un mir zaynen ale shvester

These chucklefucks support the notion that birth control is harming women. Can it be harmful? Sure, talk to your doctor about that. But as a whole, birth control has enabled women to stay in school longer, to have higher paying jobs, to have better economic status, to keep from unwanted marriages, to keep their health in many cases, and, most importantly, to not have unwanted children. This has led to a declining birth rate, and white supremacists are convinced that white people not having babies is allowing people of color to "out-breed" and overtake the white population. Tradwives and their supporters push the idea that birth control irrevocably changes your brain chemistry (it doesn't), makes women manlier (it doesn't), makes men into women via trace birth control in the water (it doesn't), and causes sky rocketing rates of heart disease, embolisms, and cancers (mostly untrue... Birth control can sometimes cause clots but that's a rare side effect. Again, talk to your doctor).

It started with someone listing "places with uncanny energy," like gas stations on a road trip, empty movie theaters, etc.

Then someone reblogged it and said those are called "liminal spaces," defining liminal as in-between, neither one thing nor another.

Tomorrow (July 4th, 2026) is the 10 year anniversary of the-crepes-of-wrath's comment, which:

Predates the 2020 spike in interest by four years

Predates the original backrooms post, and the the creation of r/liminalspaces by three years

Predates the earliest mention that KnowYourMeme attributes to Twitter by two years

I'm pretty sure this is the moment the term "liminal spaces" was attached to this sort of imagery, and it's TEN YEARS OLD TOMORROW!

Q. You want to raise every boy as a girl? Yes.

Q. Why? A boy will learn to hate girls as long as he is raised in such a way where he is treated as better, and superior to, his girl peers, whenever he is cruel to girls. So, instead, we raise boys as girls.

Q. What if they say they are not a girl, and want to be acknowledged as boy? Then you know they are a boy, so you must make sure to understand them as boy, and not a girl.

Q. What does it mean to be 'raised as a girl'? That's up for you to decide. The only difference is that you should not raise boys any differently than you raise girls, since you raise every boy as a girl.

Q. Girls and boys are raised in specific ways for specific purposes, so it does not make sense to raise boys as girls. If you raise every boy as a girl, then there is no being which is not raised as a girl, so anyone raised as a girl necessarily must learn to do anything and everything to grow up, without restrictions on tasks, labours, or interests.

Q. But boys and girls are different. All two girls are different, and raising girls in one specific way destroys this individuality in favour of moulding girls to serve the same master. Still, the girls resist to live life on their own terms. If girls can be raised such that they know they can do anything they want, including not being girls, so too will boys raised as girls.

Q. Why not raise every girl as a boy? Because if a girl does not exist among boys, then the girl is made.

Q. Why not raise girls and boys as themselves? The self must be made in a world where girls and boys can first and foremost be themselves. One step towards this goal is to raise every boy as a girl.

Q. The way people raise girls is cruel, so why would you raise boys with that cruelty? If you raise girls with cruelty, then you should stop being cruel to girls.

as i understand it the core point being made here is challenging the concept of "raising a child as a gender" entirely by going straight to the misogyny that is fundamental to patriarchal gender. to me this suggests "raise boys as girls" is about raising boys to identify with girls, rather than to develop an identity as a boy around opposition to girls. this is not being depicted as simply "genderless parenting" because it is making a specific point about misogyny & its role in gender socialization and identity formation. to deviate from patriarchal demands of masculinity is to become associated with femininity / girls regardless of intention or actual intentional performance of femininity (what i assume is meant by "a girl is made"). rather than trying to pursue an almost apolitical gender neutrality that fails because it doesn't engage with the role misogyny plays in preserving patriarchal gender as a whole, gender neutrality is presented as synonymous with identifying with girls, as under patriarchy the entire construction of gender is built (not exclusively but fundamentally) through sexism that is both oppositional (exorsexist) and traditional (misogynistic).

the point is that raising a girl should not involve cruelty, or stereotype, or stigmatization, and boys should be encourage to feel no shame or identity conflict in identifying as the same kind of being as girls. so its a purposeful act of provocation to say "boys should be raised as girls" which to me sends the message that challenging misogyny and challenging the construction of gender itself are the same project. and that being (raised as) a girl should not mean anything other than being raised as a whole person, as part of a community of whole people.

I had trouble understanding this part, so I reframed it in my head as:

"Because if [the other] does not exist... then [the other] is made."

Which might not be exactly what this is going for, but it helped me understand it a little more, at least from one angle.

It's actually two separate things:

Masculinity is understood in a hierarchy. Under this system, there is no masculinity without a Highest Ranked Man and a Lowest Ranked Man (LRM). All men must jockey at all times in every group of men to be, at least, not the LRM.

All similarly-classed men are above all similarly-classed women in this system. All white men are above all white women, etc. Because men are understood to only exist in hierarchy, and because all men in a group are above all women from the same group, to be the LRM is to sit on the boundary between Man and Woman. The LRM might as well be a woman. (There is homophobia in this as well, but let's keep it simple for the moment.)

Therefore, the easiest way to not be the LRM is to make another man into the woman of the group. From this we get insults which denigrate men by accusing them of womanhood. You throw like a girl, it's feminine to wash your ass, etc.

Boys have already been taught this behavior by being raised as boys, that is, as beings whose socially-constructed gender demands an internal hierarchy which is always at war with every other member of itself for the purposes of establishing hierarchy.

Therefore, this problem is not fixed by raising girls as boys.

The problem is fixed by raising all children such that their gender is not dependent upon an internal hierarchy.

The first-edition of The Joy of Gay Sex, published in 1977, declared, “Vegetable shortening may be the best lubricant, since it is not only greasy but also digestible”[4] Such a statement perhaps gives new meaning to the companies boastful declarations that “Its digestible” and “Crisco has been making life in the kitchen more delicious for years.”  Similarly, in the 1978 sex manual The Advocate Guide to Gay Health, Crisco even earned an entry in the book’s index.  Discussions of the shortening’s use as an anal lubricant indicate its popularity, with statements such as: “The lubricant, typically the cultic Crisco, must be copious.”[5]  In fact, Crisco was so synonomus with gay sex that discos and bars around the world took on the name, such as Crisco Disco in New York City, which was one of the premiere clubs during the 1970s and early 1980s.  Other clubs or bathhouses, such as Club Z in Seattle, even featured murals with Crisco.  Thus, Crisco was conversely also one of many things that led to the formation of gay identities during the 20th century.

from this essay: http://www.columbia.edu/~sf2220/TT2007/web-content/Pages/drew2.html

children of any species are very good at being annoying and very cute while doing that

a sphinx child based on this post

Apologizing to his tenant for circumstances that were beyond his control, local landlord Eddie Turley was reportedly forced Monday to raise the rent due to thinking of a bigger number. “You can re-sign your lease, but I have to raise it by $250 a month because I realized there was a bigger number your rent could be,” Turley informed his tenant of six years, attributing the rent increase to a need to keep up with the rising numbers he could envision.

I know a lot of trans men want to be TMA reallllll bad because someone mistook them for a transfem once and called them a tranny, but the "Affected" in "TransMisogyny Affected" doesn't just mean you have been Affected by transmisogyny at some point--it means it affects you, inescapably, in uncountably many more ways than just random harassment, every minute of your damn life. and it worms into your brain and stays there, because you ARE the tranny they were talking about

We know how this happens, how transmisogyny worms its way in, the thoughts that itch at the back of our minds that make TMA people so easy to doubt. I was programmed to think the same assumptions too, and when I dug inward I found the same dirt you will:

It's usually some vague thought or feeling along the lines of "what if the trans fems are lying or exaggerating about how badly they're treated because they're [almost like a man suddenly dropped into womens' skin merely shocked from experiencing misogyny for the first time]; or [weird feminine men desperate to have experiences of misogyny validated as a bizarre form of gender affirmation]; or [weird guilt-ridden men desperate to experience misogyny as some kind of repentance]; or [weird feminist men desperate to exert unique expertise over women]; or [men desperate to position themselves as 'more oppressed' so they can regain their lost sense of gendered power among the voices of women]; or [perverted men who just transitioned for sex reasons overreacting with anger about being treated like the weirdo they are]".

All of this thinking and the roots of ALL transmisogyny come from this fucked up assumption that we are in some way or another always still men. Transmisogyny tells the fiction that a "male essence" supposedly remains at our core and is either morally corrupt, innately digusting, or both. THAT is the lie of transmisogyny, the lie that no matter what we do or who we are, our lives before transition somehow hold some kind of fundamental, inescapable corrupting influence over us today.

It is bioessentialism at its most pure. People take one look at the sex characteristics that we can't escape and transport themselves into a made-up world where some horrid element of male gender must therefore still exist within us. They stop seeing us as men or women and instead begin defining our entire personhood as if we are wolves in sheep's clothing; misguided men at best, immoral freaks at worst. They throw at us all the baggage that comes with a person asking "what kind of man does that?".