You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Rant’ tag.

The RPOJ comes for thee.

Greetings fellow blog travellers, today we have a special treat as we get to look through the looking glass of the misogyny that masquerades as queer theory. Hypocritical, obtuse, with a generous side of bloviation make for a prime field day for the RPOJ. Let’s watch how attempting to justify violence against women, the rewriting of gay history, and making the case for having men in feminism come together in one extruded steaming mass of horseshit.

Let’s begin, shall we?

—–

“There is not a writer from The Queerness who would disagree on how wrong it is to make threats of violence, to use violent words and violent actions. We do not condone those on the Twittersphere who participate in violent words or actions aimed at anyone, and particularly women, who are often the target.”

The higher the goal, the further to fall.  I would just like my careful readers to keep this point in mind as we go through this particular RPOJ, because the hypocrisy quickly ramps up to 11 and then manages to increase from there. 

“We don’t however believe that the acronym ‘T.E.R.F’ in itself is a violent term. “

Well dayum!  See!  I told you! It didn’t take long for the hypocritical bullshit to start oozing.  Fun fact: ‘terf’ like the term harridan, witch, slut, cunt, whore (et cetera) are all terms used to describe females who have the audacity to stand up against males and defy the patriarchal stereotypes society has mandated for them.

  1. Just a small window into how the term ‘Terf’ is used – https://terfisaslur.com
  2. Elizabeth Hungerford remarks on TERF – “Make no mistake, this is a slur. TERF is not meant to be explanatory, but insulting. These characterizations are hyperbolic, misleading, and ultimately defamatory. They do nothing but escalate the vitriol and fail to advance the conversation in any way.”
  3.  TERF is used as a label for ‘uppity women’ who do not accept the patriarchal male narrative and normative attitudes. 

   So, the usage of the term ‘TERF’ is almost always accompanied by insults and threats of violence (see #1).  Yet we have this statement:

“‘TigTog’, a blogger coined the term during discussions on a blog post, which if you think about it, really isn’t outside the realm of possibility, “

I could care less about who coined the term.  It is being used to target and harass females on the internet and in the real world.  Said targeted group – feminists – would prefer not to have to deal with the term. You know, common decency mutual respect that sort of thing.  But rather than acknowledge female linguistic preferences – Annette, the author of this hackneyed literary drive-by, would rather attempt to justify the usage of the term. 

    (skipping prolix and shitty ‘justifications’)

“She’s right, any group identifying word can and will be used against that group as a slur. For example: ‘queers’, ‘gays’, ‘lesbos’, ‘dykes’, we’ve all heard them, we all know what they sound like. “

Precisely.  So should we make the case for normalizing a derogatory term?  Or perhaps, maybe, just maybe, use the terminology the particular group would like employed.  But nah, let’s continue to use slurs for these despicable TERF’s, the faster we can ‘other’ them, the easier it is to hate them. 

“Imagine if Katlyn had said “I continue to hate these fucking lesbians what else is new”, or Antonio saying “kill every fucking queer”. It’s not new is it, we hear this all the time. I’ve been subject to a few death threats, and we can see, absolutely, how it can be upsetting.”

Yes.  Violence and death threats are bad.  Maybe not attempting to justify their usage would be a good thing.

“Without getting into an academic discussion about how violent words are used to silence women and how this is misogyny, lets remember that men aren’t the only perpetrators of this.”

Because the male epidemic of violence against women is sooooo fuuuucking booooring.  I mean really, do we have to go over the fact again that the class of males overwhelmingly commit the majority of acts of violence toward the other class of people females the world over, pretty much since forever?

     Like fuck, this little tidbit seems to be at the root of most radical feminist analysis of the problems our society faces – maybe one shouldn’t gloss it over and skip directly to personal anecdotes about how mean those evil terfs…err females are.  

“In my time as a trans ally I’ve been subject to horrific abuse from cis-het women on twitter, even some cis-lesbians laid into me for standing up for my trans friend’s appearance in Diva Magazine.  I’m a cis-lesbian and I’ve been called a ‘misogynist’ and a ‘homophobe’.”

Make no mistake, transactivism is misogynistic and homophobic by nature.  Sorry about your luck. 

“We at the Queerness firmly distance ourselves from this type of violent language, and we have no time for trolls like this on the internet.”

See, I’m not too sure what you’re referring to, the accurate description of what transactivism is or the use of violent language, of course which terf is a part of.  I’m guessing though, it seems like it is only violence when applied to *you*. 

    “Yet it’s those like this that make it harder for those who are trans positive to defend their trans friends and colleagues, and end up getting lumped in with this group of trolls, because they use one acronym in a more appropriate way than these trolls,”

Discourse with transactivists is almost always fraught with threats and violence.  Male resort to violent behaviour when their arguments and ideas are shown to fall short.  Nothing new under the sun here. 

“So let’s discuss trans exclusionary radical feminists without using the term itself. “

So after 500 hundred feckless words of abysmal pseudo-justification now let’s not use the word that I’m trying so hard to prove is OKAY and JUST FINE for radical feminists. 

    The term ‘terf’ is either problematic, or it isn’t.  

    Clearly, for a large segment of the radical feminist population, the usage of terf -whether it is intended to or not (oooooooh, intent isn’t magic is it?)- isn’t cool.  Respectful people, interested in furthering rational argument would acknowledge this and move on. 

   The Our Queerness author quotes Rebecca Reily-Cooper it is one of the few breaths of fresh air in this piece so for interests of my sanity I choose to quote it. 

“From writers such as Rebecca Reily-Cooper who states the definition of radical feminism as:

“an approach to analysing the oppression and exploitation of the class of female people by the class of male people. It seeks to uncover and challenge the root causes and origins of that system of oppression, which it labels patriarchy.” RRC’s blog

That’s fine, I can get on board with that.

She states that the term ‘T.E.R.F’ is ‘not a meaningful description of feminist politics’. But different people clearly have a different view of feminist politics.”

Ahhh…thank you RRC.  So at least we have a viable definition of what radical feminism is, and what its goals are. 

“There were several cis-het radical feminists who sent a flurry of abuse at one of my trans members this year. “

One statement contains the kernel of radical feminist theory, and thus the basis of radical feminist praxis, the other statement contains no refutation or counter-argument – rather mere anecadata – essentially saying those bad feminists were mean to one of my friends – how dare they?!? 

This suggests a lack of a reasonable counter argument and no, your feelings are not an argument. 

“And there were plenty of LGBTQ+ and cis-het allies who, having read the screen shots from that discourse, would NOT have described those comments and views as ‘feminism‘. They’d have described them as ‘hate speech’.”

Me and my good buddies were offended!  Still not an argument.  This is the meat of transactivism, right here folks:  Accept my personal subjective reality or else! 

Sorry (not sorry)!  Material reality takes precedence over subjective personal feelings and respecting material reality (biological sex) is not a crime and is certainly not ‘phobic’ in any reasonable way.  

“So are both sides as bad as each other ?”

Well no actually, as transactivists online and in person threaten and physically attack women who speak against their particular delusion (see terfisalur link above).  Transactivists support deplatforming radical feminists from speaking at public engagements.   Transactivists illegally occupy and deface female only spaces.

   Yeah, and the radical feminist side…. *crickets*.    So no, both sides are not as bad as the other, stop with false equivalencies (side note: attempting to equivocate this male violence with radical feminist’s *CRITICISM* of transactivism is really quite beyond the pale).

” Or can we simply not ever agree ?”

Fuck no.  Feminism is the struggle to liberate females from patriarchal structures and normative attitudes in society.  Gender – a hierarchical patriarchal concept – exists to oppress members of the female class and must be dismantled, not celebrated.  

Why are gender and gender roles a good thing, and how do women benefit from the preservation of traditional gender roles?  What exactly does trasnactivism have to say about that? 

*Crickets* because transactivsm isn’t a feminist project, it seeks only to promulgate the status quo and continue with the oppressive gender hiearchy that benefits the class of males in society.  

“When you appear on a website that lists your twitter handle and allows a single user to block all 800+ of those names simultaneously to avoid abuse, it suggests you belong to a ‘hate group’. “

Because Transactivists (FETA’s – Female Exclusionary Trans Activists, if we like the snappy four letter acronyms)  don’t allow criticism of their ideology and have a block list to stop interactions with those who would question it is much more a reflection of the insular, cultish nature of the trans community.  You can’t argue with radial feminists because your arguments are shit, so plugging your ears and labelling people ‘terfs’ or ‘transphobic’ are the only plays you have. 

No ideology or movement can be free from criticism.

“If you purposefully and deliberately target trans activists and question the validity of trans people’s existence, it suggests you have some prejudice.”

