#merf

TIF comments on a post about "phallophobia" and womyn being afraid of penises, bathroom debate, so on and so forth. can we guess the replies?

lots of infighting it seems.

between who? that doesn't matter, certainly. right?

they're almost getting it...

and we lost them, yeah.

like, oh my god, if you're not deluding yourself it's glaringly obvious.

TIFs need to stop the cope & realize obviously TRAs see them as stupid blabbering females invading the dude bro oppression circejerk with their stupid blabbering female opinions.

this isn't the first instance, and isn't even rare at all, we see TIMs malding & screeching over TIFs existing basically. lmao.

primary interests:

— philosophy

𖥻 existentialism (Sartre, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Heidegger)

𖥻 phenomenology (Hegel)

𖥻 Marxism

𖥻 logic

𖥻 metaphysics

𖥻 epistemology

𖥻 radical feminist philosophy

this blog is more of a diary of my thoughts on different philosophical theories, ideas, and whatever. but the primary focus is feminist ideas. 💜🤍💚

one thing that keeps bothering me is the left’s (mostly men’s) obsession with the idea that a family can’t survive on a single income anymore. the argument is usually framed as a critique of capitalism: labor rights have been crushed, wages haven’t kept up, workers aren’t prioritized. and like, yes, that part is true. capital has absolutely refused to raise wages, and it loves to hide behind women’s liberation as an excuse, “now there are two incomes, so why pay more?” i get the sentiment, and i understand why this framing is used to pull in people who are hostile to marxism by appealing to something familiar and nostalgic. but what drives me insane is that the left rarely interrogates what that “single income family” actually meant. instead, they recycle 1950s imagery with this vague “what they took from us” energy, as if that era wasn’t built on women’s economic dependence and enforced domestic labor. a single-income household wasn’t just a wage arrangement; it was a power structure. it trapped women in marriages they couldn’t leave, tied survival to men’s employment, and made widowhood, abandonment, and abuse into economic death sentences. when leftists romanticize this model, they’re not thinking about the women who outlived their husbands with no savings, no work history, no autonomy. they’re not thinking about women in violent relationships with no income of their own and no exit. they’re not thinking about how capitalism relied on unpaid reproductive labor in the home to function in the first place. pretending this was some lost golden age just reinstates an oppressive system with better branding.

it’s especially telling whose struggles get erased in this framing. if the left actually wanted to talk about single incomes under capitalism, they should be centering single mothers (especially single mothers of color) who are already surviving on one income and being crushed by it. these women aren’t a hypothetical or a nostalgic memory; they’re living proof of how brutal capitalism is when you’re responsible for care work and denied adequate wages, housing, childcare, and social support. instead of learning from them, the left ignores them in favor of a straight, white, male breadwinner fantasy that never applied to most people in the first place.i agree that workers deserve higher wages and security. i agree that capitalism has made life unlivable. but if the left’s critique stops at “we used to afford a family on one income,” then it’s incomplete and patriarchal as hell. we need a vision that doesn’t rely on nostalgia for women’s dependence. i don’t have a neat solution here. i’m just venting, but every time i see those posts, i feel like screaming.

Patreon: