Remtheratfem - Tumblr Blog

words fail to describe the second hand embarrassment i feel in my body when i see a feminist criticize something like sex work, makeup, cosmetic surgery, etc and someone comes up and says “isn’t feminism supposed to be about women’s choices :((” or something adjacent to that, and then we have to remind everyone that no, feminism is about FEMALE LIBERATION and not what makes YOU feel comfortable as an individual. with the rise of liberal feminism we’ve forgotten that feminism is a political movement and it’s not meant to be fun. it’s supposed to question and tear apart what’s seen as the status quo for women. if you can’t handle even the smallest criticism of things that you as a woman enjoy and take part in then feminism simply isn’t for you

Spread it around. Steal it. Post it. Get it out there. VOTE!!

kamala harris helped get san francisco its first safe house for trafficked girls/women!!!

people think they shouldn't vote as a protest or whatever because they've been raised on boycotts. which do sometimes work.

boycotts deprive the target of money.

not voting does not deprive the government of money.

it does, however, deprive you of power.

it's not like a boycott.

“What’s a woman? Ermmmm okay but like what’s a chair haha”

You know what the fuck a chair is. If you asked for a chair to sit down, and I brought in some random guy, you’d be pissed. But what’s the problem? He identifies as a chair!

Words mean things because that’s why we have words. It is a communication tool, and it is entirely dependent on the mutual understandings of definitions. I don’t believe for a second that “woman” and “man” just happen to be the only words that you cannot define because ohhhh it’s just so messy and tricky and philosophical, bruh! Deep stuff!

If these words were really that unintelligible, that confusing, that vague… then we simply would not use them. Because that is not how words are designed to work. If a word has no meaning, it’s just gibberish.

But, you know what a “woman” is, in your eyes, don’t you? It’s “whoever is feminine enough”… isn’t it? But of course you don’t want to say that, because people would easily be able to pick that apart. You’ve been backed into a corner with this question, so all you can do is dodge it with non-answers until they leave you alone.

We’re not stupid, and you’re not stupid, so quit playing games. We’re all adults here. Grow up and own your shitty ideals.

I’ve been thinking about how much I love Katniss Everdeen through a feminist lens. She was my first introduction to a realistically strong, self-reliant, complex, and likable female character.

Before that, my only exposure to strong female characters were those seductive, callous, ridiculously sexualized female characters. The ones who somehow manage to beat up a group of men twice her size while wearing high-heels and a skimpy outfit. The kind of female characters you see in movies targeted for men—the one obligatory woman among an otherwise entirely male cast.

Katniss was, refreshingly, no such thing. She wasn’t unrealistically beautiful, nor unrealistically strong, nor seductively cruel. She was just an average girl, which is what made her so easy to empathize with. She was brave and protective and daring. But she was also a little bitter and sarcastic, and standoffish, and vulnerable, and disadvantaged. She was a realistic character, not an archetype.

It was also so refreshing to see a makeup-less female actress, rather than her having a full-face of makeup and perfect hair while running through the forest and fighting for her life.

Oddly, her character was also my first introduction to an older sister protecting her younger sister, rather than the usual older brother protecting his younger sister. It was remarkable to me even then, to see a girl protecting another girl so fiercely. If only more female characters were written with this level of depth and care.

I know everyone has fun pretending to be Diogenes of Sinope, but in politics definitions are essential because it defines who is impacted by a set of laws, decisions, social pressures, intersecting oppressions, etc. The material lives of individual oppressed people are not helped by philosophical wordplay any more than the average prostituted woman, helot, enslaved person, or otherwise systematically oppressed individual in the Hellenic world was helped by Platonic dialogues, or even Diogenes himself busting in with a plucked chicken. It must be fun to be so removed from the reality of oppression that you can live in this lofty realm of argument and counter argument and muse on the Buddhist tradition and meditate on your identity. Meanwhile women are dying and suffering because Roe v. Wade was lost.