Textbook play here.  Questioning transactivism is not debating over their existence.  Trans people have the capacity to hold shitty ideas their ideas and those ideas should, rightly, be subject to criticism and rebuttal – especially if they impact other classes of people in society (see members of the female class).

“If you imply that somehow trans women are predators; that there is some hypothetical risk to cis-women from trans women, or simply that you can’t accept them as they are because you: ‘just can’t agree’, and when you dress it up as ‘gender critical’, rather than transphobia, then you probably are trans exclusionary.”

Transwomen – MEN – behave like men.  It is not a particularly shocking fact when one adheres to analysis based on objective, material fact.  

“If you simply ask polite questions this is different. But lets be clear, the questions: “why do I have to accept them in my bathrooms ?”, and “Are they are taking something away from my definition of womenhood?”, are not very polite, and are entirely dehumanising.”

Men, do not belong in female spaces.  Female spaces provide some small margin of protection from the male violence that permeates our society.  Natal sex should be the determinant of which bathroom you use.

Why don’t transwomen use the male washroom?  Most of them still have the plumbing for it.  Let me answer that for you – the very real threat of male violence.   Now why should females be forced to put up with that very same threat? Why is the issue of female safety from violence even a debatable issue? 

What an opportunity for the trans and feminist communities to come together and name the root of the problem – violent male behaviour (enforcement of patriarchal gender norms)- and make that an issue. 

    But that choice was not made. 

   Rather, the choice via dubious legislative attempts, was to make female only spaces accessible to men based on often nothing more than their deeply subjective personal feelings.  And that, is a crock of shit, and is rightly being fought against by radical feminists.

    The definition of woman is adult human female, the gender-feels of entitled males does not change the original definition one iota.  

“Trans women have been at the centre of the LGBTQ+ civil rights movement from the beginning, “

Demonstrably wrong, if you happen to be talking about StoneWall.  Trans historical revisionism (the “T” was added in the 1990’s) is poor form and a dubious practice at best.  

“[…]even the LGBTQ+ community needs to recognise that, and feminism is a good thing as long as it doesn’t trample on human beings on its’ way.”

Feminism, by effective definition, is the female struggle for liberation from patriarchy.  The misogyny rife in the transactivst movement qualifies it as a force to be struggled against in the fight for female liberation. 

“but trans women are right there with you in that fight. Don’t shut them out because of a word, or an acronym.”

Yes, I look to the tranwomen for their bold positions on female infanticide, female genital mutilation, female sex trafficking, prostitution, and abortion.  I see page after page of poignant prose and argumentation for the advancement of female rights by transwomen….

  Oh wait.  I don’t.  

   I see females threatened with verbal and physical violence for not complying with the gendered delusions of men in dresses.   I see feminist speakers deplatformed for having a contrary opinion to the trans-cult.   I see women only events and spaces subverted because people who have problems with material reality some how think that because they belong there – they should belong there (white male privilege and entitlement at its best).  

    If your feminism is not working toward female liberation, then it ain’t feminism.  Full stop. 

    Please (*please*), feel free to form your own movements and organizations – but stop co-opting feminist movements and female only spaces.  

“When people feel marginalised they fight back, they get angry, if you knew trans people personally, you’d get it. “

Fighting back in tranactivism means harassing, threatening, and hurting females.  In other words, standard male behaviour.  Feminists know quite well about the capacities of angry men, this has happened before and it will happen again.  The tide eventually will be turned in this arena as the struggle for female liberation continues. 

“You’d realise that tilting at windmills in this debate is allowing those cis-gender men who are the real culprits, off the hook.”

Something we can agree on, of course my version is without the gender-newspeak because male violence is male violence in whatever guise they happen to present to society.

“Why not educate them to be better men, because predatory cis-gender men don’t need a change in the law to enter a woman only space.”

So we should make it easier (self declaration), not harder for males to enter female spaces gotcha.   This simple phrase  highlights the vast differences between queer (male-centric) and feminist (female-centric) theory.  

   Have your queer theory, but know that it mostly represents yet another attempt to keep the female class oppressed in society and that effective feminism is in opposition to it. 

 

And so endeth the RPOJ.  :)

 

Advertisements

Just so we don’t have to play the “no true scotsman” game on the individual level, lets look at the response of Action for Trans Health London has to say regarding the incident where four male transactivists beat up a 60 year old woman.

 

Notice the nice transition from condemning violence against women, to “WHEN THE TERFS ATTACK, WE FIGHT BACK”.  Almost feels like what happens to females when they reject a so called ‘nice guy’s’ advance – the niceness evaporates and is replaced by violence or the threat of violence.  Thanks dudes for showing your true colours.

