televangelist

i think caustically referring to human women having children as "breeding" does generally reveal some kind of heinously misogynistic worldview

What’s so awful and hope-eroding about the pandemic at this point is how consistently the value of life is cheapened before our eyes. The number of deaths go up. We are appalled and scared. The number of deaths go down, we talk about the economy. Hospital wards are full to bursting. The number of deaths go up. That number isn’t as scary as it was. We can get through that. The number goes down. It’s not zero. It’s hundreds and thousands, but it’s less than before and there are profits to be made. The number goes up. We’ve seen worse. The numbers go by. We don’t blink an eye anymore. They’re just numbers. The profits go up and the deaths go up and it’s business as usual. People are dying. People are always dying. It doesn’t make your stomach drop anymore. The number goes down. The economy goes down. Add another covid booster shot, make the numbers go the right way. My neighbor gets evicted because he can’t work anymore due to Covid side effects. Make him a number. People live out of their cars. But they didn’t die, don’t count them. Restaurants are open. Shops are open. People are dying. It’s not scary anymore. 526 Covid deaths yesterday. That’s not so bad. This is normal. It’s all numbers. 4.5 million dead around the world. How many is that? Is that a lot? I don’t know anymore. I feel sick.

You can tell when someone doesn't really have a strong ethical framework beyond a shallow "Listen To [Oppressed Person]" because they'll hear one person go "Healthcare should be universal" and another go "Racism is great" and they'll be like "Well they're both trans... :/"

I need you people to understand that there is not a single marginalized group that doesn't contain members with heinous, regressive beliefs, and trying to determine who to believe based on the ""validity of their experiences"" is no way to make political and ethical judgments

the concept that privilege on one axis can “cancel out” oppression on another axis is such a prevailing idea among this generation. it’s led to so much damage within social justice movements, and i think it directly contributed to the rise of identity politics, “oppression olympics,” and the obsession with listing every detail about your mental illnesses, race, and disabilities online. it’s a constant battle to prove that you’re oppressed, that you have the least amount of net privilege. it’s not factual, and it has no bearing in the real world. oppression and privilege on different axes can’t be added and subtracted from each other. they are different variables.

I’ll never forget this AMA on reddit. It’s by a woman who had transitioned hormonally and socially and lived as a gay trans man for well over a decade before her gender shifted again and she detransitioned and returned to living as a woman. She had no regrets about transitioning, felt she was a trans man during those years, and still identifies as trans. She also expresses that she didn’t have dysphoria when she transitioned and still doesn’t and that she transitioned based on what felt ‘right’ and how she wanted to be viewed and interact with society at the given time instead.

People be like. Wealthy women might be able to get abortions by travelling thousands of miles, paying bribes, and living in fear of the cause of their trip being discovered. Hence they are not oppressed ❌ I am very intelligent 🧠

A lot of people who make this argument want to see white, wealthy women being “punished” for having sex and not wanting a baby just like all the other women. They want an equal distribution of misogyny towards all women instead of ending misogyny altogether.

#the main problem of tumblr’s misogyny is that #so many ppl here think they’re ‘over’ it #like ppl will talk all day about how they need to desconstruct their racist classist and lgbtphobic biases but when it comes to misogyny #everyone acts as if they’ve reached enlightenment already

I wish i could find this one article written in I believe the 90’s that went under the radar on abortion. The author said that the “life” arguments are basically useless on either side and what actually matters is that humans shouldn’t have a right to use other human bodies as a resource without consent no matter how alive or sentient they are, even if they’re on the brink of death you have the right to deny them access to you. It probably was too radical for pro-choice activists back in those days but like…that’s the most robust arguement lol so we need 2 being that back and dead the pontifications and splitting hairs about “life” in my honest onion

If you cannot demand that a person donate their organs to keep you alive, you have no right to legislate that an embryo gets to use a woman’s body to keep itself alive without the woman’s consent.