fed up radfem

I suspect this is because whenever men want to reduce the damage of their rape and violence, they don't know how to do it outside of highly restrictive societal construction. As they are incentivised to ignore the root of the problem, they will always 1. project it onto women, 2. deflect with scapegoats, and 3. create strict social rules in the hope that they can at least make the violence happen elsewhere, or have it hidden from view, so they don't have to look bad, or feel bad, about what they are doing to women en masse.

Conservatives, for example, oppose pornography because they, like the pornographers, believe that sex 'corrupts' women, and they don't want their own female relatives to be corrupted. Meanwhile, feminists oppose pornography because of the material violence committed by men against women within it. But men cannot percieve that women have our own reasoning, so they assume we must align with the male 'conservative' viewpoint. They do the same thing the conservatives do and deflect a male problem - belief that sex, interchangeable with rape, is sinful - onto women, who recognise that there is a difference between consent and rape and simply wish to not be raped.

Women's recognition of moral horrors and our desire to minimise them/be shielded from them is considered 'pearl clutching' because men do not take our claims or morality seriously. They have decided that the violence is a necessary evil, and that morality is not simply a recognition of material harm, but some ethereal and symbolic 'greater good'. The horrific damage caused by men is a nuisance that must be stratified and organised. When this damage is criticised by women, it is understood to be a roundabout way of addressing the same concerns that the conservative man has - and the very fact that women care about actual harm, and therefore we have an emotional investment in the topic, is used as further proof that we are frivolous, unserious, and incapable of making the hard decisions required for leadership. Men, you see, already know that their violence is a problem, and conservativism has its ideological solutions, so everything women say and get upset about is not only redundant but either hysterical or manipulative. The idea that women simply care is never taken into account - because we're all raised to conceptualise the world from a male point of view.

If you're asking if I think they're for real: I don't think a woman can turn into a man. I also don't think there is any legitimate evidence establishing a clinically significant difference between male and female brains, nor is there any evidence that such brains get mixed up in the bodies of trans-identifying individuals. And I am an atheist who does not believe in souls, so I don't believe in a mystical interior gender that doesn't match the body. Biological sex is determinative and everything else is a mixture of personality and upbringing. And misogyny is a huge part of basically everyone's upbringing, so it does not surprise me in the slightest that some women try to escape misogyny by attempting to turn into men.

If you're asking if I hold resentment in my heart for them: absolutely not. I do not like or respect or have any affection towards biological males and it is my sincere hope that they go extinct. But it is genuinely the deepest desire of my heart that ALL females can experience true liberation. It has never been done before in the history of human civilization. We are so subdued and traumatized from thousands of years of enslavement that we don't really even know what we're fully capable of. But we know it's startlingly impressive because after thousands of years of being forced out of public life, we have now surpassed men in higher education in just two generations. We are more resilient, live longer despite being malnourished and abused, make much better use of linguistic tools at every stage of development, have staggeringly lower rates of committing violence, and many more things that make me confident an all-female society is the only place I'd ever want to live. Trans men, who are female, are part of the contingent of humans that I want to see thrive and live peaceful, safe, free, happy, autonomous lives. I myself am a desister, and I have a sister who has tried on every gender identity and is now calling herself a trans man. Another sister of mine is a detransitioner and lived as a trans man for about a year. All three of us were abused as children because of our female sex, so this is not surprising to me, but it does not mean any of us are men.

Goldstar lesbian: I’m pretty lucky I figured out my sexuality early and never slept with a guy. I’m glad I didn’t because I know I would regret it now, and it would have made me really uncomfortable, so yeah I’m pretty happy I’ve always known I was a lesbian which I’m aware is a pretty rare experience. Yay, good for me.

Everyone on earth for some reason: oh so you’re just a creepy straight guy who is saying that women who have slept with men are dirty impure sluts? you’re saying that late bloomer lesbians aren’t actually lesbians? You are a misogynist who judges women’s value based on their sexual history?? You want women who have slept with men to literally fuck off and die??? You are literally planning a mass genocide of women who have slept with men???

Gold star lesbians make up approximately 0.5 percent of the global population. No one hates you or is mad at you because you are straight or bisexual and slept with a man, and no one hates you for being a late bloomer lesbian who slept with a man. It’s fine, in fact, you are the status quo. I have a lot of respect for women who didn’t realize they were lesbians until after sleeping with a man, or even marrying one. All the hardships that late bloomer lesbians talk about when it comes to compulsory heterosexuality, social pressure, and uncomfortable sexual encounters with men are exactly why I’m really happy and proud of myself for figuring myself out early, and not caving to any social pressure, because I know that’s not an option for most lesbians and not a common experience. Late bloomer lesbians have every right to also be happy with themselves and proud of the things they’ve gone through to get to a happy lesbian life, and it wouldn’t make me insecure. You wouldn’t see me claiming that late bloomer lesbians are creepy men.

Unlike women who aren't discriminates since birth, aren't mutilates because of their sex, aren't forced down one gender path... wait.

I think these tags are important.

When I was with transfeminist circles I saw these posts all the time and it was a super effective guilting tactic. I kept several MTFs in my mutual circles way too long after they started going on aggressive screeds against "TME"s (which I wasn't even against at the time due to said transfeminist conditioning), doing kink shit I'd normally block people over on-sight, and making comments like "I don't agree with ISFF but the construction of the pedophile is used to oppress us"... because I was afraid I'd look like a transmisogynist excising them from my social circles. So, with the other transbians on the site, they continued to get worse in ways none of my other mutuals did and my dash became insufferable lol.

I am reminded of the minority tolerance phenomenon. As a trend, people become less bigoted towards a minority group the more they interact with members of said group inter-personally. This isn't to say minorities will have no problems in non-minority friend groups, but that as a trend they become more liked the more familiar a majority gets to them, because it becomes clear they are just normal people with harmless differences like everyone else.

This makes this whole thing a real outlier. Trans women getting in social groups *while* already out as trans women (so there's no "coming out as gay and being kicked out of a friend group" bias happening), becoming friends with the people there, and then being expelled again and again, well... That's not really typical?