this sounds like misandry

goodnight-friend-deactivated201  asked:

Are dorkinlesbian and radfemtori bad feminists?

It’s ultimately up to you to define what bad feminism is, keep that in mind. You’re entitled to your own beliefs and opinions and I won’t disrespect or dislike you for it (nor should anyone else honestly) unless given a reason, like harassment, cruelty, hatefulness, etc.

I didn’t look at their pages in depth, but from what I did see, this is my impression.

Both pages seem to be radical feminists which I do not support; radical feminism is dominance and superiority over men which sounds an AWFUL lot like misandry disguised with a more pleasant name, so I personally would consider radical feminism wrong because it doesn’t stand for equality and typically excludes men. And I can’t stand misandry.

While I don’t like either page and don’t agree with the ideals, dorkinlesbian seems to be the better of the two because (from what I got from the page) she supports trans individuals. It didn’t appear to me that radfemtori did, and I believe in equality for all, not just a selected few.

I also thought radfemtori had a lot of super long posts, and I never read those thoroughly or entirely. I like points that are straightforward and clarified because my attention goes out the window on wordy posts. Oh, and I didn’t like the way she answered some of her asks, but that is probably a big personal preference.

Would I follow them? No. Do I agree with them? On some things maybe, but for the majority, no. Would I consider them bad feminists? In my definition of bad feminists (answered on a previous ask), yes.

All this being said, please keep in mind I merely skimmed the profiles and am basing them off my own beliefs and ideals. You aren’t obligated to agree with me: my goal is never to shove my thoughts down your throats, but to create a perspective you might not have considered and to challenge your mindset.

thanks for asking!

The trans woman struggle for parity with cis women can mean over identifying with the problems of cis women which are not always the same as our problems, erasing some of our biggest issues like misgendering and social death and everything else we know but have difficulty expressing because of a cis centric approach to this whole problem of being alive

The current wave of popular feminism is consumed with a rhetoric of fuck men misandry

A lot of trans women “look” and “sound” like “men”

Welcome to hell

Heterosexuality and homosexuality both contain idealized images which correspond to cis men (and many trans women). This means I can be pursued as a sexual object up until the point where I reveal that the words I use to describe myself are different from the words they thought I used to describe myself. I am more attractive to heterosexual women and gay men when that intangible part of myself is invisible to them.

So my “fault” lies in the information I embody. This is an information war, and my body is the disruption of idealized images.

And what does acceptance actually look like? Cis people are far more likely to accept trans feminine people who police other trans feminine people, even if they don’t consciously realize this. Visibility overwhelmingly corresponds to this act of policing which is actually an act of policing the ideas which that person’s body represents.

Popular feminism has a lot of rhetoric to hide the fact that it’s actually pretty uncomfortable embracing femininity, especially non-normative femininity. In which ways does centering masculinity, even negatively, serve to erase trans feminine people?

So for me the rhetoric that matters isn’t “fuck men” so much as “how can I be decentralizing masculinity and loving other feminine people” and “how can I be dismantling these idealized images that conflate bodies with identity”

bathroom-cleaner  asked:

I read your response to why feminism is viewed as a "women's power over men" type thing and it's been one of the most enlightening I've seen by far. But don't you think that one of the biggest reasons it's confused is because its relation to the word "feminine"? Ignorant people refuse to get behind feminism just because the name sounds like what we would call "misandry". I would love to hear what you have to say on the matter

I think people do have that misconception and that that misconception makes them not want to identify as feminist if that’s what they think feminism means. 

But really, I think that it’s patriarchy, not feminism, that causes that misconception. Patriarchy is a system of control, so when people hear that feminism is fighting against patriarchy, they assume that they’re basically the same type of words, just with a different gender in charge. 

My point is that that kind of thinking is patriarchal. It’s dominant, oppressive, aggressive, etc. 

We need to be clear that Feminism is not the opposite of Patriarchy. It does not replace the patriarchy by trading one oppression for another, but rather works to dismantle the systems of oppression all together by lifting up those who have been oppressed to a state of freedom, autonomy, and mutual respect.

bi-sassquatsch  asked:

My sister accused me of being a misandrist today bc I complained about the male intern at my job who happens to be the only dude working in a (feminist) organisation. He's only been here for a month and he's so damn entitled. Like, just today I had to explain a task to him bc he kept fucking it up and he's like "You just do it for me, it's much quicker!" I'm glad my boss stepped in and told him it's not about getting it done but about him getting his shit together. Sorry, just needed to vent <3

Oh, ok. So expecting men to be adequate at their jobs now qualifies as misandry? I guess misandry has just become super popular overnight then, because most people I know have those kind of standards for their employees. 

This guy sounds like he saw an episode of Agent Carter and thought “ohhh, old timey workplace sexism! That is SO my aesthetic!”

Don’t be sorry, he sounds like his mother’s prized asshole. 

For the white man to ask the black man if he hates him is just like the rapist asking the raped, or the wolf asking the sheep, ‘Do you hate me?’ The white man is in no moral position to accuse anyone else of hate! Why, when all of my ancestors are snake-bitten, and I’m snake-bitten, and I warn my children to avoid snakes, what does that snake sound like accusing me of hate-teaching?
—  Malcolm X

true-king-of-monsters  asked:

Wait, people are calling for death on the dentist after what happened with Cecil the Lion? Well, I'm not surprised that people devolve into mob justice whenever an outrage occurs.

Yes, that is exactly what I was talking about.

Now, I am very, VERY much against animal poaching (especially concerning big cats).  There are so many factors that are diluting the issue, such as people wishing to be respectful of other cultures, even if some of the outdated practices of those cultures are steadfastly wiping out entire species.  Either way, we’re taking for granted something precious that is nearly gone, all under the delusion that they’ll always be there.  Some may argue that it’s still human meddling to try to “undo what we caused”, but we’ve made it so that we’re actually forced to intervene in order to allow these animals a fighting chance.

Nonetheless, there are better ways to punish a poacher, especially when that poacher is a privileged, pompous douchebag that wants to bag an “exotic” trophy in order to validate his insecure masculinity, and prove his “strength” and “superiority” as a man (oh god…that sounds like something misandry-mermaid would say.  I think I need like twelve showers…).  Death is not going to teach this man a lesson, and it will leave others in his family that had nothing to do with his choices with a great burden.  To hurt a man like this, you need to strike him where he’s the most sensitive:  Right in the wallet.  Some jail time would also be very welcome, as it would place him in an environment in which he is NOT equipped for, nor accustomed to.  In all of this, he will likewise be ostracized by others, and will learn what happens when you go around burning bridges.  Living with that stigma is a greater punishment than swiftly ceasing to exist.

When it comes to the guide, he should also face a likewise punishment, and should be stricken from working as a guide in the future.  The guide is JUST AS GUILTY in this situation, if not moreso for making it possible for the poaching to happen in the first place.

To scream “DEATH!” is to become a mindless, frothing mob using social media as the modern-day equivalency of marching through the village carrying stakes and torches.  It’s primitive and irrational, and I’m embarrassed that we can come far enough as a society where the law finally acknowledges the right for all people to be with those they love, yet still approach other situations with excessive force that goes beyond what is justified.  While I am not a religious person, the Code of Hammurabi (the old “an eye for an eye”) is not a call for vengeance, but a plea to punish only according to the severity of the crime.