If I interact with you, You Are Based

to be blunt: lesbian =/= sovereign

there may be more sovereign lesbians than bihets but one does not inherently equal the other. when they say "only gold star lesbians are real lesbians", they're trying to distance themselves from lesbians who very much are not freethinkers, who very much do care about what other people think of them, who were not smart enough to see through religious indoctrination, who wanted other women to accept them so much they dated boys to fit in. women who were so consumed with longing to be Normal they would rather subject themselves to rape after rape from men that they hate just so her bestie isn't suspicious she's in love with her. women who would rather deal with the nuclear fallout of life-long substance abuse than fail to conform. martyrdom is a female trait, and so is blind conformity. lesbianism is just a sexual orientation. it doesn't mean you're a born rebel. it doesn't mean you're free from the most common female failures. there's only half as many lesbians as gay men because if they're not trapped by circumstances, they are trapped by their own fatal refusal to disobey.

to be sovereign is to be innately, immaculately selfish as a woman; surely lesbians are more prone thereto, but almost nothing in this world is so black and white. rest assured: the lesbian foid exists.

you can see the foidery unfold on radblr every time a more sensible dyke takes a potshot at some bihet, only for the little dykelings to all come crawling out from under their rocks to accuse the first one of misogyny, biphobia and witchcraft.

we call bihet women out for dickriding patriarchal males who exploit them.

lesbians ought to be calling each other out for muffsucking up to women who exploit them exactly the same way for exactly the same reason. it's servile, self-hating behavior, and it's the same behavior which makes most western lesbians try dick at some point. it's also the pathological drive to avoid discomfort which forces those same women to eventually come out despite themselves.

"lesbian" does not always means "sovereign woman with her act together". sometimes it means "cowardly enabler chasing the high of approval from her oppressors like crack"

sometimes it just means "foid4foid".

until we all get real cool with that fact, every time a lesbian displeases us we'll be forced to scramble to prove she's secretly bisexual, because it is intolerable to the ego that someone in the In Group might have an opinion we dislike.

separatists said, "peak men", and were outcast;

blackpillers said "peak woman" and everyone lost their goddamned minds.

there is an obvious difference of aura between the average potato IQ gendercritter and a legit feminist separatist

but there is a chasm between feminist separatists & sovereign women who came to understand that patriarchy only exists because women want it to.

separatists are still driven by the notion that they can drag women into feminist consciousness kicking and screaming and that when they're finally free they'll just. agree with them. quite like how communists think if you just seize power and "re-educate" the populace, you will end class warfare because people will just naturally stop oppressing each other.

fucking el oh el.

both groups are just intelligent enough to grasp ethics individually. don't judge people for what they cannot help, feed the poor, clothe the sick, etc.

but they're just fucking stupid enough to believe ethics can be institutionalized without replicating the very systems they seek to abolish.

rip

Can I ask what are your thoughts on this critique of blackpilled/separatist feminists? At the very least they admit that they kinda conflate the two unlike other women on radblr who beat around the bush.

What's crazy about those who starve themselves to look more attractive is that they're not even trying to imitate physical traits pertaining to good health and fertility that men would have evolved to be attracted to; they're literally just conforming to man-made beauty standards that have more to do with having a certain silhouette that best suits certain fashionable clothing, rather than anything to do with the physical traits that identify a woman as being healthy breeding stock. A frail, rail-thin woman gives the subconscious mind the signal that she's suffering from a wasting illness or is malnourished and is not fit for bearing children (or being f*cked, really, because the man viewing the woman could never be sure what illness she may have been suffering from.) Their bones protrude, their teeth decay, their skin yellows, and their hair begins to fall out. They did it all believing that they were becoming more beautiful and the complete opposite occurred. Women do this in a million ways of course with countless beauty rituals that do more harm than good, but you'd think anorexia would be a thing of the past by now.

I feel like only women could be convinced to do something so self-harming and stupid. There is some validity to the fact that men think women should never be in leadership positions either in the church, in business, or in politics (and it sucks that I'm forced to say that as a woman) but its because women can be convinced of ANYTHING in a way that far exceeds men's gullibility. They're very easily swayed by bullshit ideas and don't possess strong enough critical thinking to reason through them. They'll literally DESTROY themselves for an aesthetic. How often do we find men self-harming in grotesque ways to gain approval from the opposite sex or society? It's VERY rare. Women generally have no discernment at all, and it's no wonder that we ended up with a patriarchy as a natural result of half the population essentially being mental children.

homosexuality is just as much of an enemy of females that heterosexuality is. normal people go about their damn lives if they’re “same-sex attracted” or socially different from hetties and normies but we’re clearly not dealing with normal people here, we’re dealing with degenerates and hedonists with sick perversions and fetishes that they must make public and bake into their identities and lifestyles to get their major fix from it. realizing this shit will free you. i dont care about homophobia/transphobia/-phobias. what i really see when i hear accusations of -phobia is that you’re either pro-perversion or anti-perversion, and -phobia being a constructed term is the grand moral arguments happening in the underbelly of the world. i am anti-perversion, anti-sex indulgence, because there is clearly something fucking wrong with both.

For example, somehow childfree women need to be attacked despite literally not contributing to the existence of rapists, pedos, murderers, sociopaths, dictators, and other types of humans that cause immense suffering. How could there even be time to acknowledge the fact a woman refuses to be bred like a whore when there are 8 billion humans and counting as well as a child abuse epidemic?

Another example is celibate people, particularly celibate women. We're not molesting children or raping people to satisfy our disgusting urges, yet people feel attacked by someone choosing to keep their animal nature in check instead of choosing to focus on execute or enforce consequences on those who are sexual predators. Celibacy is endlessly critiqued yet nobody is traumatized by someone choosing to not engage in anything sexual.

Those that are targeted by this neurotic behavior are more than likely a small or marginalized population and pose no threat to whatever collective bullshit that has been going on for millennia. That animal need to control those that don't conform is demonic behavior.

They come up with self defence techniques like keeping a taser around and other weapons. Then they come up with signs about the tiger turning violent and early red flags.

They form groups discussing an epidemic of tigers turning on their female owners. "Blame the tiger, not the victim" is what echoed through these spaces. How it's tigers who should be changed so women can peacefully coexist with their pet tigers and show off the lavish breed they bought. Not just that, but also unleash their tiger on women who don't have tigers to assert dominance. But at the end, the beast still ends up slaughtering the owner and devouring flesh.

Well, sounds absolutely ridiculous right? Now replace tigers above with men. This is what feminism feels like once you are disillusioned with women as a whole and their true nature.

Women will go "that's a logical fallacy tigers and men are not the same". And you are right, men work just the same but with setting elaborate systems.

We don't need activism. We don't live by the letters of motherfuckers who have been in the ground for decades. We don't need a 500 page book by women suffering from a bad case of cognitive dissonance.

Feminists today are a lot like the ones from before. They waste time on intellectual masturbation while their personal lives are a hot mess.

Radfem PSA: Nobody can take you seriously as you maintain a blog dissecting the patriarchy and the phenomenological hell that's unique to hetero women and then walk around smelling like shit because you didn't douche your man's nut out properly and it's fucking up your PH balance. You're a joke bitch.

Anyway, feminism is a dead end and so are their lives.

“Women comit less violence” yeah cuz they’re incapable of it, doesn’t make them more virtuous, it just makes them harmless innit 👍🏻

“Women are more empathetic” in their weakness they have come up with innovative ways of being cruel though words and social exclusion, I have yet to meet a woman who doesn’t virtue signal, moral police or isn’t an overall snake. Try to be honest in front of a woman and you’ll see just how empathetic they are.

“Women are the creators of life” bringing slaves into this world is not something to brag about. You tear your flesh apart in a grotesque humiliation ritual just to materialise another person into a world you knew was fucked up. That’s worse than anything males are capable of. Every victim of male violence exists because of a woman.