If you don’t care about Palestinian women and girls being raped, starved, denied medical care, blown up and shot… you’re not a feminist.

not she/her in an "i identify with womanhood" way, she/her in an "i was born with this body and i'm not ashamed" kind of way

—— 01.

preface: I shall start by saying 6B4T is a lifestyle choice. no one, no lesbian especially, has the power required to separate you from your males, we do not have the power to ban, or restrict, or kill you for continuing to date, idolize, and birth males while having no female solidarity and prioritizing no women. the most "backlash" you shall receive is online words on a screen. compared to real life as women are raped, beaten, assaulted by men repeatedly over and over; we are not wrong to demand feminist action and hold women up to a certain standard. 

6B4T: a South Korean & Chinese feminist movements that calls for radical action & provides the most practical and sensible way of ending the patriarchy. the tenets are:

"radical feminism"; there is a disconnect here, but not by much. western radical feminism is the one that originated during the 3rd wave feminist movement. the meaning of it was to 'get to the root' of the problem and dismantle the patriarchy. the word radical here also applies in a literal sense, meaning radical action. then there is the South Korean / Chinese radical feminism or the 6B4T group which is essentially the same, but with clear cut goals and lifestyle. a direct approach on how to best, and swiftly end patriarchal oppression; at the root. while they both refer to different sects, the end solution is always the same: separatism. which is why it is important that online radfems learn the difference between the radical feminist label, and gender critical. not centering & catering to males is an essential necessity of the movement. you cannot pick and choose when to call yourself a radical feminist while actively contradicting the fundamentals of the movement itself simply because you do not want to take radical action, in a radical feminist movement.

Separatism: I outright refuse to believe separatism constitutes as a 'radical' action, rather it should be considered the most natural solution. the obvious choice. the only power we have is to not serve men. let's break this down; for the sake of convenience let's just ignore male family members at this point, despite the fact that they're the ones who are most likely to benefit out of your subjugation. for now let's focus on romantic male partners. 

to start, I've heard many say that I, as a lesbian, have no right to give my input on this topic, and during my earlier r*dblr days I'll admit I thought that too as I was being silenced by every osa woman around me. still, that did not stop me from thinking and forming opinions; seeing things clearly. some lesphobic way's I've been shut down includes saying things like "lesbians just don't get osa oppression, t's easy for you to advocate for celibacy when you aren't the one being involved with or being affected by men", or "you get to say that & date, yet we cannot find love? how unfair is that" 

—— to a degree this is correct, I'll never understand what you as a osa go through, but that does not mean we do not face misogyny. we are women, and we are traumatized constantly by being forced to be in the presence of males, usually brought around by osa women. the axis of homophobia and misogyny here overlap. that aside 6B4T radical feminist movement isn't made solely by lesbians. it's a movement started by women of all sexuality in South Korean & china. many women abstain from sex & marriage whether for religious reasons, or protest; it is not a new concept.

—— sorry but you won't receive any sympathy from me on the second point; lesbians are well resigned to the fact that we will never date, never find loved and will likely be sold or raped by our family members. and guess what? that isolation is unique to us, but it is also our norm. in every single tv show, play, books, media, conversation, history; every part of creation on the planet has been saturated in your favor; you were promised love from the start, you were given it in tv shows, in books, in historical stories, in songs, in poems — the world is made for you. everywhere you go. we never had that, we still don't. to me this sounds like the cries of the privileged. so sorry if I do not care much about how being celibate is a very difficult choice for you. I'm devoid of compassion here. I'm sure it's hard, but you will find someone else to hold your hand instead; the entire world always gives you what you want, so please bear my lack of sympathy. 

moving on, I don't think I need to expressly say it, but I will anyway: dating men is self harm. it's foolish; you endanger yourself and everyone around you. no, I am not infantilizing you when I say this. it is just a fact. I know it, and you know it, must I really pull out the beautiful words and string it all together lyrically? we both know the end result and the truth is this; men don't respect you, they do not care for you, and they do not love you beyond how one love's it's property. although I am well aware that when faced with uncomfortable facts women tend to double down often on their beliefs. it's a defense mechanism, so I have nothing to say to that. shut your ears, avert your eyes & scream about how wrong I am, I shall continue to speak to the ones who will listen then.  

I think the reason women on radblr find it so hard to be anti male centric is because of western privilege. due to the fact that the patriarchy you reside in is comfortable enough for you, you lack the empathy required to use your privilege to take radical feminist action & make a solid stance. western countries like America, Uk, etc have a lot of influence, the effects of colonization still ripple across many different countries; it is why popular fads like gender identity and pro-sexual abuse movements blaze through other countries. alternatively we can use this tide in the favor of all women; if western women take up such a bold feminist stance they shall cause a ripple effect and their actions will reflect the struggles of all women. 

However they refuse to do so because they are lazy and lack empathy for women in other countries because they aren't the ones being beaten, raped and sold by their family members into sexual slavery, because they aren't the ones being payed by governments to birth babies like cattle, because they aren't the ones who's parents kill them upon being born, because they aren't child brides (or at least pretend that it's not an issue in their countries), because they are not pawns; they have rights. and they lack empathy for us outside of reblogging posts to reaffirm their beliefs "oh look at those poor dirty countries, how those women suffer" while still being extremely individualistic and male centric. 

women do not need sex, to argue that having PIV / het sex is essential to your life as a woman is not only misogynistic, but homophobic as well. you are a multifaceted individual, your entire being is not tied to sexual acts you commit with men; it is not a need to have sex, you will not die if you do not have sex with men, insinuating so is very incel-like behavior. pleasing men sexually will not grant you liberation, no matter what gratification you claim to get out of it.

centering males is unfeminist. reproducing, marrying and birthing males is an unfeminist action. no amount of revolutionary online 'think' posts will aid in women's liberation unless you, yourself, take action. which brings me to the next point; some reasons & arguments that anti-separatists give: 

—— "it's too extreme": misogyny is extreme. feminism is extreme. you will not be liberated nor contribute to the liberation of anyone else as you drag your feet & hold any entire movement back by co-opting the 'radfem' label as a gender identity while taking no action. then calling everyone who rightfully follows and advocates for the principles of radical feminist 'deranged' and harassing them out of the spaces where they rightfully belong; lesbians & woc especially are a victim to such overwhelming target of harassment by bi/het privileged women as they continue to repeatedly prioritize men and themselves over marginalized minority women.

—— "how dare you say I don't deserve love" love has nothing to do with being deserving or worthy; I think you're too emotionally involved at this point where you cannot give up the privileges you acquire from bedding men, so instead you think yourself a victim of online hate crime. please go back to the preface at the start of this post, I don't want to retype it.

—— "if we stop reproducing with males, they will rape us". is that not more reason to separate from males? distance yourself so that they may never reach you again. being pressured to sleep with males; saying 'no' and getting raped: that is the true face of all males, these creatures will not 'love' you, no matter how much you try to romanticize it. for every 'good' male there is a girl he's harassed, a rapist friend he's defended, a porn watcher he's ignored, a woman he didn't help out, a comment he liked about misogyny. prioritize other women first, not males.

—— "osa women are the majority, they will never stop partnering with males, it's unrealistic to demand so & exclude them from feminism" you see.. here's the thing; separatists, lesbians, actual radfems: we have no systematic power to exclude or oppress osa's from feminism. there is no way to stop these women from benefiting of the labour of lesbians / woc radfems. however they, being part of the oppressor class, largely do have the power to come into radical feminist spaces and co-opt it, dismantle it and reconstruct it to 'function' within the frame work of their comfort (dating men, wearing makeup, watching porn, being hateful to lesbians and woc all the while simply being anti sex slavery and gender critical is enough for them to garner all the attention and positive reaffirmation they require about their male reformist feminism). 

    —— as for the first point; women in china, south korea, women in conservative households or even nuns; these are real women who practice celibacy, they are doing it as we speak, it is possible. have some courage. this is not a new concept and you are certainly not alone in this. 

    —— lastly, separatism not only helps you, but lesbians as well. continuing to force lesbians to be near, and interact with males means continuing a society where we are preyed on by men. I bring this up not because I expect anything of any of you, but rather because you are so quick to bring up words like "solidarity" & "sisterhood" in regards to male reformist osa women. well. I am throwing this back there; solidarity and sisterhood means taking actions that save lesbians from a lesphobic society. (don't worry, I know none of you take lesphobia seriously, this was more a comment on principle than expecting genuine results)

Criticism of radical feminism: lesphobia; as I was alluding to in my fourth point, osa women have a lot of structural power, especially when it comes to oppressing lesbians. and the entirety of radical feminist movement has been infested with political lesbianism; women who believe lesbianism is a choice, that simply not dating males makes you a lesbian, that exclusive same sex attraction is not real — all of this lesphobia has been prevalent since the start of radical feminism. lesbians were a big help to the advancement of women in terms of feminism, yet we were abused for it repeatedly. our voices were silence, we were stripped of our labels as a woman, and as a actual lesbian. even still, to this day so many lesbians continue to be brave and fight for the rights of all women, all we have been given in return is repeated abuse; we are treated like how male-lites and predators and that is proven time and time again on 'r*dblr'. if you are going to start having solidarity with all women ('the majority of the women are osa's') how about prioritizing vulnerable groups? lesbians and women of colour. groups who's labour you've continued to reap from.

hypocrisy of Tumblr radfems: my last critique is the hypocrisy of self-proclaimed Tumblr radfems; spineless. half of you are far too spineless due to your own comfort and privilege; (you excuse imperialism, racist jokes, birthing children and bedding males, why? because these issues don't affect you. did you know there are countries where women are paid to give birth to a minimum of 2-3 children? did you know that child brides, & arrange marriages are still a thing? do you even care? I think not, because you have the choice to not care and only focus on male reformation or defending your favorite r*dblr idols),  you have a disgusting clique mentality and shy away from holding people accountable for their actions, you are focused too much on trans issues and expend so very little energy or time to actually helping all women, you do not prioritize girls but instead groom and encourage them to sleep with men and be abused, you enable the worst inaction between each other all the while deluding yourself that you're achieving something big. you extend your compassion to worst people alive; anyone but a lesbian. women who are racist, women who are lesphobic, who bed men, women who birth men's children, women who cheat, women who sabotage — all of them are given 10000 excuses by self proclaimed radfems, they are never held accountable because perhaps it's your favorite popular blogger, or your mutual, or your friend — radical feminism is a feminist movement, do not derail it by letting your judgement be clouded. focus on what the objective is. 

(and because I know I will be told 'it's just tumblr', the original 6B4T movement was one that was started online too. you have no excuse). I have witnessed countless lesbians be run off radblr because simply asking certain women to be held accountable is apparently "drama/infighting/causing division" & oh — isn't it painfully, laughably funny? that only lesbians, women of colour and separatists are ever accused of 'causing a rift in feminism', isn't it funny that asking you to hold racists and lesphobes accountable is what gets us harassed and chased off a movement of our own creation? isn't it funny how you have more solidarity with osa white women then you will ever have with us? and isn't it funny that only we are told to "let go of a mistake / choice from x & y years ago, don't be mad over it anymore" by people who have no right to give any input? it's hilarious.

I am tired of lesbians and women of color making posts about how they are leaving because r*dblr collectively decided to side with class traitors. I am so very tired.

women and girls, here’s a reminder that you deserve to eat. your goal in life isn’t to be skinny. the world is a happier place when you nurture your body and your mind so they can function properly. enjoy all the different foods and flavors out there without guilt. i love you

i am in a long term straight relationship. i am also a rad fem. you can die mad about it i guess? i am yet to see an argument against this that isn’t literally just “straight women are cum-brained traitors!! obsessed with PENIS!!! they exist only for sex!!! their opinions are all based on PENIS!!!” which is like…. the most classic form of misogyny ever lol.

tumblr gender havers having a conniption over south korean feminists oh so naively "allying" themselves with radfems is so transparent. why don't you think south korean women are capable of holding their own radical feminist thoughts and perspectives? the 4b movement IS a radical feminist movement. south korean women are fully capable of being radical feminists in their own damm right, and trans people are not actually the centre of the universe.

All I have to say about this pride month's discourse is I'm about to start unfollowing people if I keep having to see the same women who were happily reblogging 4B movement posts suddenly wringing hands crying heterophobia over anyone wishing we could have that level of female class consciousness and solidarity here too. Lesbians are not out here trying to press you into service picking vegetables on the lesbian commune, you're embarrassing yourselves.

it's not clitor-YOU, it's clitor-US. take my hand.

Warning! Tumblr user @viljaisuus is a terf and likes harassing trans women about their identities. I don’t use a Computer so I can’t do it but can someone please mark her for shinigami eyes? This much transmisogyny is NOT how I wanted to start my week 🥺

Some of the Americans on here would really rather 'make a point' to the Democrats than prevent DONALD TRUMP from getting a second term and that's because they consider their ideological purity to be more important than material political impact

you only need to look at the way being intersex is often referred to by doctors and by TERFs to understand the damage the "sex is biological" rhetoric does

in case you're not familiar, the term I'm referring to specifically is DSD or Disorders of Sex Development

to someone who truly deeply believes that sex is natural, being intersex will always be disordered or defective. they insist on continuing to label us (intersex folk) as "men with DSD" or as "women with DSD" in order to reinforce the sex binary. they will not let intersex people be proof of the truly social nature of sex as a category, because they will not even see us as intersex. delete "sex is biological, gender is social" from your vocabulary. please and thank you

hijabs are misogynistic. nijabs are misogynistic. burkas are misogynistic. 

any religion that makes a woman cover herself because women are ‘unclean’ is MISOGYNISTIC. any religion that considers women to be intrinsically more sinful than men is MISOGYNISTIC. i don’t care if you’re catholic or muslim or jewish, if your religion requires women to cover themselves when men don’t have to, then your religion is sexist.

something i keep seeing among all the celibacy discussions is this argument that we shouldn't restrict women from trying to find "love". but what does love mean? love is as much defined by our social realities as everything else involving sex & sexuality. love, romance & partnership are not neutral concepts. heterosexist patriarchy wields the ideal of love against women and our class interests, to instill in us that love is the only thing we should aspire for. that love is marriage, children, self-sacrifice, & submission to a man. fantasies of love are one part of female socialisation into femininity & heterosexuality. given men are socialised not for the capacity of love in its purest sense but for dominance and ownership, how is it you are hoping to find love with them? can you find love and partnership that is truly free of the inequalities of capitalism & patriarchy? just as we interrogate sex we should interrogate love.

i am at the point where i no longer entertain delusions of romantic love with a man. i am not happy to settle for "what i can get" from a man, which honestly i don't think would ever be very much. watching and learning from the older women in my family it seems like the "love" of men is not worth having. what i am searching for instead is community and love among women. romantic or sexual love from men is not love's only form, love's only source. but that is what they would like you to believe.

hey quick question, what do radical feminism has to say about heels and makeup? I know historically men used to wear heels and then women did too, but I don’t know if wearing heels has somehow been twisted by the patriarchy. I also want to know the same thing about makeup, and all the things that are associated with femininity. I also maybe understood that radical feminism doesn’t believe in concepts like femininity and masculinity, could you explain why? Thank you.

Okay reasons off the top of my head to say no to heels and makeup and femininity in general as advised to me by radical feminism:

expensive

stupid

men aren't socially expected to do these things

waste of time

signals to other women you think of yourself as a human being

gives you more room to be human

can rub your eyes

feet don't hurt

no long lasting health problems

makes you more attractive to men

There is a book called the Beauty Myth that you might be interested in reading. I haven't read it myself nor know if it's strictly radical feminism or just critical of the beauty industry in general, but it's been quoted on radblr and well reviewed.

I think I know what you're talking about with regards to rf not believing in concepts like femininity. Femininity and masculinity are gender roles, and as such they are not innate. This also means they change over time and place. You can see this in your example. It was once part of the male gender role to wear heels and now it's almost strictly part of the female gender role. So, yes, femininity and masculinity DO unfortunately exist, but they are not innate, as evidenced to us by masculine women and feminine men.

I'm so tired of not seeing gnc women anywhere. Literally everywhere i go and in every piece of media women are always so feminine. I don't see gnc women not even on media for post modernist progressive teenagers.

"so when you as a girl or woman express disdain at femininity, it is not because you think "feminine" women are beneath you. it is because you know femininity is beneath every woman and yourself."

it's normal to be insulted by femininity as a girl or woman and it's really simple why.

the core philosophy of patriarchy is that men and women are not defined by their sex but by their sexual roles in the male sexual hierarchy (a naturalistic fallacy). the philosophy of patriarchy cannot allow for equality at any given point, because a man ceases to be a man if he is not dominant and a woman seizes to be a woman if she is not submissive. keep this in mind.

so a woman as defined by patriarchy is a complementary thing (non-human, like animals or "nature") to a man's estate. the woman identity, as construed by patriarchy, exists solely for male pleasure and estate. that means the woman is only a woman if (it/she) is an asset to a male's estate. so it/she must be a wife, a concubine, a tradeable daughter (this is opportunity for wealth), a prostitute or mother. please note, in all these roles, a woman is always meant to be subordinate or she/it is not a woman.

now remember, this is only patriarchal philosophy, but this philosophy/worldview needs to become an ideology and way of life. so patriarchs, in order to justify their made-up bullshit about the sexes and their right to exploit without consequences, must naturalize this worldview. they can create patriarchal religions (for whichever has the power over life and death defines the value and purpose of a soul) and language (whoever defines the world controls how it is perceived).

but CLOTHES are an expression of both. clothes, aside from simply being utilitarian (even in ancient times), were visual symbols denoting things like class, age, sex, nationality, and beliefs. NOW UNDERSTAND, the first class distinction in human societies was between men and women. men were higher humans hence were to be treated as a distinct upper class, and women were lower-class.

class distinction via sex was the first kind of class distinction. so it became increasingly important to the patriarchal state that women and men had to dress according to their class (the Old Testament of the Bible shows that this was indeed important to early patriarchal states in the ANE via verses like Deuteronomy 22:5 which reads, “A woman shall not wear a man’s garment, nor shall a man put on a woman’s cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.”) In short, clothes do not have sex (no garment can chan he your chromosomes), but they do have sex-class (which is gender).

in the development of patriarchy, the veil in the ancient near east, became a symbol of women's sexual status, publicly announcing them as married, concubines, virgins, etc. (i encourage you to read The Beginning of Patriarchy by Gerda Lerner for more in-depth information on all this). clothes then, and today, have always been about determining women as a sexual class and what role they performed in that sexual class (modest, up for sale, married, low-value, lesbian/deviant).

because men get to define what women are, they get to define what our clothes mean. they get to decide if something is modest or if a woman is "asking for it."

what does this have to do with femininity?

patriarchal belief= a woman is a thing, defined explicitly by her inequality to man, that exists purely for the pleasure and purpose of the man. this means a woman can only be a sexual slave (whether as a mother/wife or a whore) and cannot live or exist outside of this male-defined sexuality (temptress/justified sexualization of underage girls) without becoming something other than a woman (a monster, a witch, ungodly, mentally ill). since it was made for man, it cannot pursue interests outside of pleasing him and still be a natural, healthy thing.

enter gender.

femininity (and gender) is how women are regulated by the patriarchal state. it is a costume, a uniform, that signifies an obedient subordinate, but it is also a performance that is constantly tested and scored. women with low scores get re-educated or removed from society (via death or ostracization). femininity is how women are policed. all you have to do is to look at the traits of femininity and it's rules.

the natural female face/body should always be palatable, pleasing and presentable to the man and what he specifically finds attractive (so it doesn't matter that you're from a different culture or of a different class, if you're dressing "modestly" or "promiscuously"--this is the only primary rule: that you please men and that you are tasteful to the man who fancies you)

this means that the woman's health is secondary and her body should be editable, adaptable, picked apart and put back together on a whim, on any and every level to appeal to any man who wants her (cosmetic surgery, corsets, trends)

nurture is paramount to the character of a woman (because a woman is meant to be an excellent breeder)

softness and smallness (signals submissiveness, passiveness, defeat, weakness--all of which are proper womanly behaviour)

martyrdom (a woman exists for the preservation of the man and his estate)

silence (this communicates mental submission which is important, women should not voice their experiences, grievances, frustrations, desires, stories because she is showing agency and none of these qualities aid her identity as a sexual servant)

i want you to look at and analyze, even within your own cultures, what femininity is defined as wherever it exists, and then see if you can find any connection to how it enforces the idea of the patriarchal woman-thing. the entire performance, clothing and behaviour, is enforced in order to justify the fictional woman-thing in patriarchal imagination.

but you are a human being.

you have always been able to think, feel, disagree, feel anger . . . because you are a person with a sense of dignity, history and purpose outside male-defined sexuality. so when you as a girl or woman express disdain at femininity, it is not because you think "feminine" women are beneath you. it is because you know femininity is beneath every woman and yourself.

the capitalistically driven insecurity market that pushes women to seek out the security of male validation is beneath all of us. the performance is beneath all of us. we were human before we were mothers, wives, sex workers. we were beautiful and wonderful before makeup. we were human before men looked at us and called us fuckable. we were powerful and divine before men told us we were demonic and simply angelic, servants of gods rather than goddesses ourselves. we had the capacity to create and invent the world before men told us we didn't have heads for learning.

we have always been human and always will be.

femininity is a patriarchal polemic against our humanity. it's fundamental philosophy disagrees with the reality of us. that's why there's so much anger and fear around this culture.

some of us, as girls, resented the fact that our mothers asked us to swallow the fact that they accepted (as right) their humiliation and ours. that they wanted us to show men and boys that we accepted that we were made to be humiliated. of course we got angry. of course we felt confused. didn't our mothers, sisters, aunts, friends care that this performance was never-ending humiliation as we were forced to parade ourselves in order to compete for male approval? in front of the eyes of men and boys we knew mocked us for everything? so we said, we're not like other girls. other girls want to keep up with this. maybe they like humiliation? but we can't live this way. something must be wrong with us, or with them. they're sheep, or we're disgusting lesbians. but the truth is that we're all just in a world of pain and desperation.

your (feminine) clothes are not made with you in mind, but they are also made to keep you minding yourself. checking yourself. making sure your bra doesn't show. your underwear doesn't slip. your belly isn't too prominent. it keeps you eager to perform your role. to win against a race you can't even define because you haven't ever questioned if it ends. you get approval from the state because you are trained to self-regulate, and you have been trained well. the relief you feel at the approval of other girls or boys is that they are giving you a high score. which means you are safe. you are beautiful, you are a good performer. you will be picked and not left behind.

you may say you dress for the girls, but that's part of the problem, still. you and the girls are. you are still agreeing with the political philosophy of patriarchy when you uncritically wear the uniform of the woman-thing. you think of yourself as the woman-thing. you think of your face and body as infinitely editable. delete the breasts, delete the pores, enlarge the eyes like you're a doll on a Wii avatar creator. and so other girls are scared of being themselves because you all know there's something here to fear. there's rejection and punishment waiting for pretty ladies who don't comply.

but you're a living, complete human being, darling. you are an ecosystem with mysteries as old as the universe in you. you are a person that deserves to be here fully and freely. this is your world, too. our world.

so you see why gender cannot be reclaimed by us in a meaningful sense? it is a performance that is invented, re-invented and validated by the philosophy of our dehumanization. it will never be independent of it in this system.

you are worth the freedom and strength you can give yourself. you are worth the fight out of this.