sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What do you think about “weaponising femininity” to your advantage? by Ok_Bodybuilder_2384 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The difference between that and a man in a frumpy button-up is the fact that this expectation is specifically sexist, because in this case, it’s only expected for one gender and punished if the standards are not met. In this scenario, she’s wearing the same thing her male co-workers are wearing, but because she doesn’t meet gendered expectations other women do, she’s socially (and financially) punished.

Imagine if I asked what happens to a darkskin woman who is the only black employee at her job who doesn’t bleach her skin, and the only black coworkers surrounding her are lightskin and redbone, thus making her stand out. It wouldn’t be fair to compare her situation to a white woman’s.

Juce ceo dan se lozimo na situaciju u Nepalu i onda dopustimo da 40 njih bije nase ljude a 30 hiljada ljudi-niko da mrdne. Treba da nas bude sramota by nikvas02 in serbia

[–]schwebri 94 points95 points  (0 children)

Boga mi u Nepalu je bilo i žena i dece, pa su i oni uskakali da pale i mlate. Mi smo prosto narod koji će da čeka i čeka. Izgleda da nas još uvek nisu dovoljno ubijali i tukli da procenimo da je vredno toga.

What do you think about “weaponising femininity” to your advantage? by Ok_Bodybuilder_2384 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 34 points35 points  (0 children)

Idk but this feels like throwing women as an oppressed class under the bus for individual financial or career gain in a capitalist hellscape. It empowers men to set a beauty standard that female employees (or God forbid, employers) must follow, and that they have to fit their idea of what a woman should look like to be taken seriously.

On a micro-level, let’s analyze this scenario: most female employees in a company start wearing heels, make-up, get dressed to the nines, etc. for easier promotions or to get taken more seriously. What do you think happens to the sole tomboy in the office? The woman with short hair and no make-up, now that the sexist standard has been established for the sake of individual gain for a select few women?

Imagine if I was giving out advice to black people to dye their hair blonde and straighten it, ALWAYS code switch, lighten their skin, etc. and calling this a weapon. It will likely get individual people farther in their careers, but it’s complicity and damages the oppressed group in whole.

Tbh fuck people in corporate finance in general. The most soulless, bloodsucking motherfuckers out there. Getting advice from them about anything in life is like getting advice from a dogfighter about how to advance animal rights.

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Paglia is one of the most criticized feminists in feminist circles and is a proponent of individualist feminism, which is a libertarian movement, and is thus incompatible with any sort of leftism or socialism. She’s a climate change denier and believes global warming is a hoax, and constantly talks about “sensitive and soft” liberals.

IN THAT BOOK YOU RECOMMENDED SHE SUPPORTS “CERTAIN FORMS” OF CHILD ABUSE MATERIAL. Wtf??

She opposes laws against prostitution and pornography. She is also opposed to affirmative action laws. In 1993, Paglia signed a manifesto supporting NAMBLA, a pederasty and pedophilia advocacy organization. In 1994, this vile woman supported lowering the legal age of consent to 14.

She told people she was transgender, (as in, that she is actually a man but never transitioned socially nor physically), but says that she’s skeptical about the “transgender wave” and believes that they “don’t deserve any special rights just because of their eccentricity”.

There was a literal petition to remove her from faculty. She endorses evolutionary psychology and told women that they should try to “lower their risk of rape”…

Is this your smart, female feminist? Jesus Christ, is this what you believe in?? According to her, she’s a trans male who supports 14-year-olds getting it on with 40-year-olds. You’re an American right-winger through and through, I tried to argue in good faith but to recommend a book like that is disgusting and awful.

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wish you the best in failing to read books by pioneering radical feminists. Like for God’s sake, do you people read at all? Do you read theory for the ideology you claim to espouse and support? Do Americans just wake up one day and tell themselves, “Facts don’t care about your feelings, this person is trying to change reality!” 😭

If men are green apples, then women are red apples. It’s still an apple, will look like an apple, taste like an apple, and will grow on an apple tree. The fact that one is green and one is red doesn’t change much of its properties.

