We have a small, friendly groupchat for radfems & rad aligned women on Telegram. If you're interested in mutual support, friends & discussing feminism, send me a DM! Being 20+ and female is a requirement. 🥂
radblr can be pretty toxic / draining so I might log off for a while sometimes ❤️
my inbox is open for anyone that wants to talk 🔆
this post will be edited and expanded at times :)
Links to different topics based on my personal opinions:
General
Radical feminist resources
Radical feminist tumblr masterpost sources
What is a woman
Sex binary & intersex masterpost
Radical feminism & Radfem beliefs & illustrated
Why feminism's goal is not achieving "equality"
Why I am critical of gender & trans ideology
My thoughts on female seperatism
Why TRAs compare radical feminism to conservatism
"Radfems are gender essentialists" approach refuted
A glance at women's oppression
The origin of the patriarchy
Why women's opression is sex-based
Gender equality isn't the goal of feminism &
equity over equality
Why we should abolish gender / gender criticism
Dissecting gender / arguing with a TRA
Non binary is invalid
Why systemic misandry does not exist
Why you should be anti porn & more sources
Porn forged the trans movement
Appropriation of Indigenous “Two Spirit” People in Trans Politics
Why gender disphoria does not exist
Agender identity
Transgender VS Transsexual & The issue with the "true trans"
Men cannot be feminists but they *can* be allies
Why anti drag queens
"But women NEED men to protect them!!" - statistics
#Radblr Discourse
Yes, men need to change
Dissecting 'feminist' blackpill ideology & another elaboration on blackpill feminism
Receipts of blackpill misogyny
Political lesbianism, are lesbians better feminists?
Criticizing lesbians who police osa women on separatism
Advice for women who date men
no separatism = more patriarchy??
Bisexuality / Biphobia in radfem spaces
Biphobia on radblr
Analysis on general biphobia
Another one on biphobia
Why "febfem" can be seen as a biphobic term
Am I not a radfem if I desire romantic love with a man?
The flaws of tumblr separatism
"Why I am not a separatist"
Does radfem mean female separatist?
Would separatists accept osa women dating men if men suddenly ceased to be a collective danger
Radfems can't be male partnered, what other solutions than separatism are there? + another one on that
Another take on the separatist discourse
Rad-aligned misogyny receipts:
(idk I have too many atp... might stop adding...)
Semen change a woman's brain
Osa women are at fault for men invading female spaces
Anon receipts
TRA receipts
Receipts on autogynephilic statements
Crimes of trans identified males against women in female sex spaces
Receipts of trans violence
Terfbreaking receipts
Other topics:
The wizard liz: Spiritual narcissism
Why do men grow resentful of women who love them
Should the government be able to police pronouns
Criticizing immigration in Europe & elaboration & more elaboration
Arguments for pro choice VS pro forced birth
Book recommendations:
Princess: A true story of a life behind the veil in Saudi Arabia
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.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
You are not a liberal "feminist", you are a liberal individualist. You have no class consciousness.
A woman choosing something based on her own free will can still be oppressive to women as a whole and re-inforce a patriarchal mindset, and repeating that it is within her right to choose it is not only not the point of this discussion, but completely shifts the focus away from the initial question: Why is this woman choosing this & how does it affect women as a class?" That is the kind of question we should be asking if we actually want to advance the cause of female liberation; the ultimate goal of feminism.
The fact that a woman has the individual right to make a choice does not automatically make that choice liberating, feminist or free from patriarchal influence. We need to be able to distinguish between individual autonomy and collective liberation. Women should have agency over their own lives but feminism cannot stop at "she chose it, therefore it is feminist." If that is where the analysis ends, then there is no room left to examine the social, economic, cultural or patriarchal forces that shape the choices women make in the first place.
You can be a flawed feminist. Yes, you heard that right. In reality, no one is a perfect feminist, all of us are flawed, because each and every one of us is affected by the patriarchy. We have all been socialized within the same system we are actively trying to dismantle and therefore none of us are going to somehow exist completely outside of its influence.
The difference is being able to recognize where your own shortcomings lie and being willing to critically examine your own choices rather than becoming defensive and assuming that everything you do must automatically be feminist by the nature of identifying as a feminist.
