A trend I notice with radical feminist writers is how blunt and direct they are, which makes them easy to read. Valerie Solanas, Andrea Dworkin, Gail Dines--all of them cut straight to the point. Meanwhile, "queer theory" authors like Judith Butler and Michel Foucault are famously dense, obscure, and no one can ever agree on what their point is.
I see people talk about how there's an anti-intellectual backlash happening on the Left, but I think it's worse than that--it's not just that people are discrediting academics and research, they're discrediting common sense. It's common sense to say that a man who orgasms to the thought of women in pain is a misogynist. It's common sense to say that sex that is meant to hurt and degrade someone is not good sex. It's common sense to say that a man is not a woman.
And I think that's why radical feminist authors come across as blunt speakers--because they aren't intellectualizing the obvious, they're stating it. Meanwhile, the work of Butler and Foucault obscures reality as much as possible (oh sorry-- "problematizes" reality as much as possible).
I wish the people who accuse radical feminists of having dog whistles would actually read radical feminist literature and see how blunt the writing is--absolutely nothing has a double meaning or an implied meaning. Everything is direct.
I love how feminism changed my perspective about everything in life. This is why women are taught that feminism isn't good for them; it opens our eyes and shows us the world's true colours. "If you want to get married or you don't want trouble in life, avoid feminism", they say, but it's for them. They know how strong the power women could hold against men and their sick rules.
Watching Home Alone is so funny it’s like
Kevin’s mom: *hyperventilating into a paper bag* I can’t believe I left my son home alone, he has to be so terrified, my poor baby boy all alone I need to go get him-
Kevin: *actively planning to commit war crimes*
#80
Tumblr, buddy, listen to me. This is an unprecedented opportunity. You can snap up all of the pie here, and become defacto internet goodguy easy. All you gotta do is... drop the nsfw ban. Unambiguously. Announce that dicks are back on the menu. You want people subscribed the blogs? You want people to actually use your Post+ function? Porn. Let us use it for porn. The youngins aren't joining this site anyway, you're not competing with tiktok. The vaguely horny 20-40 demographic though? You can have that. You can have all of that. Think about it.
Cats painting studies by Paul Rabaud
“Male fantasies, male fantasies, is everything run by male fantasies? Up on a pedestal or down on your knees, it’s all a male fantasy: that you’re strong enough to take what they dish out, or else too weak to do anything about it. Even pretending you aren’t catering to male fantasies is a male fantasy: pretending you’re unseen, pretending you have a life of your own, that you can wash your feet and comb your hair unconscious of the ever-present watcher peering through the keyhole, peering through the keyhole in your own head, if nowhere else. You are a woman with a man inside watching a woman. You are your own voyeur.”
— Margaret Atwood, The Robber Bride (via corpsicles)
x
An activist from SCUM, a French radfem activist group, crashed the red carpet at the Cannes festival to call-out surrogacy, often used and promoted by movie stars.
Btw she's the same one who did a similar act last year.
✿ 19, European, radfem ✿ (attracted to men but impossible to not despise them)
192 posts