This was to be a debate, with speakers from both sides to discussing concept of gender identity; the fucking peak of what (so-called) civilized societies do when faced with contentious issues.

But it wasn’t it be.  The queer regressive left scuttled the event. (screen cap from the New Statesman article)

Fuck your hypocritical queer activism.  If radial feminist arguments are shit, then let them say them in safety and security and rebut them and demonstrate why they are faulty, as what we do (or have airs toward) in civilized society.  But no, you won’t tolerate debate and move to violence (of the male variety) and your actions speak tellingly of the strength of your position.  Your cowardice has been on full display during the September 13th Hyde park incident.

There is no going back now, people are seeing the violence that is transactivism as the cloak of queer respectability has been torn away.   Male violence is the language that you spoke on the 13th, as it has always been, but now it is an undercurrent no more.

Females see you, and I hope to christ-on-a-pogo-stick that women who somehow think that including men in feminism is workable, will see you for what you are.   (hint:Violent MEN)

It is time for women to reject the queer/trans agenda and the subversion of feminist theory that goes part and parcel with them.  Rather, it is time to reform Feminism proper around the notion that Feminism exists for the liberation of females from patriarchy – full fucking stop.

 

Oh hey, and a recap of all the events in case you missed it.

 

I’m not sure why people are having such problems dealing with factual reality.

Whether it be the gender-queer crowd and their patented ability not to understand that sex and gender are not the same thing or here today with this story about the head of the EPA not accepting the fact that CO2 is a significant green house gas and pumping more of it into the atmosphere threatens human existence as we know it.

   “The new head of the Environmental Protection Agency said on Thursday he is not convinced that carbon dioxide from human activity is the main driver of climate change and said he wants Congress to weigh in on whether CO2 is a harmful pollutant that should be regulated. 

   Pruitt, 48, is a climate change denier who sued the agency he now leads more than a dozen times as Oklahoma’s attorney general. He said he was not convinced that carbon dioxide pollution from burning fossil fuels like oil, gas and coal is the main cause of climate change, a conclusion widely embraced by scientists. “

What the ever living frak is this malarkey?  Predictably, scientists are call Pruitt’s bullshit for what it is.

“Scientists immediately criticized Pruitt’s statement, saying it ignores a large body of evidence collected over decades that shows fossil fuel burning as the main factor in climate change.

“We can’t afford to reject this clear and compelling scientific evidence when we make public policy. Embracing ignorance is not an option,” Ben Santer, climate researcher at  Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, said in a statement.

The Supreme Court unleashed a fury of regulation and litigation when it ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases are an air pollutant that can be regulated under the Clean Air Act. Two years later, the EPA declared carbon dioxide and five other heat-trapping gases to be pollutants.

Pruitt said the Supreme Court’s decision should not have been viewed as permission for the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide emissions.

“Decisions were made at the executive branch level that didn’t respect the rule of law,” Pruitt said in his Houston speech.

Pruitt has previously said the EPA should not regulate CO2 without a law passed by Congress authorizing it to do so. The Republican-controlled Congress could potentially issue a strong signal to the EPA that carbon dioxide should not be regulated by the agency, a move that would undermine many Obama-era rules aimed at curbing emissions.”

When Florida is mostly underwater, then – maybe – these people will understand what AGW is.

 

[Source: cbc.ca]

lemming

Happy Lemmings Day! a.k.a Black Friday

Should we besmirch this plucky rodent’s escutcheon by associating Lemmings as the embodiment of greed and feral-consumerism known to a good chunk of the western world as ‘Black Friday’?  It isn’t really fair (hey, just like capitalism) to play on the misunderstood ‘suicidal tendencies’ of the much maligned lemming.  For the record:

Lemmings have become the subject of a widely popular misconception that they commit mass suicide when they migrate, by jumping off cliffs. It is in fact not a mass suicide but the result of their migratory behavior. Driven by strong biological urges, some species of lemmings may migrate in large groups when population density becomes too great. Lemmings can swim and may choose to cross a body of water in search of a new habitat. In such cases, many may drown if the body of water is so wide as to stretch their physical capability to the limit. This fact, combined with the unexplained fluctuations in the population of Norwegian lemmings, gave rise to the misconception.[6]

The answer, dear friends, is of course we should – appropriating and exploiting nature is a zesty analog for capitalism and the consumer culture that feeds the satanic mills that are grinding our planet into dust.  (Not enough sleep and too much coffee during this particular writing stint.)

It’s hard to believe, but sometimes your dear host finds it necessary to perch upon a perfectly precarious high horse in order to dispense the needed wisdom to the unwashed massess, the hoi polloi, the basket of deplorables, et cetera.  I remember making a post about Black Friday expressing my disgust with scenes that seem to happen around this time of year.

As noted in the video above – we’re still mired in this terrible consumerist extravaganza. The problem is that, I’m not disgusted, but rather saddened by the whole, often gory, spectacle. The lengths people will go to, to get stuff, that they think will bring them happiness in their life.

Their association of “happiness = stuff” is no mere coincidence, but rather the endgame of a society, while drunk on capitalism,  that measures success, status, and happiness with the amount of material goods acquired. Of course, the needs are manufactured (followed by the goods to meet those ‘needs’) so that the prospect of new shiny baubles will be the next ‘true’ indicator of having ‘made it’ in life. The process of chasing after material goods in the vainglorious pursuit of happiness is a nasty positive feedback loop that reduces citizens in a democratic state to mere consumers always hungry for their next fix and thus justifying the exploitative system that feeds them their drug.

I can’t help thinking that if we had a guaranteed minimum income and housing for everyone people might start to stray from the consumption paradigm. People might start renewing connections with others and engaging in pursuits that they actually want to do instead of what they have to do in their struggle to avoid the depredations of abject poverty.

We’ve lost reverence for the security and connectedness a strong community provides – and it is only way back from the abyss that we continue to create for ourselves.

Make no mistake – capitalism in its current incarnation requires the exploitation of people and resources to make it work. Exploiting people and natural resources inevitably leads to war (see Iraq for instance) and this in this zeal for feeding our doom-systems we often forget that eventually

war1

war2

Start with lemmings and end with Lord of the Rings references, you’ll only see it here at DWR (for better or worse).

I’m fond of a good rant.  :)

I seem to be under the false perception that when attending a meeting with friends that the focus of the occasion should be the people attending and not the digital world available through one’s smartphone.

I write this piece because I have a couple of friends who periodically bring their phones out during dinner, or while having a conversation with them.  I’ve talked to one of them about this behaviour and asked them to not to do the texting at the table thing because of how rude it is and sent the other subtle hints to the other via Facebook like this:

cellphone    The idea of focusing on the people that you are with and not your phone does not seem to be rocket science to me.  The digital world is forever and not accessing it for the 120 minutes that we are together won’t destroy you.  I guarantee it.

But, as always, I am here to help and to educate thus using the power of Duck Duck Go I found this helpful chart.  Voila!  Problems solved all is well in the world.  You’re welcome. :)

 

CELL-PHONE-ETIQUETTE

sirens_call  I cannot identify what it is with dudes and radical feminism.  There must be some strange extra-sensory siren call that attracts dudes and dudely opinion to articles, blogs, and heck even just mere information about women speaking unequivocally about their experiences and analysis of society.  Of course the attraction is just one part of this warlocks brew, the most infuriating part is that the dudes once attracted, have the overwhelming desire… nay with seemingly single-minded animus to grandiloquently extrude their man-centric opinion blithely into feminist conversation.  At the very same time,said dudes, expect to be taken seriously with all the gravitas and respect they usually receive while intoning their manly wizdom.

Concomitantly,  dudes assume that their experience is just the same as everyone else in society(??) and thus, without research or understanding, make pronouncements that, to the finely tuned lobes of radical feminists, sound like Grade A, First Tier, patriarchally laced bullshit.   Once called on their bullshite phase two sets in, displaying in full glory the fragility of the male ego and the ensuing stampede, to either Godwin,Flouce or have a full blown mantrum as they exit from the thread.   Let me assure you gentle readers, this cycle of male-fail is a most dependable and curious clockwork…  But I digress.  The RPOJ has leapt into my hand quivering in anticipation of the justice about to be dispensed.

Today friends we delve deep into the world of dudes explaining Radical Feminism AND misandry – all in one post – who would have known it was soooooo easy.  Let’s put on our swashbuckling pantaloons and join The Brain in the Jar; hmm…lets tighten that up a bit and go with Shit for Brains (SfB); and watch as he puts on his Mansplaining boots and beats all your favourite strawfeminist arguments to death.