It needs to be understood that not every choice made by a woman is automatically a feminist choice & not every choice made by a feminist is automatically feminist in nature. Feminists are still human beings born and raised under patriarchy. We can internalize patriarchal ideas, reproduce patriarchal expectations and make choices that ultimately reinforce things we politically oppose. Recognizing that does not make someone a bad feminist. What actually makes you a bad feminist or no feminist at all is refusing to critically examine your own choices and beliefs because "it's my choice" is the actual problem. "It is my choice and I am a woman, therefore it is feminist" is a dangerous mantra that shuts down the possibility of having any critical discourse at all. It is also deeply illogical because it would define feminism as "anything any woman chooses to do" which, you see, isn't a very good concept...
Because I am afraid some illiterates are going to willfully misinterpret this: No one is saying women should have their choices taken away from them. It is about being capable of having a political discussion about those choices beyond simply asking whether a woman technically had the right to make them; which in the end is sadly the discussion we inevitably always end up having when critically examining the choice feminist mindset. Note down: The right to choose something and the patriarchal conditions that lead women to choose it are two different questions.
I want to be very clear that trying to sell the idea of choice feminism is inherently harmful to feminism and women. Not being a feminist is one thing, actively working against the progress of feminism by trying to change its very meaning because you want to wear the label "feminist" for clout is another thing.
Feminism is not supposed to feel "comfortable" or "cool". It does not matter if a choice makes you feel empowered or if you personally experience it as liberating. In fact, if something is actually feminist, you will much more likely receive pushback from other people (especially men) and feel uncomfortable because you are not conforming to the current patriarchal standards and society will punish you for it.
So (more broadly) speaking, how do you know if your choices are actually feminist? Do they challenge the structures, expectations and material conditions that uphold women's oppression rather than simply giving an individual woman (you) more freedom to navigate those structures? Does it challenge women's subordination or does it reproduce it? Does it expand women's freedom collectively or does it reinforce the conditions that limit women as a class?
I repeat: A woman is not automatically a feminist by nature simply because she is a woman, and a feminist's choices are not automatically feminist by nature simply because she made them. If our goal is female liberation, then we need to be able to critically examine not only what individual women choose, but why they choose it, what influences those choices, and what the normalization of those choices does to women as a class.
Gender ideology makes zero sense. There will always be two genders; one for women and one for men. Why? Simple, because gender is defined by sexist stereotypes, personal preferences and personality traits that are ascribed to either of the two sexes, which is why every other gender does not exist in reality but instead is a label you use to describe your personality and preferences as.
Gender aswell as sex is always binary; that's how humans function and how our society works. We will never break out of patriarchy by creating more boxes and saying "Well, women like pink and dolls so I'm not a woman if I don't like that" (hardening gender stereotypes and actively confirming them by claiming to be something other than you are due to not meeting the corresponding gender stereotypes that are ascribed to your sex).
If you want to be 100% accurate by putting people into boxes, you'd need to create a single box for each person to ever exist. A lot of women who identify as something other than a woman to some degree suffer from internalized misogyny because subconsciously they still associate women with those sexist stereotypes/traits and because they themselves do not align with those and do not wish to conform to those sexist gender stereotypes, they call themselves non binary or other.
It is patriarchy and gender ideology both, making women feel that if they do not perform femininity to the expected standard, they are not women and if they do not want to be women like the patriarchy describes women to be, they must be something else instead.
Being a woman under the patriarchy is not only a biological reality, it has become a social performance aswell. Radical feminists know that being woman can well exist without the performance of femininity, gender ideology believes that femininity cannot exist without being a woman. Gender ideology is patriarchy newly invented.
Under patriarchy, women are incredibly sexualized and stripped of their humanity. Of course a lot of women will want to opt out of that by claiming to not be women, to be non binary instead. By doing so they feel like the pressure to conform to those stereotypes is lesser, because non binary is a a term and they can decide what this means to them. Being a woman to them has never been able to exist outside of gendered expectations, it's never been a mere biological fact but always tied to some kind of pressure to conform.
They want to feel like "a person rather than a woman" but it is an illusion, because non binary is not real. It is not material reality, not observable, not measurable, nothing that actually exists.
They are still women and will be observed as women by society, and it is important that they realize because only by saying "yes, we are women, and that isn't defined through the way we act or what we like" is how we actually break gender norms.
Gender is ever and always changing - just have a look across history and how the stereotypes and expectations about women and men have changed within different historical periods. Back then, men wore dresses and skirts and shoes with heels, it was seen as masculine and manly. Today, women are the only ones expected to wear dresses and skirts and heels and it is seen as feminine and womanly.
My point is, the exact sexist stereotypes/personal preferences/personalility traits/expectations that is gender is in constant change. Even now, across different cultures, in 2026, to different people those are totally different. But sex is always the same.
Femaleness ≠ Femininity & Maleness ≠ Masculinity
One is gender, one is sex. They can co-exist but sex can exist independently. You can be a masculine woman. You can be a feminine man.
But to be a masculine woman does not mean you are not a woman. And to be a feminine man does not mean you are not a man.
Being gender-nonconforming is perfectly okay. More than okay.
Someday, I hope gender will mean so little and hold so little importance that "gender nonconforming" is no longer even a term we need or actively need to use. I hope we reach a point where women and men alike feel completely free to express themselves in whatever way feels authentic to them, without there being a "normal" or stereotypical way to be either.
Femininity and masculinity should no longer be traits that are socially tied to one's sex. They should simply be ways of expressing oneself, open to everyone, regardless of who they are. I want to live in a world where there is no majority that defines what a "normal" woman or a "normal" man looks or behaves like, because everyone is free to be themselves.
Obviously I do not hold all of the answers for how we can exactly achieve that future and we are far from reaching it at this current stage, but I'd like to dream sometimes.
Directly copied from basically the same ask 2 weeks ago:
Adult human female.
I have a strong feeling you thought this would stump me but this is actually so easy, it's sad. Adult. Human. AND female.
Not an adult human male. That's a man. (even in a dress, he's still a man)
Not a child or teen human female. That's a teen girl or girl. (though they'd logically grow up to be women and, thus, would actually naturally become women)
Not an adult horse female. That's a mare, not a woman.
So you're probably thinking, what do those words mean? Welp, that's easy!
Adult: fully grown; developed
Human: homosapien; human being
Female: of or denoting the sex designed around the bearing of offspring or production of eggs; distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) which can be fertilized by male gametes (sperm)
And, because I know how Trans Cultists think, you probably have some half-assed 'so you're saying infertile women aren't women?' To that I answer: "no, genius, their body was still designed to produce ova even if it can't, just like a woman going through menopause or who's body can't menstruate due to starvation, heavy drug use, and the like doesn't become a 'not woman.'
And then you'll probably imply that women with intersex conditions aren't women either, huh? You Cultists tend to. And, to that, I'd show you this neat graph :)
and remind me you that there are only two categories of sex in humans. Males, who produce the smaller and motile sperm gamete. And females, who produce the larger, immotile ova/egg gamete. There has never been another gamete discovered in humans, let alone able to reproduce with either of our two pre-existing gametes. There has never been, either, a self-inseminating example of 'both sexes in one body.' All people with intersex condition are still male OR female.
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.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
I am a journalist and a researcher. In my work, I analyze journalistic texts to spot bias.
While in spaces like Tumblr, it is a known that conservative media tends to distorts reality and uses rhetoric manipulation to form their audience opinions, I must heavily point out, that so does the left. And particularly so about transwomen matters.
This article about the UK Supreme Court’s ruling on what a woman is from The Nation, written by Sophie Lewis, is a shocking example of how little objectivity is found in her work and how deeply manipulative and inaccurate her claims are. Nearly every sentence is filled with fallacies.
In just 362 words of the text, I have found TWENTY-SEVEN attempts to manipulate the audience with claims that aren’t testifiable but emotion-driven. Journalism is in crisis, and many outlets produce pieces not to inform but to spread political activism.
I ask you, please, be critical. Transgenderism is an ideology, not a fact. Trust sources like AP, Reuters, and BBC, for they are the least biased.
And do not trust my word for it. I am just a junior scientist. Use this toolkit or search for your own (persuasive language, rhetoric devices, logical fallacies, tentative conclusions, etc.) to critically evaluate the media you consume.
It's been said before but I'll say it again: Terf is a term that was coined by men to condemn women who refuse to go along with the misogynistic idea that a male can become a woman. It is a misleading slur with the goal of publicly ostracizing and shaming women, framing them as cold-hearted, uneducated bitches for not happily welcoming their oppressors into their circles.
if u only learn one thing from my washed up blog, learn this. one of the many things both the left and right can agree on is that women’s social, physical and sexual boundaries are to be held in contempt. unfettered sexual access to women is the nucleus of male supremacy.
women who say no to sex with any kind of male for any reason or no reason commit an injustice. to the right, our injustice is against civilization itself, because our failure to comply means they will find it harder to propagate the next generation of slaves and slave masters at our expense. to the left, our injustice is against the oppressed, the marginalized males who want to reap this particular spoil of patriarchy but cannot due to their diminished value in the patriarchal pecking order.
the right will be honest. they will tell you that their solution is to simply erode and eliminate your ability to enforce your boundaries. that your ability to say no is a glitch in the system that has been left unpatched for far too long. the left will lie. they too agree with the right’s solution, and they too agree that your boundaries are an inconvenient glitch in the system. but the left will use progressive language to obfuscate this belief. to the left, the erosion of your boundaries is necessary for the marginalized males of this world to achieve some semblance of their denied birthright.
come to think of it, both the left and right believe your ability to say no can be an act of oppression; some of the most high status, western white men, are losing their minds over birth rates, saying women are oppressing the human race itself by saying no. they both believe that your ability to say no is an ethical and moral failing. to the left, to say yes is justice, to say no is bigotry. to the right, to say yes is justice, to say no is catastrophe—on par with human extinction.
all males are politically incentivized to view your ability to say no as an injustice, and they are socially and culturally compelled to correct and overcome this injustice. they correct or overcome this injustice with rape. the more sophisticated male supremacists will push for a psychological strengthening of patriarchy. a world where you’ll never say no at all, because you are a good comrade, or a good wife, and there will be no rape to speak of and no boundaries to think of because you will always say yes. that is true liberation for both the marginalized males, and for the higher status males who have marginalized them. you were never really supposed to say no in the first place. it’s inconvenient. they want to claw back this power.
don’t let them. keep committing the injustice. it is important that this injustice is ours to commit. embrace the failure of ethics, embrace the criminality, and smile when they attempt to wear down your ability to uphold your fortress. don’t allow anyone to take your spine. if sex is a need, then let them die, and tiktok dance on the gotdamn corpse.
Idk how the biphobic homosexuals are still finding this post, but this sort of thing still happens fairly regularly.
This comment is a good example of a lot of behaviors you’ll see from biphobic homosexuals:
sexual harassment to punish bi women for standing up for ourselves
incel rhetoric about women’s bodies being ruined by penises
obsession with graphic sexual images involving male genitalia/bodily fluids
they borrow from the way het males talk about feminism: “you’re only criticizing our bigotry because you’re mad that none of us want you sexually!!!” - attempting to convince women that our only value is as sexual objects for another group of people
the incel belief that women deserve punishment for sleeping with the wrong people rather than saving themselves for “nice guys” (in this case the “nice guys” are homosexual women)
attempts to bully women into heterosexuality by insisting that they are too disgusting to be worthy of female partners
The similarities between biphobic homosexual women and straight men are striking. It goes deeper than just sharing the same sexual orientation. People like this have adopted a slew of deeply misogynistic and homophobic beliefs, and they actively weaponize them against bi women.
politician from my country gave an interview today, saying that raising children in his opinion is not "unpaid labor" and that referring to it as such would equate to seeing a family as a business and not a space where people support each other regardless of financial aspects. he completely twisted and probably willfully misinterpreted the terms "unpaid labor" and what women who use them actually mean ; describing the comittment of raising children as actual labor in the form of them having to put in lots of effort and time that would equal a workload of more than a regular full-time job, plus missing out on advancing their career and not being able earning money during that time - which their husband actively continues to do, making these women financially depend on him and widening the gender pay gap over the years. also - just because you like doing something - even if you want to have these children and taking care of them - it still equates to unpaid labor that continues to put women at a financial disadvantage, is severely undervalued in society despite politics trying to push the birth rates and so on... spontaneous rant might add on later
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.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
It’s kind of harder for me to participate in abortion discourse since having an abortion myself. bc now with this hindsight i feel like a lot the discourse gets it it a bit wrong and it’s hard for me to explain how and why exactly it’s just the wrong perception of what abortion is. It is not remotely easy physically or mentally and this should be much more prominent in discussion, but instead i feel like it’s all very flippant and most people have the perception that abortions are pretty simple and easy to recover from especially if you’re 100% sure and not maternal or emotional about it- which is the perception i also had. It’s only since having an abortion that i know this perception to be misguided and believe the physical and mental toll, pain, and discomfort should be at the forefront of discussions.
See, this is very interesting for me, because I have also had an abortion, and while I don't relate at all to any mental or emotional stress or distress, and didn't really feel any toll in that regard (I, myself, was very flippant about it, and still am. I respect that some women won't be, but I had no feelings but relief about it), so I won't comment on that portion, I was entirely blown out of the water by the physical pain of the procedure.
I feel like anything I'd read, including a great many medical sources, feminist sources, and the actual instructions given with the medication, didn't prepare me at all for what to expect, and in fact, I feel like it was minimized by a lot. I went into it expecting "extra rough period cramp" type of pain. Several articles (and the advice given by with the meds) advised to put on a comfort show and have some food that I enjoy; take some over the counter pain meds. It was easily the worst pain I've felt in my life. I had an abdominal surgery a few months ago, I've broken a few bones, I cut the tip of my finger off last year, and none of these, even a teensy bit, compared to the mildest pain I experienced during my abortion.
I was completely blindsided. I almost caved and asked to be taken to the hospital, because NOTHING I had read had described anything even close to how bad the pain was. It came in waves, and there would be thirty to forty minute intervals where I couldn't even speak if I wanted to. I curled into a ball and just laid there. I won't lie and say it wasn't traumatic.
My first thought, tbh, was "holy shit, is this what other women's period cramps feel like? Have I just been lucky this whole time?" But a while back, when I still used TikTok, I came across an abortion joke video, and a ton of women in the comments were discussing how painful it was, and how they weren't prepared for it properly because they'd been told to expect much milder pain.
It was about a 9 hour process, for me, and as soon as the pain waned, I was out like a light. I had no residual symptoms the next day, thankfully, but during it I was almost positive that something had to be going wrong, because I hadn't seen anyone anywhere mentioning that it could hurt that bad.
I'd have made the same choice, regardless, but honestly I think some much stronger pain medication should be prescribed, and I think more research should be done to find out what factors impact how bad the pain will be, so we can at least be better prepared for what to expect.
My abortion pain was honestly the worst thing I have very felt. Incomparable to anything else. Not even close. They said I would start experiencing mild discomfort within 30 minutes of taking the second pill. It was more like within two minutes I was getting severe cramps. Within 10 minutes I had projectile vomited on my bathroom wall. Within 30 minutes I was screaming.
My partner gets flashbacks to it sometimes because I locked my bathroom door behind me when I bolted in there (the meds also gave me instant diarrhea) and then I couldn't stand long enough to unlock it again. He listened to me screaming on the other side of the door for 15 minutes before the pain abated enough for me to stand up and let him in. I bled so much we thought I was hemorrhaging.
I took all the pain meds we had in the house and was in and out of consciousness for 20 hours. I was too weak to walk up my stairs without a break for a week afterwards. I have come out of a surgery that required general anaesthetic in a better condition than I was after my abortion.
And like @goodmiffy I had quite a lot of mental difficulty with it that I hadn't expected as I was completely confident in my choice. I would have a termination again if I was pregnant now, pain notwithstanding. But it was not easy at all, and it took about 6 months of processing the feelings around it before I would say I was back to normal. I definitely agree that most feminist conversations make it out to be something very easy and I was woefully underprepared for the reality.
As someone who has experienced two medical abortions and two deliveries of babies (one single and one set of twins), the problem with these discussions about abortion and about pregnancy and childbirth is that there is no "normal" experience. There is an insanely wide range of what women experience, more than most other medical experiences. Same with periods. Even the same woman can experience vastly different things.
My two medical abortions (10 weeks and 11 weeks) were extremely easy. They were easy for me emotionally. I felt nervous beforehand but I felt relief afterwards. While I did experience some pain, it wasn't worse than my typical period cramps or bad food poisoning.
My two births and pregnancies were also extremely different. My firstborn extremely traumatized me. The delivery was wretched, my postpartum was horrible and slow and painful... I just assumed everyone else was lying about their positive delivery stories to save face. Meanwhile, for my twins, the pregnancy was horrible and I wanted to die, but my delivery was basically painless and was done super quickly.
For periods, I used to have cramps so bad I would lose consciousness and black out on the bathroom floor, whereas now, I get some back pain for a few days and get very sleepy.
What this has taught me on a personal level is that anything to do with a woman's reproductive system is incredibly varied, and there is nothing an individual can do to affect it. Someone having an easier time doesn't take away from the trauma of someone else's experience, and someone else having a horrible time doesn't mean that the women who have it easier are lying or covering anything up.
Culturally, we dismiss women's ability to tell their own experiences and relay their own narratives honestly and faithfully. Even after years of trying to deprogram, I still subconsciously do it, and other feminists do too - cultural programming is hard to completely rid yourself of. It's easy for people who haven't had these experiences to listen to the stories that validate their own worldview and dismiss the ones that "don't fit the narrative".
Abortions, periods, and childbirth all utilize the same organs, affect the same systems, and affect every woman incredibly differently. This is why it is so important, in my opinion, that women speak openly and freely with each other about their own experiences. The abortion narrative should have women who have had abortions at the forefront. The pregnancy/childbirth narrative should have women who have been pregnant and given birth at the forefront. Same for women who have had miscarriages or have underwent IVF.
About 80% of men claim "touch" is their "love language". And less than 20% of women say touch is their love language.
Men claim they need physical affection to feel appreciated. But they don't hug each other. They don't hold their children, or baby wear. They don't hold their friends hands or rub their backs after a breakup. They don't lean on each other on the train after a long night out.
Women do. Women reach out with their hands and their hearts daily both to friends and family but also to complete strangers. Men do not.
"Touch is my love language" is just shorthand therapy-speak for men to be able to say that they feel entitled to sex. Men complain that women want "acts of service" and men just want "affection" - yet a cuddle isn't what they're after, and providing sex that you do not want no matter how your day has been, no matter how tired or stressed you are, that IS an act of service. It's more than that, it's a chore. It's sexual coercion.
Question for my fellow radfems on tumblr: Do you make accommodations for religious women?
Let me explain what I mean with a specific, hypothetical scenario and let me know your thoughts:
Imagine that you are in a gym, in the women's only section to be exact. The women's section is a smaller compartment in a mixed sex gym where there's a few machines but a bigger number of the same machines is downstairs on the first floor, where both sexes have access and train together. In the women's section for the most part there is only one machine per type available; for example, instead of 5 treadmills in the mixed sex department, there is only 1 in the women's section and so on.
You like to train in the women's section to avoid stares from men and generally feel much more comfortable in a space where there's only women and no men at all.
Then there are some women who train in this female only space for religious reasons. They also do not want to be watched training by men, their reasons stem predominantly from religious reasons.
As you're working out on one of these machines, a woman approaches you and asks you how long you intend to keep going and you reply that you've only just started your workout and tell her how long you'll approximately take until you are finished. The woman argues that since you're not religious and do not "need" to cover yourself in front of men like she does, you could just go downstairs to the mixed sex section and use those machines and leave the one you're currently using to her and other women who can only train in this singular sex space.
How would you most likely react and/or respond to her argument?
Scenario A: You tell her that in this country with the locally established women's rights, a woman covering herself is optional and a misogynistic choice women make under the influence of oppressive, patriarchal religions. You also say that her not wanting to train next to men because of her faith is not more valid or important than your reasoning for not wanting to train next to men with the absence of faith and that you will not leave your machine to go work out downstairs. You empathize with this woman and the fact that you do not know her background and to what extent she might be forced to cover up because of her family but at the same time do not believe that sacrificing your comfort and right to be here will help her out in the long run. You even hope that by refusing, she will eventually see how restricting her religious lifestyle is, start to resent it and break free.
Scenario B: You feel sad for this woman and how restricting her life must be, although you also recognize at the same time that she would probably have the agency to break out of it, if she really wanted to. That her covering herself, would not be necessary if she really decided that she didn't want to anymore. You decide that your comfort and right to be here mattered less than making this woman's life a little easier by giving in and using the machines downstairs. You simply hope that she will someday realize how misogynistic the religion is, that she follows. You know that you would be justified to refuse giving up your machine as you were there first but also think that refusing to give in, would rather make her resent people outside of her religion as she would view them as disrespectful, thinking that they are actively making her life harder; that she would avoid these people and likely blame them for not making her restrictive lifestyle easier instead of recognizing that the true culprit and root cause is the religion itself that she follows. So you bite the bullet, leave her the machine and go train downstairs.
Feel free to share your thoughts and/or alternative ways you would likely react. Which scenario do you align with more?
Personally, I feel very torn between both of them so I wanted to hear your takes on this.
Are there other ways in which you (would) accommodate religious women and/or sacrifice your own comfort in order to make their life easier, in which ways and for what reasons?
Do you believe that doing so could potentially open them up more for external opinions / religious criticsm as they do not view you as someone who is making their life harder and/or that not doing so would make them resentful of you and people outside of the religion rather than the religion itself or would it be more likely that it leads to them resenting the religion itself as they realize how much it restricts them?
I would also be very happy to hear the opinions of ex-religious radfems!
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.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Over 80% of English vocabulary comes from old French. However, when you look at the most commonly used words in English, you have to look well outside the top 100 before you find the first word that doesn't come from Old (pre Norman conquest) English.
This is because the most basic words, the ones we use most often and which describe the most fundamental concepts, tend to remain very stable over the long term.
You can see the evolution in the meanings of words such as "terrible", "awesome" and even "gay" in relatively recent history.
Generally, when the meaning of a word evolves, it is because we no longer have much use for the old meaning, or because the same word can have different meanings depending on the context, without causing confusion. (Take the word "sole", for example, which can mean a type of fish, the bottom of a shoe, or "only". Nobody is ordering sole in a restaurant and expecting to be served a shoe on a plate.)
None of this applies to the word "woman", which is about as basic as it gets. Both "woman" and "man" come from Old English and have been used consistently for over a millennium to mean, respectively, "adult female human" and "adult male human". These words haven't evolved because the original meanings are no longer relevant. We still need to be able to identify and distinguish between female people and male people as much as we ever did. Nor are they the type of words which can comfortably support different meanings.
If the word "woman" can mean either "female person" or "male person who identifies as the opposite sex", how are we supposed to understand which group of people we are discussing? And more to the point, "women" is a category word. In order for a category to exist, all the things or people in it need to have something in common. If what women have in common is being female, changing the definition to include male people makes it a meaningless word for a non-existent category of people with nothing in common.
So yes, "language evolves". But certain words do not, because our need for these words remains the same over time.
Until about 10 years ago everyone agreed that women are female people. Most people still do. And we definitely still need a word for female people that doesn't include male people.
If you redefine "women" to include male people then you no longer have a word that just means female people.
This isn’t the natural evolution of language. This is a rather Orwellian weaponisation of language, designed to prevent people whose beliefs are grounded in reality from being able to express those beliefs coherently, and to stop women as a whole from engaging in activism as a sex class. And that's why it must be resisted.
a cosplayer was found dead in the rhine in germany after the dokomi, circumstances of the death are not clear yet, a TIM and apparently a sex offender who groomed a minor, wow
the main focus is on trying to get people to address him with female pronouns btw
