The scale and cruelty of animal agriculture is staggering. Go vegan, comrades.

bump amber whataboutism

no longer daily health complaint: i’m just so goddamn exhausted.

Thank you. I already pointed this out on another hexbear post about 4B, but this movement is explicitly extremely transmisogynistic and they are not trying to hide it. If we’re trying to be a trans-friendly space this is not something we should be supporting.

I would maybe edit my own original comment to say that radfems engage in “gender essentialism” more broadly because it’s not always necessarily bioessentialism, though of course bioessentialism is a huge part of gender essentialism. And yeah, I totally feel you on how this whole thing always becomes about cis men’s feelings.

I should also clarify that I put “hates men” in quotes just because I know that a lot of chuds claim that feminists hate men when they don’t actually hate men, they’re just angry at patriarchy. I know what you’re talking about with the whole over-the-top “kill all men” takes though, and those are definitely gender essentialist, and the material effects of those statements are directed towards transfems and non-transfem AMAB nonbinary folks rather than cis men. Intersectional feminism and transfeminism are the way to go!

(Totally did not mean to delete my last comment, it was a complete accident, so I’ll just rewrite it as best as I remember it.)

Oh no I totally understand, that is what I meant by “enforcing patriarchal bioessentialism + cissexism” if it wasn’t clear! Gender essentialism is really harmful and antithetical to feminism, as it relies on upholding misogynistic views rather than challenging them (like when TERFs argue that trans women shouldn’t compete with cis women using misogynistic ideas of women as “weaker”.)

I am totally not an advocate for political lesbianism or radical feminism, and please let me know what parts of my phrasing made you uncomfortable, I’ll edit them and do some self-crit. And I definitely need to pick up Whipping Girl soon.

deleted by creator

Oh another thing for the “misandry is totally real it’s just not systemic” people: “misandry” as a term is itself antifeminist. It’s a manosphere and mra chud term that manosphere and mra chuds use as a weapon against feminists. As a comparison: you can say that “all lives matter” has a literal meaning outside the context of its use as a reactionary dogwhistle, but in the real world that’s the way its used and you can’t separate it from that use. Find me a place where “misandry” is discussed as a serious thing that isn’t a reactionary space. You can’t, but good luck. Ironically, the idea of “misandry” is weaponized against women in a misogynistic way by denying them even the ability to express anger at their oppression. If you’re going to go to bat for the idea of “misandry” as a real, coherent issue, even if you add the caveat that it’s not the same as misogyny, just know that you’re going to bat on the side of manosphere and mra chuds.

Women who do actually “hate men” would not hate men if men did not systemically oppress them in every aspect of life. This shit doesn’t exist in a pool of neutral generalized bigotry that could be theoretically directed anywhere and just happens to be worse towards women. We live in a world that oppresses women. And a world in which reactionaries have always tried to discredit feminism by painting it as being motivated by hatred towards men. (And don’t bother bringing up TERFs/radfems, who direct their “hatred of men” towards being misogynistic towards trans women and enforcing patriarchal bioessentialism + cissexism.)

there are definitely a few others in this thread who deserve it

Do none of you people arguing for the existence of misandry understand that “a woman was mean to me once” is not in any way remotely comparable to the systematic undervaluing of women as people for the benefit of men. If you’re a man and you ever feel the need to express a hot take on how misandry totally is a real problem, you have to remember first that you are benefitting from patriarchy right now whether you know it or not and like it or not.

Aaahh shit yeah wrong thread lmao thanks for reminding me

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

This has got to be the clunkiest way they could have phrased that title lmao

In communist China…

Just a reminder to boycott Mcdonald’s

Huh, can you elaborate on what you mean by the mistakes made that alienated other students? I’m curious.

From my perspective, I feel like there’s a lack of militancy (a more focused organizational structure cough vanguard party esque cough would probably help with this) and this tendency to get bogged down with the idea of organizing for organizing’s sake. I’m curious to hear your critiques.

I mean even the Harvard students acknowledge that this concession is meaningless, but they take it as a win for “organizing”. I just find this whole “organizing for organizing’s sake” idea meaningless. We organize towards specific goals, we don’t organize to prove that organizing works. This valorization of tactics in the abstract is something Western leftists need to pull out of if we ever want any militancy.

Harvard’s Gaza encampment ends after administration agrees to meet

This is the Brown thing all over again isn’t it? Disbanding an encampment over a vague promise to discuss the demands instead of actually fulfilling them? The organizers say that they are aware that this isn’t a win for divestment but that it is a win for organizing and that they’re going to continue the struggle “through other means”? I’m sure they mean what they say but this is just proving to colleges that vaguely promising “discussions” of divestment works to shut down encampments and I feel like other schools are going to start employing this tactic too now that Brown and Harvard have set an example.