The original post by ‘Brain in a Jar: Of Radical Feminism and Misandry’ ,in all its glory can be found here.

—–

“Whenever I bring up the subject of feminism, I always hear about those crazy extremists who really are all about hating men. I’m sure they exist.”

  Well if you only talk to other dudes and MRA’s why of course you are going to get a nuance free view of feminism and feminists.  Looking beyond your own bias is hard, and who the fuck wants to do that?

“There plenty of crazy ideas out there, and misandry is actually saner compared to them.”

   Awww! Lookit SfB put on this big-boy-boots of equality and deep understanding, to show how amazingly aware he is of what he’s prevaricating on about.

“Women are also parrt of the dating game, so the terrible of reality of people wanting to have sex with you but not be in a relationship must have taken its toll on some. The thing is, these people can never refer to an example of such a radical feminist.”

  Editing, what the fuck is it?  Also, did you catch the subtle(?) hostility toward women?  I mean isn’t it totally obvs that women are in the position of power when it comes to dating and relationships? (*eyes rolling into back of head*) That whole male violence/rape culture stuff those feminists prattle on about sure clouds the issue about those bitches not knowing their place and bowing to my ‘peen.

“They also don’t see that misandry and feminism, even the radical version, are two seperate things.. You can point out misandry all you want, and if it makes sense I’ll get behind you. It’ll never be a solid criticism of feminism or radical feminism.”

Read the rest of this entry »

This Blog best viewed with Ad-Block and Firefox!

What is ad block? It is an application that, at your discretion blocks out advertising so you can browse the internet for content as opposed to ads. If you do not have it, get it here so you can enjoy my blog without the insidious advertising.

Like Privacy?

Change your Browser to Duck Duck Go.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 349 other followers

Progressive Bloggers

Categories

December 2017
M T W T F S S
« Nov    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Archives

Blogs I Follow

The DWR Community

Not The News in Briefs

A blog by Helen Saxby

SOLIDARITY WITH HELEN STEEL

A blog in support of Helen Steel

The National Sentinel

Independent. Reliable. Honest.

BigBooButch

Memoirs of a Butch Lesbian

RadFemSpiraling

Radical Feminism Discourse

RED

Radical Education Department

a sledge and crowbar

deconstructing identity and culture

The Radical Pen

Join The Fight For Female Bodied Liberation.

Emma

Politics, things that make you think, and recreational breaks

Nordic Model Now!

Movement for the Abolition of Prostitution

The WordPress C(h)ronicle

These are the best links shared by people working with WordPress

HANDS ACROSS THE AISLE

Biology, Not Bigotry

fmnst

Peak Trans and other feminist topics

There Are So Many Things Wrong With This

if you don't like the news, make some of your own

Gentle Curiosity

Musing over important things. More questions than answers.

ANTHRO FEMINISM

A place for thoughtful, truly intersectional Feminist discussion.

violetwisp

short commentaries, pretty pictures and strong opinions

Revive the Second Wave

gender-critical sex-negative intersectional radical feminism

Trans Animal Farm

The Trans Trend is Orwellian

Princess Henry of Wales

Priestess Belisama

miss guts.

just a girl on a journey

writing by renee

Trigger warning: feminism, women's rights

RANCOM!

Happily Retired

twanzphobic since forever

• • • • it's mocktacular! • • • •

Godless Cranium

Random musings of a godless heathen

freer lives

A socialist critique of the transgender phenomenon

Centering Women

A radical feminist page made for women only

radicalkitten

radical Elemental feminism

yumicpcake

A fine WordPress.com site

Feminist Twitches

Gender, Culture, Food, and Travel

RANCOM!

Happily Retired

Madam Nomad

Notes on the Journey

A Radical TransFeminist

when I said "fuck the patriarchy", I didn't mean it literally

Women's Space

Re-Member the Past, Seize Today, Dream the Future

The Colour of Pomegranates

Screaming into the Void

Finally, A Feminism 101 Blog

Frequently Answered Questions

Cloak Unfurled

Life is a journey. Let us meet at the intersection and share a story.

gendercriticaldad

Fallout from my Peak Trans

Dead of Winter

Bitter Cold Truth from a Bisexual, Gender Critical, Almost Conservative Catholic

RADICAL THOUGHTCRIME

feminist heresy in an age of gender worship

Women’s Liberation Radio News

WLRN: A Radical Feminist Media Collective

UVic Womyn's Centre

bring back the women's centre

%d bloggers like this: