Cats are cute

The bodily fluids expelled during the orgasm are not special. They're just as toxic as all other forms of human waste, which is why sexuals need habitual testing, protection, and medication.

The problem is, sexual women want to play in sewage, but get offended when people think they're dirty and stinky.

And sure, people will judge a woman for being dirty, while exalting the man who soiled her. This is logically inconsistent.

But just because someone is being logically inconsistent doesn't mean everything they're saying is false. It just means they've yet to reconcile two contradictory ideas they hold.

"Why does racism exist?" People prioritize their genetics, skin color is one of the easiest ways to recognize a difference in genetics.

"Why do people torture small animals?" It reminds them of hunting instinct, a reminder that their genetics are good.

"Why does homophobia exist?" A non-reproducing member can be a burden to your future genetics.

"Why do men hate women?" Patriarchy is an incredibly efficient method of spreading the male genome.

"Why are disabled people hated?" Because they are seen as a genetic hindrance to the group.

I don't think people like to think about things like this because we've shunned the idea that humans are biological for so, so long. There must always be some principled, rational reason why the oppressor would act this way, they say to themselves. We've invented entire religions, ideologies, schools of thought, cultures, all around the concept that we are separate from the nucleic acid in our cells. But it's all a massive cope to the fact.

So long as people continue to wallow around in their books and pages of 'theories' on why oppression exists, it will continue to exist. So long as people attempt to protest oppression on a basis of ideology, it will continue to exist. Activism in the traditional sense is largely worthless unless the environment is already favorable for change. Otherwise you are fighting an uphill battle.

The only hope is to attempt to make our biology irrelevant. Somewhat ironic I guess, as that's what we've been trying to do for the past hundred thousand years. But this time we actually have a little bit of hope.

There's a reason that so many civil rights and social justice movements came after the industrial revolution. Technology can negate biology, at least by a little bit. It's worth trying at least, to continue to advance and advance in hopes that there's a small chance that we could escape it all, at least for a while.

Is it a separatist action to work for a man? No. But most of us don't have the option to make good money under a fully woman-owned/staffed company.

Is it a separatist action to spend spare energy to prioritize developing relationships and skills with your female coworkers over male ones? Yes, that's a good compromise. That's a degree of separatism that doesn't involve retreating from the benefits of current society.

Concerning boyfriends and husbands -

Men don't get into relationships with women for love but for real tangible benefits.

Even if you don't know what he gets out of you, he knows. If he wants something out of you he will try to force or coerce, or trick you into giving it to him. If he had no benefit from you he would dump you.

In radfem groups I also constantly see the insinuation that leaving kids with men is “unsafe”/men shouldn’t babysit/men can’t care for kids as well/men don’t even want kids, but somehow a lot of women are still okay with having them with the same men they dupposedly do not trust? As someone raised in a religious home, this basically just sounds like the conservative talking point. It always seems to come down to: women should be responsible for children/if you don’t want to care or help out a child you are evil as a woman. It’s the older sister, aunt, your bestie, the female neighbor who will ultimately be asked to help. But zero mention is made of men helping, despite men being the ones who are like the other half of every kids’ DNA.

I see them as groomers to the tradwife life, because that's the goal anyway.

They only put these expectations on the women finding a way to escape their forced role as domestic and sexual slaves. They target them to put them in lines.

They never expect their husbands to be the babysitter, so let alone the co-parent of their own child.

And they don't target women who are already mothers because they are already fulfilling their patriarchy's duties.

They are agents of the patriarchy, to make sure no women would find a way to emancipate herself a little bit.

They also are most the time boys mom, and if they can't find childfree WOMEN, the pressure and grooming is put on their own daughters, to be the second domestic and sexual slave of the house. Because that's the only reason we exist.

This is pattern that can be seen everywhere in the world. Almost as if subconsciously even the worst moid worshipper knows her owner is active danger to her kids.

Like, you recognize that oppression is sex-based, particularly on lesser strength, vulnerability and costly reproduction, and at the same time you take pride and flaunt that wimin are creators of life! Womb envy! Tits are not sexual, they produce food for children! We can survive ripping from clit to asshole! Stronk!