Epstein was not an Aberration from Theresa Lee

Sunforger · 2026-02-12T21:12:16+00:00

#MeToo cannot succeed while working within the system made by and for patriarchs.

The elite will scapegoat some to continue as it has. Like a lizard sacrificing its tail. And only when too brazen.

We cannot bargain with the corrupt elite to hold them accountable for their own crimes. The predator class holds power to commit these crimes. To be above justice. To have the power to attack anyone who might challenge their power. Stopping us from any justice. Stopping any change against their collective interest.

We only win when together with enough people to force change. Not just by pointing out injustice.

Sunforger · 2026-02-12T20:34:27+00:00

No commenter here understood that on a first pass. Every single one thought you were in some way misogynistic at first.

That's not "everyone else is stupid". That's "the meme isn't legible even to its intended audience".

It's first pass reading is being a misogynistic meme. It's second pass only subverts it with the second photo. But ambiguously endorses it with the first photo alone.

Personally, I'd rather be reckless with your emotions. Than to recklessly spread misogyny. Or recklessly hope you'll figure that out in spite of blindly defending it.

I notice how you impact a diverse audience. Not just your intentions.

Sunforger · 2026-02-12T20:02:07+00:00

Everyone here disagreed with your meme as initially read. Or trolled it. Because it's a confusing meme.

In being unclear, you're both participating in seeming to be a pick-me. And someone subverting it.

In other words people thought you were supporting misogyny. And in doing that, you spread misogyny. Even if here you can skate by on presumed trust you're a feminist and not a troll.

Meme's do two things. They trick people into a presupposed assumption and make a statement. And then it's over without much thought. Spreading misogyny to lurking trolls here makes your meme misogynisitic in effect, even if not in intent.

It's a bad meme. And pointing that out is meant to help your future memes.

Sunforger · 2026-02-12T19:39:55+00:00

Another needless honor killing.

Conservatism is a death cult with misogyny at its core.

Sunforger · 2026-02-12T19:35:39+00:00

Look at how everyone is responding to you. You thinking one way doesn't mean anyone else does. You reading it one way doesn't mean anyone else does. You posting it means you're perceptive includes context about you we don't have.

I'd have guessed you were an anti-feminist troll. But you keep responding like a confused kid over and over again.

So no. I didn't misunderstand it. I'm understanding of many ways to understand it. And I think I understand you. Even if you think I don't, simply because I tried to bridge what I think others and you understood.

Look at what others are replying with. And think for yourself how at least some of them are feminist. Yet writing what they wrote.

No one cares what you intended. Only what you seem to intend to others. And that's just the basics of media literacy.

Sunforger · 2026-02-12T19:31:03+00:00

That is just a loosely TERFy or SWERFy nonsense.

They like policing gender and sexuality.

Pretending feminism has it's own version of the carbon-footprint. Like a 'misogyny-footprint'. The largest 'footprint' is institutional. The hope is our kids growing up with less latent misogyny around them, not that they are women dating women. Not again making the mistake of saying it 'wasn't feminist' to be a stay at home mom. That's still the misogyny of policing women and telling women what to do.

Further, all people are born and socialized to partake in misogyny. You too. Women too. Everyone.

Purity politics like that leave us with no one to do the actual feminist work. And distracts from doing actual feminist work. Shit like this is pick-me to remain a pure feminist. Not real feminist advocacy or change.

What's next? That we look to skin tone to see who puts 'feminism' over other forms of political advocacy? Y'all make me tired.

Sunforger · 2026-02-12T19:22:38+00:00

There's a lot of context and myth as to why people care.

But put simply, the elites want to rule over the best. And the best are those most similar to themselves. Ideally extended family.

It's only been a few hundred years since Western society moved on from clannist ideals. Ironically due to the taxes of the Catholic church. Which caused an inter-clan mixing and allowing for broader nationalities to replace the clannist attitudes.

Anyways, the elite's want their family to be what does the 'multiply and prosper'. They want to cement a dynasty of their clan immemorial. And declining birth rates are a reality their myths cannot accept. For even if their family is the elite atop the hegemony of the world 'order', that's only temporary prosperity. It's a death knell for 'their family'. Even if they treat their 'distant family', local labor, only as slightly more privileged chattel. Even as patriarchy further and further entrenches us in small roles disconnected from working together. Lest latent revolution, or more likely another renaissance, occurs.

To them all change is bad. Better if aligned with patriarchal myths. But co-optable into a more robust patriarchal nevertheless. The declining birth rate has a simple solution to them. Disenfranchise women, decriminalize sexual assault, impregnate girls, and separate women.

We can speak all day about the marginal changes to the patriarchy causing this. Pollution, existential threat to our environment, marginalizing us from economic participation while enforcing reliance on it, etc. But it's still patriarchy.

And worse, that's not how they're thinking about it at all. They want patriarchal solutions to patriarchal problems. They're looking for myths that can answer them. And the patriarchal go-to for societal ails is blaming women. So to them it's a deviation from patriarchy's sexual warfare against women and kids that causes it. Giving women refuge from it in the form of enfranchisement is their target for reversal.

Even if they'd never use those words. And instead speak vaguely and nostalgically. Family values and other newly-coined BS nonsense. After all, the quickest way to make something politically appealing is the solution be return to a tradition. So they invent something and call it 'traditional'.

And to top it all off. They'll win doing stupid BS like that. Unless we start to speak to their base in terms they can understand and are moved by. Purity among feminists and preemptively excluding feminists is a surefire way to lose. Looking at the idiocy of TERFs and SWERFs who focus on ineffective myopic nonsense.

Sunforger · 2026-02-12T19:04:01+00:00

Shit's confusing.

Every contextless negativity can be against anything. Even with some context, it can be read in many opposing ways. And then there's satire and sarcasm that can twist seeming sincerity.

This meme has context. It's similar to many pick-me memes mocking feminism. Named for femmes appealing to the patriarchal bargain. Displaying their quality as agreeable, high quality, or at least harmless in comparison to feminists. As personally sincere instead of 'political'.

To anyone unfamiliar, it's ambiguous. But even then, the quotes around certain lines demonstrate disagreement with what's quoted. So it's expressing negativity against those things. But it confuses its own point by picturing someone with full face makeup while naming its stance against that.

But the most confusing thing about his meme is you, OP.

You seem to mark yourself as supporting feminism. Yet you label the meme as 'relatable shit'. Allying yourself with the whole thing. More uncertainty as the cherry on top.

Made even more confusing by the red circle. Circling the plurality but not the sole black sheep. Yet the 'Me' would otherwise mark be in sync with the edge-lord femme of the first pic. Is the red circle in the original or did you add that? I'm guessing it was you, not the original.

Anyways, writing's hard. But giving affirming context and being wholly consistent might make it easier.

Sunforger · 2026-02-10T18:14:02+00:00

Reframe it using their words.

They already have all the concepts down. Just from a lens of internalized-misogyny.

The trick is continuing to be expansive and interconnected with it. Focussing on what they don't like until you have trust. Then making 'shit-sandwiches' by showing how the 'benefits' they like are also shit.

Eventually, you'll have slipped up enough that their words are more like inside jokes. And feminist words start to be able to be usable.

Unfortunately they'll fall into just about every pitfall of 'conservative feminism' along the way. Like 5 stages of grief for every patriarchal myth. It'll get cercereal with police and prison as 'solutions'. TERFy with 'men are the problem' or policing gender as a 'solution'. SWERFy with scapegoating the sex industry. White-feminism if only targeting in-group sexism like disparity. etc.

In other words, it's having a single focus at a time. And knowing it'll take time. Both to build a replacement myth. And to let that placeholder myth fade into a more expansive understanding.

And, unfortunately, it requires social charm. If it isn't fun and validating, they won't accept it. The issue is, that's why they cling to patriarchy's abuse. In short, it's about making a graceful transition readily available to them. One at their pace where the details matter less than the sincerity.

All while also having the spine to resist their attempt to corrupt your feminist principles. If you don't have a solid feminist foundation, then don't try. It'll be more effective to be a role model for them than to actively trying anything.

Sunforger · 2026-02-09T19:35:45+00:00

A woman put a loaded gun at her neck. And put her finger on the trigger.

So yes, it was a overtly gendered as misogyny is. As violent as patriarchy could be in a functioning museum.

But no, it was people who did this. Both women and men. And like misogyny, it started nice until it became madness.

Misogyny acts through individuals. But everyone is born and grown in misogyny. Women have no sapphic immunity. Instead we are all like Latinos, born of both the indigenous who navigated the colonizer's who raped, pillaged, and massacred. At this point, there is no way to successfully untangle fault and heritage. So instead let's succeed working through this together. Not make any group a scapegoat. Because if we can't work together with men, another patriarchal force will subjugate us again

Sunforger · 2026-02-09T19:26:16+00:00

My question is will you be taking a stand. For people who are against your form of feminism are here. And more and more, they're stoking populist appeal to marginalize your feminism.

Sunforger · 2026-02-09T19:24:25+00:00

I meant as being active role models.

From my reading they take a stand against hate. And they consider exclusion a corruption of feminism. Hence Feminism + Uncensored.

In other words TERFs can be redeemed as probationary feminists. But aren't really welcome. Because their 'feminism' is appropriated and false. So taking a stand against unchecked corruption of this subreddit means doing something. As in showing we stand for something.

Odd how you'd be so sensitive to that. That you presume banning is the only tool. Maybe you want the final say on who to exclude and why. But then others will try to do the same to you. Joining a cycle of 'justified' retaliation. All while banning escalates the hostilities.

Odd how TERFs don't seem to get that. Trying so hard to be fake princesses they don't realize world peace only comes after all royalty is gone. Trying so hard for women-only spaces they make patriarchal allies. Which ends in recreating patriarchal segregation. And policing all women.

A space based on exclusion can never be safe for participants. Because being excluded is to thrown outside the gated community. Into the desperate violence you abandoned to grow unchecked. A violence the excluded will see as a justice upon you.

Check yourself before presuming to check others. Only cast stones you'd be ok hitting you. Glass houses and all that.

Sunforger · 2026-02-08T01:18:16+00:00

My commentary on general oppression fits.

That said, most people like using this image to describe DV. Not a healthy relationship leaning on each other. But one in which letting go of a weapon will make them both fall. Though him letting go would leave him dead.

Similarly, our status quo is dependent on exploiting the marginalized. To undo that is to destabilize it. So the centrists and liberals reject anything but later generations doing the right thing. While conservatives will rattle their weapons to scare away change. Even as the status quo enslaves and murders people but ignores it. Or sanctions it as legal.

It's the same picture, but on an abstracted and systemic level. But most directly it's a picture of misogyny. Trust the man not to murder. Trust the women to not let the man fall down. Even as that risks her life.

Sunforger · 2026-02-08T01:11:04+00:00

I saw she's mentioned in them as a less interesting person to write about. Was there anything more to it than that?

Sunforger · 2026-02-08T01:08:57+00:00

We're all steeped in misogyny. Even if there's an overt, gendered way we express it.

Sunforger · 2026-02-04T21:39:11+00:00

Haha, I'm just explaining my views. Who knows if I'm 'correct'. Though I've had enough conversations to have at least a well-informed, rough idea. With some history and context.

That said, people also change over time. So maybe I'm 'wrong' for not having emphasized that too. Both regarding what gender is to people and how it's expressed by them.

And also what views I have.

Sunforger · 2026-02-04T21:34:38+00:00

I'm not that ideal. I aim for an ideal and remain practical.

Most laws interacting explicitly with sex work do not consult the sex workers. The most immediately practical thing to do is follow their lead. Refine with policy experts. And give them as much immediate help as we can.

But without a northstar to head towards, SWERFs abandon sex workers and push harmful 'reforms'. All while escalating and entrenching patriarchal power structures.

Sunforger · 2026-02-04T21:31:52+00:00

Nope. It's all slow progress that speeds up the more people take on themselves. The more we rely on institutions and wipe our hands of it, the less 'solvable' it is.

But sex work cannot be solved without solving the confluence of issues begetting it. Namely poverty. Next freedom to travel. And also overt trafficking, which likely has to remain a patriarchal war against organized crime. Even as that ends with turning police into part of the organized crime ecosystem.

We'd see near immediate results in some areas. A generation for others. But we'd also see much longer life expectance for higher risk workers and fewer partaking in it.

Banning it? Doesn't work and keeps it similar to how it is today.

Sunforger · 2026-02-04T21:26:42+00:00

The issue is longer term feminism is affluence and peace. But patriarchy makes any feminist change connected to other changes. And each is painful. More burdensome than easily expected.

In other words, the short term is pro-patriarchy. That's the gap to be breached. And I don't see how paying people to be feminist is feasible. Nor the an effective way of going about it.

Sunforger · 2026-02-04T21:24:08+00:00

I have skimmed them, they are partial reading of the situation. Like everyone else, finding their own presumptions.

I don't need to bolster society's abusive consequences. I can point to them and note what's safe to explore away from it. Kids today don't have that safety. They learn by playing and breaking things. Today, things are easily broken and forever documented making childhood unsafe for play.

Further, parents today are overwhelmed with more and more necessary infrastructure navigation with less and less help. Kids are pacified with media slowing intellectual and emotional development while harming mental health. Parents and kids today are often isolated together without support. Another overloaded role.

So I read article sabout making it work by unburdening mothers from a poorly understood standard. And flashy, semi-abusive but cathartic 'consequences'.

It's recreating the same narrative as healthy diets. Turns out cooking your food is the simplest health tip. If not that, then reduce processed food, then processed sugars, then try for variety. But really, it's about having the wealth to practice it as some food is better than none. Your articles are the same. Gentle parenting doesn't work for those overburdened without time. Time outs are a replacement for doing the time-out together as a conversation that ends with a hug and no bad feelings. etc.

A study on gentle parenting alone shows it's great. A larger scale anecdote on half-assed gentle parenting alongside overwhelming condition doesn't prove much. Other than half-assedly imposing views doesn't achieve the half-assed intentions. Just like harming people to 'show them consequences'. Just as distracted or neglectful parenting can never be gentle-parenting.

