silkyradfem #transphobia #sexist at.tumblr.com

A man by nature is gender conforming. He has to change nothing about himself. To be gender nonconforming he has to do something—wear makeup, put on restrictive clothing, adopt a less manageable hairstyle, buy jewelry, shave his body.

A woman by nature is gender nonconforming. She must change herself to conform. To be gender nonconforming she just has to be—throw on comfortable clothing and forget her razors, makeup, styling appliances, and jewelry in a drawer somewhere.

For men, conforming to gender is passive, natural; nonconformity is an active choice. For women, the opposite is true. Her natural existence itself revolts against demands of her gender.

To draw similarity between gnc men and gnc women is to misunderstand the nature of gender itself—it is a set of shackles for women. This means that gnc women are freeing themselves of their chains. But does it not also mean that gnc men are trying on our shackles for fun, with no awareness of the role they play in our lives and none of the pressure to chain themselves in this way that we endure? Do they feel so entitled to our experiences that they can experiment with the most brutal of our feminine beauty rituals and have the audacity to say it validates them? To the point where they demand access to everything women have to ourselves, including but not limited to our spaces in which we can be vulnerable, our anatomy and our language for it, our shared experiences, our names, our very words—women, female, she?

Is a gnc man any more than a mockery of the cages in which we are born?

drkineildwicks #crackpot #quack #fundie at.tumblr.com

To the evolutionists out there:
I just want to say that I feel sorry for the evolutionists, for they say that peer-review is best and yet ridicule Creationists at the same time. Peer-review is not let us have all that agree on one point agree on this point, but let us show this work to those who have differing opinions; if we can all agree, then there must be merit.
I feel sorry for the evolutionists that know so little about history that they call Creationists Nazis—Nazis, who believed in evolution to the point that they made concentration camps to “remove the pollution from the Aryan race and thus form the master race.”

I feel sorry for the evolutionists who think that just because we believe in God, we think science is some sort of fantasy. We know that gravity exists, that physics exist, that dinosaurs and outer space and genetics exist—I daresay we approach science with more humility and awe than evolutionists do, because we approach it from the angle of knowing that the One Who made it all did so from such a high and knowledgeable and caring position that we mere mortals have no hope of fathoming it. We approach the world as a fan does a piece of literature or art: marveling at how it is put together and admiring the Artist Who made it.

Basically, I just feel sorry for evolutionists, for being so busy spewing hate and ridicule that they can’t admire the world around them.


rad-bad-and-dangerous-to-know #transphobia at.tumblr.com

But that's not true. Every transwoman was born with a dick and surgical mods to a penis doesn't make it anything other than a penis that's been carved up and rearranged.

If a man's penis is injured beyond repair and something must be rigged so he is able to urinate, does he automatically become a woman? Of course not. He is a man who survived a life changing traumatic injury. So are transwomen.

It's also worthy of note fewer 15% percent of transwomen have had neovaginas surgically created. That is considered statistically insignificant. If a party of transwomen got together roughly one in ten would have mutilated peens. The other nine would be out swinging.

radbelinda #transphobia #fundie #pratt #conspiracy at.tumblr.com

two rules to live by:

1. if you create a sacred caste of men who cannot be questioned or accused, abusers will do whatever they can to join this caste

2. if you create a group of women it's acceptable to shit on, even when there are valid critiques to be made of said women, men will take that criticism and apply it as viciously as they can to as many women as they can get away with

#'why would a man go to all the effort of dressing as a woman to abuse women when they can abuse women anyway?'#idk why did paedophilic men go to the effort of ordination to access children rather than just fathering children themselves#why do men go through years of med school to assault female patients rather than just going to clubs and finding easy targets

Philosophy Freshman Syndrome Award

TERF Edition

divinedionne #transphobia #enbyphobia #fundie #pratt at.tumblr.com

It's only illogical if you never carefully thought about the difference between a concept and a human being. Between the ego and your essential human essence.

Celebrities are a good example because they have larger-than-life personal brands (concepts) that often obscure their humanity. For example, a superstar like Beyonce is associated with certain concepts in people's imaginations: glamour, sexiness, icon, being a diva etc.

She's so heavily associated with these things that people might use her name as a substitute for saying these words. They might look at an outfit and say "That's so Beyonce" or a way of dancing, behavior, and movement and say "That's Beyonce-esq".

Yet, if you were to take it one step further and say "I identify as a Beyonce" people would find it odd. Because they recognize that although Beyonce is heavily associated with some concepts, she's also a distinct human being. And to" identify as" her is almost like saying she's more of an idea than a real, living breathing person.

Yet, this is precisely what the concept of gender does to women. It takes ideas and aesthetics commonly associated with female human beings (softness, feminity, wearing dresses, certain hairsyles, nurturing a child etc) and uses those things as a substitute for actual living breathing human females walking this earth. This is the reason why gender has been defined as a tool of sexist oppression wielded against women.

To "identify as" Beyonce Knowles-Cater I would have to first remove her humanity (her distinct human thoughts, emotions, ideas, livingness, beingness) and flatten her into a concept, an idea, behaviors, styles of dress, movements that I can embody.

This is what every male who "identifies as" female does. Without exception. And it would be one thing if they did it to cope with some mental illness. But now "You don't need dysphoria to be trans". It's the normalization of female dehumanization.

Ok bye.

yeehaww-cowgirl #fundie #transphobia at.tumblr.com

As a black girl, it’s just impossible for me to ignore the similarities between black face and drag as phenomenons that were/are incredibly normalized in popular culture. Both are offensive exaggerations of an oppressed class to the point of caricaturization by the oppressor class for entertainment and perpetuate harmful stereotypes. The defence line drag apologists always use is that drag is an exploration of gender expression especially for gender non conforming males who were never able to express their femininity and that’s why it’s different from black face in that sense which is just blatant racism. What they don’t know is that white performers often used the excuse of exploring their “inner negro” when in blackface and it was actually a very popular response to blackface criticism lol. And even then..why should women be mocked and made sexual objects in order for men to be able to “express themselves” it’s really just grade A sexism so many drag performers have expressed not thinking that women should participate. There is no other explanation for why drag queens are overwhelmingly much more popular than drag kings and that’s the fact that embodiments of men aren’t seen as jokes. Recently read this really fascinating paper that talks about how similar the two are I strongly recommend it