — and they have tremendously high ideals. That’s what has done so much to raise the standard in men. It came hard, but it worked.”
I raised my head with keen interest, remarking, “I’ve glimpsed a sort of Iron hand in a velvet glove back of all this. What did they do?”
Owen looked rather grim for a moment.
“The worst of it was twenty or twenty-five years back. Most of those men are dead. That new religious movement stirred the socio-ethical sense to sudden power; it coincided with the women’s political movement, urging measures for social improvement; its enormous spread, both by preaching and literature, lit up the whole community with new facts, ideas and feelings. Health — physical purity — was made a practical ideal. The young women learned the proportion of men with syphilis and gonorrhoea and decided it was wrong to marry them. That was enough. They passed laws in every State requiring a clean bill of health with every marriage license. Diseased men had to die bachelors — that’s all.”
“And did men submit to legislation like that?” I protested.
“Why not? It was so patently for the protection of the race — of the family — of the women and children. Women were solid for it, of course — And all the best men with them. To oppose it was almost a confession of guilt and injured a man’s chances of marriage.”“It used to be said that any man could find a woman to marry him,” I murmured, meditatively.
“Maybe he could — once. He certainly cannot now. A man who has one of those diseases is so reported — just like small-pox, you see. Moreover, it is registered against him by the Department of Eugenics — physicians are required to send in lists; any girl can find out.”
As I read I'm starting to think that Gilman is not precisely eugenicist, in the sense of *unfit people* being bred out of existence. No, I think what's going on here is that *unfit men* are being manipulated into a different way of being. I don't think you can call this eugenics, although you definitely could call it social engineering.
Honestly, this is wild. It's really social engineering, and from a feminist perspective: (from chapter 7)
"I groaned in spirit. “Do you mean to tell me that you have introduced legislation against hunting, and found means to enforce it?”
“We found means to enforce it without much legislation, John.”
As for instance?”
As for instance, in rearing children who saw and heard the fullest condemnation of all such primitive cruelty. That is another place where the new story-books come in. Why on earth we should have fed our children on silly savagery a thousand years old, just because they liked it, is more than I can see.
We were always interfering with their likes and dislikes in other ways. Why so considerate in this? We have a lot of splendid writers now — first-class ones — making a whole lot of new literature for children.”
“Do leave out your story books. You were telling me how you redoubtable females coerced men into giving up hunting.”
“Mostly by disapproval, consistent and final.”
This was the same sort of thing Owen had referred to in regard to tobacco. I didn’t like it. It gave me a creepy feeling, as of one slowly surmounted by a rising tide. “Are you — do you mean to tell me, Nellie, that you women are trying to make men over to suit yourselves ?”“Yes. Why not? Didn’t you make women to suit yourselves for several thousand years? You bred and trained us to suit your tastes; you liked us small, you liked us weak, you liked
us timid, you liked us ignorant, you liked us pretty — what you called pretty — and you eliminated the kinds you did not like.” How, if you please?” ‘By the same process we use — by not marrying them. Then, you see, there aren’t any more of that kind.” “You are wrong, Nellie — you’re absurdly wrong. Women were naturally that way; that is, womanly women were, and men preferred that kind, of course.” “How do you know women were ‘naturally’ like that? —
without special education and artificial selection, and all manner of restrictions and penalties? Where were any women ever allowed to grow up ‘naturally’ until now?”
I maintained a sulky silence, looking down at the lovely green fields and forests beneath. “Have you exterminated dogs?” I asked.
“Not yet. There are a good many real dogs left. But we don’t make artificial ones any more.”
“I suppose you keep all the cats — being women.” She laughed.
“No; we keep very few. Cats kill birds, and we need the birds for our farms and gardens. They keep the insects down.”
“Do they keep the mice down, too?”
(also chapter 7) “I found it extremely difficult from the first, to picture a world whose working day was but two hours long; or even
the four hours they told me was generally given. “What do people do with the rest of their time; working people, I mean?” I asked.
“The old ones usually rest a good deal, loaf, visit one another, play games, in some cases they travel. Others, who have the working habit ingrained, keep on in the afternoon; in their gardens often; almost all old people love gardening; and those who wish, have one now, you see. The city ones do an astonishing amount of reading, studying, going to lectures, and the theatres. They have a good time.”
“But I mean the low rowdy common people — don’t they merely loaf and get drunk?”
Nellie smiled at me good humoredly. “Some of them did, for a while. But it became increasingly difficult to get drunk. You see, their health was better, with sweeter homes, better food and more pleasure; and except for the dipsomaniacs they improved in their tastes presently. Then their children all made a great advance, under the new educational methods; the womenhad an immense power as soon as they were independent; and between the children’s influence and the woman’s and the new opportunities, the worst men had to grow better. There was always more recuperative power in people than they were given credit for.”
“But surely there were thousands, hundreds of thousands, of hoboes and paupers; wretched, degenerate creatures.”
Nellie grew sober.
“Yes, there were. One of our inherited handicaps was that great mass of wreckage left over from the foolishness and ignorance of the years behind us. But we dealt very thoroughly with them. As I told you before, hopeless degenerates were promptly and mercifully removed. A large class of perverts were in capacitated for parentage and placed where they could do no harm, and could still have some usefulness and some pleasure. Many proved curable, and were cured. And for the helpless residue; blin(l and crippled through no fault of their own, a remorseful society provides safety, comfort and care; with all the devices for occupation and enjoyment that our best minds could arrange. These are our remaining asylums; decreasing every year. We don’t make that kind of people any more.”
ok, so get this: in the third book of the Herland trilogy (With Her in Ourland) in Chapter 3 , Gilman writes,
"There was an able Egyptologist on board, a man well acquainted with ancient peoples, and he, with the outline she had so well laid down during her English studies, soon filled her mind with a particularly clear and full acquaintance with our first civilizations.
“Egypt, with its One River; Asia Minor, with the Valley of the Two Rivers and China with its great rivers—“ she pored over her maps and asked careful eager questions. The big black bearded professor was delighted with her interest, and discoursed most instructively.
“I see,” she said. “I see! They came to places where the soil was rich, and where there was plenty of water. It made agriculture possible, profitable— and then the surplus—and then the wonderful growth—of course!” That German officer, who had made so strong and disagreeable an impression while we were on the Swedish ship, had been insistent, rudely insistent, on the advantages of difficulty and what he called “discipline.” He had maintained that the great races, the dominant races, came always from the north. This she had borne in mind, and now questioned her obliging preceptor, with map outspread and dates at hand.
“For all those thousands of years these Mediterranean and Oriental peoples held the world—were the world?”
“Yes, absolutely.”
“And what was up here?” she pointed to the wide vacant spaces on the northern coasts. “Savages—barbarians—wild, skin-clad ferocious men, madam.”
Ellador made a little diagram, a vertical line, with many ages marked across it.
“This is The Year One—as far back as you can go,” she explained, pointing to the mark at the bottom. “And here we are, near the top—this is Now. And these Eastern peoples held the stage and did the work all the way up to— here, did they?”
“They certainly did, madam.”
“And were these people in these northern lands there all the time? Or did they happen afterward?”
“They were there—we have their bones to prove it.”
“Then if they were there—and as long, and of the same stock—you tell me that all these various clans streamed out, westward, from a common source, and became in time, Persians, Hindus, Pelasgians, Etruscans, and all the rest—as well as Celts, Slavs, Teutons?”
“It is so held, roughly speaking.” He resented a little her sweeping generalizations and condensations; but she had her own ends in view.
“And what did these northern tribes contribute to social progress during all this time?”
“Practically nothing,” he answered. “Their arts were naturally limited by the rigors of the climate. The difficulties of maintaining existence prevented any higher developments.”
“I see, I see,” she nodded gravely. “Then why is it, in the face of these facts, that some still persist in attributing progress to difficulties, and cold weather.”
This professor, who was himself Italian, was quite willing to question this opinion.
“That theory you will find is quite generally confined to the people who live in the colder climates,” he suggested.
When Ellador discussed this with me, she went further.
“It seems as if, when people say—‘The World’ they mean their own people,” she commented. “I’ve been reading history as written by the North European races. Perhaps when we get to Persia, India, China and Japan, it will be different.”
I really have to say~~I don't think a racist would write this. I'm starting to think there have been some mischaracterization of her writing. idk gonna finish reading and then think about it for awhile.

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
Meanfem moment but I am Very Done with the "I don't dream of labor" wannabe trad-wives on the internet. Sorry, yes, the Fake Feminism Girlbosses are indeed presenting a much more appealing version of a future. Be a man's bangmaid forever until he decides you don't make his dick hard anymore or have your own money?
My mother has the combination of best case scenario for being a SAHM (mostly, she worked on and off) and marrying a man much older than you (10+ years) and she still rants and raves to me nearly every time I see her on how she can't make any money moves without my father's cooperation/approval because it's still his money. She says he has no business know-how and that she built them up to this point--and you know what, she's right! Gosh golly, wouldn't it be great to be able to make these decisions with YOUR money?
"Mothers are uncelebrated, overworked, and made to endure thankless drudgery" and "Society equates womanhood with motherhood and romanticizes the role of mothers to push women towards domestic confinement" are both true statements about patriarchy by the way
The latter is essential to ensure the continuation of the former, even.