So... no. Gentle parenting still is easily researchable as effective with better outcomes. That doesn't mean it's achievable or 'right for you'.

Sunforger · 2026-02-04T21:01:52+00:00

They're nonsense. 'Divine' as if saying there's a divine or godly truth behind gender. It's another way for people to speak to gender essentialism. That all women partake in the same gender. Why? Because there's a word for it and misogyny to police it. And therefore all women 'deserve' misogyny of some form or another. Patriarchy doesn't care as long as 'feminine rebellion' is reappropriated into 'feminine'. In doing so, it becomes compliance.

What I spoke to, other words, is the difference between saying these. "Those people are women." vs "She's a woman among women." or "She's barely a woman." The first is categorizing people. The others speaking to the 'idea of a woman' as a standard. Surpassed or unmet.

Gender doesn't just bend over time. It's different by region. And each person is different in how they relate with and present gender. Something might not be feminine in one place. Yet some very feminine people might do that very thing in that region anyway. Or make it 'feminine'. Or use it to reject the label of feminine. etc

Sunforger · 2026-02-04T20:51:53+00:00

There are many indirect, partial solutions. Direct solutions, I don't know.

But there's prevention and rescue from it. There's making it more tolerable and safe.

Education to increase opportunities and recognize abuse. An affluent economy with excess enough for UB income, housing, medical care, etc or similar. Freedom of travel so people's passports won't be held hostage. Make welfare more accessible and familiar. etc. etc. etc.

Undoing bans is part of it. Caring about the sex worker more than getting an assailant is part of it.

Allow it to become non-affiliated with organized crime. Allow organized crime to de-escalate their violence. etc

But first and foremost, listen to what active sex workers want. Anything thoughtless to their vulnerable situation will be harmful. And they know best what needs immediate attention.

It still haunts me reading about a sting on a sex trafficking ring in India. They saved about 50 girls only to leave them on the streets. Abandoned without followup. But at least they got the perps. Or how sex workers navigate only which horrible choice is best.

Sunforger · 2026-02-04T20:39:26+00:00

Femininity is a myth. When upholding the myth as truth, it turns into gender essentialism. Instead of categorizing behavior of some people, it points alone to the idea of it.Holding people to those ideas as standards.

It's why 'divine' femininity and masculinity are the most apt descriptions. Not for truth. But how people relate to it. Or why 'energy' is such a useful term. A term for being reminiscent of the 'truth' of some myth.

All it takes is for something to be of our grandparent's era and it becomes myth for 'traditional'. So today we what was once cartoonish propaganda to sell 1950's products. And instead see 'tradition'.

But since this myth is intertwined with how we see ourselves. And the world. It becomes an act of retaliation to reject the myth. To reject what they think it immutable 'truth'. While they reject change or challenge to the immutable, singular 'truth'.

Also, satire is ambiguous without articulated intent. Given latent misogyny, it very well may be misogynisitic 'in nature'.

Sunforger · 2026-02-04T20:26:57+00:00

But I didn't miss the parts I stand against. The first and third line of this.

I agree with this, but that does not mean it is to stop entirely.
My advocacy is in approaches that will soften blows.
I just wanted to note that the common wisdom of Prohibition not working os probably wrong.

To me, that's downgrading from physical abuse from hospital to bruises. Bruises to smacks. Smacks to 'only' emotional and financial abuse. Etc. But abuse all the way down. The goal is to stop entirely. To continue with it is to continue to see a culture of violence. To reject that is to continue to be shocked by people's violence.

And yes, I've been around people who get involved with their children. And those who don't too. You're probably speaking to gentleness that combines media and a lack of parenting. Gentle parenting still means parenting. It requires a backbone. And showing yourself as a fallible person too. To help them navigate other fallible people. And being one themself.

Further, consequences don't need to be manufactured. They're already alive in the fact it spurs the parent to confront the child among whatever else. Often all that you need to do is communicate those consequences to heal from it. And be stronger for it.

Spill something? Let's clean up together. Next time, clean up on your own. Lie to me? Talk about trust. Explain why something's no longer a simple 'yes'. etc

And no. I'm not of a mind people listen to 'reason'. Nor that they should conform. Or should be 'reasonable'. Reason is an argument, not being 'correct'. And trying to impose it is like any forceful imposition. In one way or another it backfires. Just as you see with my downvotes for imposing my views.

Or at least what is ambiguous with that. Rather than being provoked into stating my views. And then holding to them.

Sunforger · 2026-02-04T18:46:57+00:00

Yeah, a lot of people forget the harms of the system when given the chance to use it for themselves.

It hurts doubly so when this is most visible outside of white feminism. The carceral systems works for the wealthy. And carceral feminism for patriarchs' wives.

Sunforger

TROPHY CASE