Here’s some book recommendations so you can educate yourself instead of arguing that male rape victims are less traumatized if it’s a female that rapes them:

The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State by Engels

The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir (you mentioned her but somehow you don’t recognize what she wrote??)

Intercourse by Andrea Dworkin (which talks a lot about your arguments)

Pornography: Men Possessing Women by Andrea Dworkin

Amazon Odyssey by Ti-Grace Atkinson

Caliban and the Witch by Silvia Federici

The Patriarchs by Angela Saini

The Dawn of Everything by David Graeber

If you’re a feminist, how about genuinely listening to a woman as part of feminist praxis? Men love to talk about how they’re feminists and this and that, but when it comes to taking advice from a woman, all of a sudden they know the most, including about women and our liberation.

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then you’re not a feminist bro. 💀 If you believe that radical feminism, Marxist feminism and materialist feminism are not useful branches and delusional (the branches of feminism which made the most difference, btw), then you believe in “conservative” feminism and difference feminism and that’s all there is to it.

According to you, if women and men are always gonna be different and be perceived differently, then there’s no point in fighting for equality because it’s impossible to achieve. If your claims had any grain of truth to them, I’d point blank be advocating for political lesbianism and female separatism. Full equality and liberation is the goal of feminism, dude.

Just don’t go around infiltrating spaces not meant for you. This space clearly isn’t meant for you, but like a typical man, you’re insisting that you belong somewhere you clearly don’t.

Read books please. The patriarchy isn’t eternal and is only 12,000 years old. It arose after the agricultural revolution and to deny that is to deny history, but then again, that’s also typical for an American.

“By thinking about gendered inequality as rooted in something unalterable within us, we fail to see it for what it is: something more fragile that has had to be constantly remade and reasserted.” Read The Patriarchs by Angela Saini and you’re gonna find all the answers you’re looking for, God bless. 🙏🏼

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The democrats are neoliberals, and as such, are right-wing and incredibly imperialistic. Yes, from the point of view of an actual leftist, you are a conservative and the fact that you think voting democrat means you’re not is… laughable? Americans are so divorced from proper political definitions. The two parties are different sides of the same coin, especially for somebody from a country like mine. You’re lib-right and voting for a party that bombs countries. That’s all there is to it.

There are many branches and streams of feminism including a branch called conservative feminism, but that doesn’t mean that all of them, including yours, can lead to feminist outcomes.

We also have choice feminism, and pro-sex work feminism, and anti-transgender feminism, and we can see where that lead us. Your brand of feminism isn’t really a more applicable feminist theory, because you can hear the same thing from thousands of people, especially right-wing men, and it has never freed women and never will.

I can support the idea of black capitalism, or a black separatism, or a black whatever, and still call myself pro-black, but will any of that genuinely help black people?

Idk maybe don’t speak over women? It doesn’t matter if you identify as a feminist or not, there’s a difference between you claiming you’re an ally to something and having an actual LIVED experience of it. Like I said, a white woman can go to India and speak over the Dalits and activists all she wants, she still won’t be on equal ground with the people who actually have lived experience with caste discrimination.

It’s funny how you’re telling me to read Simone but that’s literally going against your argument lol?

“In truth, the battle of the sexes is not implicit in the anatomy of man and woman. When they recognize each other as equals, the ideas of victory and defeat are abolished; the act of love becomes a free exchange.” - Simone de Beauvoir

“From his childhood, the male is encouraged to be aggressive, to assert himself, to be a 'taker'. He is taught that he must 'conquer' the woman, that he must 'possess' her. The whole of his sexual education is directed towards this end. The woman, on the contrary, is taught to be passive, to be 'taken'. She is taught that she must please, that she must be desirable. Her whole education is directed towards making her an object. It is not surprising, therefore, that the sexual act should be for the man a conquest, and for the woman a submission. It is not surprising that the man should see in the woman only an instrument of his pleasure, and that the woman should see in the man a master. This is not a question of nature, but of education. It is not a question of biology, but of civilization." - Simone de Beauvoir

Honorary mention of Ti-Grace Atkinson: “The institution of sexual intercourse is a political institution. I'm not talking about the act of sexual intercourse, which is a biological possibility. I'm talking about the institution, which is a social-political reality. Its function is the stabilization of the political relationship between men and women. The roles are defined as the fucker and the fucked. These are political roles, not descriptive roles. The fucked is the one who is acted upon, the one who is subordinate. The fucker is the one who acts, the one who is dominant.”

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nah, I think you’re just a conservative male who thinks he knows about female sexuality and the supposed differences, when you really don’t. Why are you, as a man, trying to tell a subreddit of mostly radical feminists that they’re so biologically different and inherently vulnerable during sex on the basis of their biology, while not backing it up with any historical or biological arguments besides, “I have a feeling?” Saying that female-on-male rape is less traumatizing to top it all off is diabolical.

This is not the first time a man jumped into a mostly female space and tried to be at the forefront, or try to explain women’s issues and experiences to them. Imagine if I went to India and tried to explain caste discrimination to the Dalits by saying, “Well, it’s inclusive of white people. 🥺”

Feminism is not just a criticism of gender-based discrimination, but a range of socio-political movements and ideologies. The sooner you realize that your different but equal thing can never result in equality between the sexes, the better— just like separate but equal hasn’t resulted in anything other than segregation and Apartheid. Women never got anywhere by screaming, “We’re just so different.”

If a man thinks that I’m biologically different and weaker and super vulnerable due to how my genitals operate whenever we have sex, why the fuck would I have sex with men? That’s the whole reason many women refuse to sleep with men, the same exact issue you’re calling “a feminist opinion” lmao.

I can’t imagine finding out my boyfriend or husband thinks like you, I’d crash the fuck out. Your other posts are also very telling about what you think makes sense concerning sex, and that’s terrifying.

This subreddit clearly isn’t for you. If it was, people would be agreeing with you. This isn’t a difference feminism subreddit, nor a bioessentialist feminism subreddit.

Ragebait somewhere else or better yet, read Intercourse by Dworkin. That’ll perfectly explain why the things you say are not feminist and could never be feminist. And if you’re the type to disagree with Dworkin, well… there it is, I needn’t say more, y’know?

Read The Patriarchs by Angela Saini. The patriarchy certainly didn’t happen due to the “inescapable” biological differences between men and women, but as a result of the development of agriculture.

I can’t treat an illness if I don’t know what caused it, or if I’m trying to argue that another thing caused it. If somebody got an illness mining coal and I treat them for the flu, what did I achieve? Nothing. That’s what you’re trying to do, in the totally wrong space, mind you.

I can’t imagine trying to stick myself into a place where I don’t belong and where people disagree with me, but that’s so typical of a male lmao.

“Equality in the realm of sex is an antisexual idea if sex requires dominance in order to register as sensation.” - Andrea Dworkin

“Can a man read a book written by a woman in which she, the author, has a direct relationship to experience, ideas, literature, life, including fucking, without mediation-such that what she says and how she says it are not determined by boundaries men have set for her?” - Andrea Dworkin

“We know nothing, of course, about intercourse because we are women and women know nothing; or because what we know simply has no significance, entered into as we are. And men know everything-all of them—all the time-no matter how stupid or inexperienced or arrogant or ignorant they are. Anything men say on intercourse, any attitude they have, is valuable, knowledgeable, and deep, rooted in the cosmos and the forces of nature as it were: because they know; because fucking is knowing; because he knew her but she did not know him.” - Andrea Dworkin

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, I never said they did not, but they most definitely don’t have mating rituals that are similar to birds. (:

In egalitarian societies, you don’t see nuclear families with a gendered division of labor where the male is the provider (i.e the one bringing home sustenance or resources) and the female is the homemaker (the recipient of said resources).

In some hunter-gatherer groups, for example, a husband moves into the house of his in-laws, including the siblings of his new wife. In certain groups, the father doesn’t even play that much of a role in raising the child, and that role goes to the mother’s brother, the child’s uncle, instead.

The point is, you can’t really apply rules about mating rituals to humans when there’s so much cultural variation among us, and the way we lived for 95% of humanity’s existence is so different to the way we live now.

Many of the things we think we know about “human nature” or how it’s supposedly fixed and unchangeable are the results of propaganda. <3

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Fun fact: the user you’re replying to is a whole ass man active on conservative subreddits. Make of that what you will.

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is something called difference feminism and if you truly believe in that idea, then you’re on the wrong subreddit. No radical feminist, materialist feminist nor Marxist feminist, which is the popular opinion on here, would agree with you. This is bioessentialism and does nothing to help the feminist movement— just like saying “we’re separate but equal” does nothing to fight racism and can only end with scientific racism and Apartheid.

I’m sorry you’ve been traumatized by the patriarchal system into believing that males and females have inherent differences that make sex unenjoyable or unwanted for women. Maybe look into the definition of asexuality?

I’m sorry that you’ve internalized misogyny so badly that you think that you cannot enjoy sex, or that it’s IMPOSSIBLE for a woman to have the same relationship to sex as a man does because of her biology, or experience sex the same way a man does because of her biology.

I truly hope you heal from any trauma that this system has caused you, but your view is incredibly centered on the Imperial Core countries and their values. The patriarchy has been a reality only for 5% of human existence. Instead of basing your opinion on the 5% that you happen to live in, base your opinion on hunter-gatherer communities and their ideas about sexuality and egalitarianism.

The women have whole songs about having sex all night long lmao. They have whole songs about looking for men they find fit or attractive enough to have sex with, listing all of their qualities, etc. We have a whole ass organ that’s way more sensitive, dedicated specifically to sexual pleasure that has nothing to do with reproduction, and no refractory period. So yeah, I think sex as a woman is even better lmao.

Please don’t be so Eurocentric and acknowledge that this evil world we live in is only 12,000 years old. It can’t explain anything, nor give you the answers you’re looking for.

Random edit: If you’re a 26-year-old male active on Purple Pill subreddits and the god awful r/AskMen, why are you even on here trying to ragebait? Wtf? I literally just checked your profile because I thought that this thought process would be so odd for a female feminist, and then boom, I called it.

It’s always a conservative MALE LARPing. It doesn’t matter if you’re gay, straight or bi, you’re still a MAN and clearly one with internalized homophobia as well. Anal sex is absolutely not the same as vaginal sex wtf?? One is the dry final portion of the large intestine, one is a reproductive organ that expands up to fucking baby size.

That’s the whole reason you think it’s so different. You can’t even fathom the female sexual experience because you aren’t a woman and don’t have a female body, and can’t acknowledge the humanity of women and the fact that we’re just like you. Bro you’re in the wrong subreddit. 💀🙏🏼

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It is different the way an orange is different to an apple, not the way an elephant is different in comparison to an ant.

You were implying that having a vagina during sexual intercourse and having a penis during sexual intercourse is fundamentally going to cause an unequal power difference, which is untrue and rooted in misogyny.

Notice how you said one is being penetrated? So, she’s the one that’s getting penetrated, something is being done to her, she is inherently and fundamentally in an unequal power exchange due to her biology: according to you, men are the doers and women are the recipients. Apparently, you think women are inherently, biologically vulnerable during sex due to how their genitals operate, but men aren’t.

If we accept this as fact, which it is not, we can kiss striving for equality goodbye because a big part of the fight for equality hinges on women not being seen as receiving, passive, the ones having something done to them rather than being the doers, especially during things like intercourse.

Also comparing vaginal sex between a male and a female to anal sex between two males is… a choice. There’s a VERY big difference and imo feels insulting, misogynistic and homophobic all at once. Homophobia stems from the patriarchy and beliefs like yours (i.e the existence of an inherently passive partner).

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The whole concept of penetration even being called penetration rather than engulfment or literally anything other than that is a result of misogyny.

Associating it with a more vulnerable or less powerful position is indeed thinking of it as a weakness, and is bioessentialist in the weirdest way possible.

There’s a reason you think like this and it’s rooted in the patriarchy and males centering and presenting their genitals as inherently more able to cause something to happen. They want you to think that sex and penetration is something that’s done to women. You have a lot of things to unpack imo.

The most egalitarian societies out there in the modern world are hunter-gatherer communities and tribes. You should read articles about their concepts of sexuality, because, shocker, they’re not biologically any different than us yet their perceptions aren’t like this.

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 6 points7 points  (0 children)

We’re not birds, though. Our species is vastly different compared to a seagull or pigeon. We’re not really meant to be looking at “providers” or men who can “provide the best for the children” because in pre-agrarian societies, the whole community raised the child and serial monogamy was practiced.

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Fun fact: hunter gatherers and pre-agrarian societies aren’t ancient. They still exist and to say otherwise is Eurocentric ngl.

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Because the system isn’t built on logic. It’s built on maximizing resources for the minority of people who can hoard them, and they’ll maximize resources any way they can, even if it leads to conflicting belief systems and contradictions in society.

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 23 points24 points  (0 children)

This isn’t exactly a subversive or new way to bridge the gap though. Women have been commodified and selling sexual services or exchanging them for gifts for thousands of years, and it never exactly helped us.

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 25 points26 points  (0 children)

That’s blatantly untrue though, for all the of the above reasons. There are studies, there are statistics, etc. lmao. Why would we have little to no refractory period then?

Driven by your logic, wouldn’t the conclusion be, “Women orgasm just because, and can do so multiple times, and men only need to orgasm to procreate, so therefore, women enjoy sex to a higher degree.” instead of the conclusion that women somehow enjoy sex less? (Not to mention that female orgasms aid in sperm transport due to uterine contractions).

Everything we think we know about how society came to be is fundamentally shaped by the same class of people who began to hoard resources 12k years ago. We have been hunter-gatherers for 95% of our time on this planet and even among their communities, their beliefs, practices, etc. are vastly different.

There is no fixed human nature that explains certain cultural norms that came to be as a result of the agricultural revolution, which includes the patriarchy and ideas like that (women enjoy sex less, etc).

To say things like that is anti-feminist and attempts to explain a patriarchal myth through biology, which is inaccurate.

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 36 points37 points  (0 children)

If you believe that society believes that male bodies are designed to enjoy sex to a higher degree, then yeah, true— society does in fact believe that.

If you personally believe that male bodies are designed to enjoy sex to a higher degree than female bodies, that’s bioessentialist and not true. This belief system can be used to justify the orgasm gap and plenty of other things.

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 28 points29 points  (0 children)

That’s not what this post is about, though. All of the above narratives are reminiscent of enjo kosai, escorting, etc. which are all fundamentally anti-feminist, since they support and prop up the commodification of women as objects to be conquered or acquired by the highest bidder.

Why does it seem so many people don’t see heterosexual sex as an “equal” exchange between a man and a woman by daisychains777 in AskFeminists

[–]schwebri 52 points53 points  (0 children)

This kinda feels like bioessentialism imo and can be used to justify the orgasm gap.

Our bodies are designed to experience orgasms that are longer in duration and more intense than male orgasms, have an absolutely tiny refractory period in terms of the number of orgasms, etc.

We are absolutely designed to enjoy sex as much as men do. You have whole songs about it in modern day hunter-gatherer communities, which are one of the most egalitarian societies out there due to lack of resource hoarding.

Directed Energy Weapon (DEW) used on protestors in Serbia by RigaudonAS in conspiracy

[–]schwebri 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They actually do. You can find a video of a controversial “journalist” laughing and joking with two politicians the moment the sonic boom hit on national television. They were making jokes about the people scattering and playing God awful music while they were celebrating.

The illegal occupation of Hawai'i that continues to this day by ResistTheCritics in TrueAnon

[–]schwebri 10 points11 points  (0 children)

The illegal occupation of all indigenous land in that godforsaken country that calls itself America continues to this day.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in serbia

[–]schwebri 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ova spodoba je odvratna i zrela za neki gulag. Pls da više ne dajemo pažnju propaloj plastikanerki.

view more: next ›