Pet Peeve: When A Male, A Group Of Men Or A Male-dominated Government/regime Commit An Act Of Incomprehensible

I believe all religion is made up by men to oppress women. if that offends you dni 💗

“women used to marry young and have a lot of children” VS “men used to marry women when they were still little girls and force them to be pregnant and give birth their whole life”.

“in the past women didn’t get education” VS “in the past, men stopped women from getting education and excluded them from all cultural spheres”.

“muslim women must wear hijab” VS “muslim men force muslim women wear hijab”.

“in this country, abortion is illegal” VS “men in this country made women getting abortion illegal”.

women’s oppression doesn’t happen by itself. women’s oppression isn’t passive. there is an oppressor class that actively chooses to oppress women, and the oppressor class is MEN.

men dont be hypocrites challenge GO!

male “feminists” don’t exist

Funny how words change. I was thinking about the phrase "gentleman's club," and what I'd IMAGINE that would mean (based on the definition of "gentleman") is a place for well-bred, intelligent, likely educated, civilized men to talk, drink and smoke cigars with other men of the same mindset. I picture Mr. Darcy sitting there with Mr. Bingley. Instead, it's come to mean "The lowest, dumbest, most perverted dirt bags you can imagine throwing filthy dollar bills at women who they're paying to take their clothes off." The men who visit these places are the furthest thing from gentlemen.

The funny thing is, if there were a "Lady's Club" it would probably still resemble exactly what we'd imagine: well-dressed, elegant women having a beautiful luncheon with their female friends, behaving totally appropriately. The most they might do that was "out of character" for ladies (supposedly) is laugh uproariously after a few glasses of wine.

Since I'm on the subject, Tea Rooms (which were very popular in America in the 1910's-20's and were generally owned by women) were very close to what I described as a Lady's Club, and I'd love to see them brought back. Getting dressed up to go to a fancy tea with a lot of female friends sounds like so much fun!

I feel so awful for all the young girls being forced into religion and forced to wear a hijab. imagine being born and being told your whole life that you must cover yourself, must hide your body, because your body is inherently sexual - you are inherently sexual and must be hidden just because you were born a girl.

“it’s another culture, be respectful” idgaf 💀 if it’s oppressive to women, it’s a problem, i don’t care if it’s ur customs. girls having to cover themselves, not being allowed to go to school, being violated, not being allowed to be heard, literally being all around disrespected but you expect me to just be cool about it because “it’s culture”.

women do not deserve to be treated as lesser than in the name of anything. idc if it’s your religion, i don’t care if it’s tradition, it’s a bunch of bullshit.

btw trump giving medals to mothers who have 6+ kids is exactly what hitler did

this.

At its core, “gender critical” ideology has nothing to do with transgender ideology. There’s three main beliefs that create a gender critical ideology and none of them have anything to do with or stem from trans issues.

1. Sex is a physical and material reality. You can touch and hold a penis or vagina. You can measure testosterone or oestrogen differences between men and women. You can study any inherent differences in the brain. Yes, intersex people also exist. That difference in sex development is also a material reality.

2. Gender is a social construct. A conservative, patriarchal invention that believes (as a modern example) women must like dresses and men must like pants. Women like pink and men like blue, or in other cultures or times, other ideas. This is not a material reality, it’s only socialisation. Nothing about material reality makes women like pink. There may be some debate regarding where sex stops and gender socialisation begins, as scientific analysis of the brain has not developed enough to know exactly what is inherent and what is part of the socialisation which starts at (or before) birth.

3. The social construct of gender should be abolished, as it is the foundation of a patriarchy. Women are given gender roles which revolve around being subordinate and submissive, as to obey the patriarch, and men’s gender roles are to be aggressive and strong, as to serve in the military. Sex differences are to be respected and gender is to be abolished. Decisions regarding safety, medical care, and other treatment of people should be based on sex, material reality which effects everyone, not gender.

The issue with trans ideology only comes in where in order to transition gender, gender as a social construct must be maintained. To feel “validated” in changing gender, gender must become more important and more recognised than sex. It pushes that decisions regarding the treatment of and protection of people should be made based on gender rather than sex, entirely opposite to the gender critical belief. Gender needs to be reinforced and protected for the ideology to make any sense at all, otherwise, what are you transitioning to?

Gender critical ideology does not target trans people or ideology. It targets a misogynistic social construct. It is not about trans people or ideologies. It is about a misogynistic social construct and its abolition. It’s just that trans ideology happens to rely on that misogynistic construct which gender critical ideology aims to abolish, and thus, they are opposed.

Gender critical ideology is only anti-patriarchy and anti-conservative. Gender belongs to patriarchy and conservatism. Transgender ideology only has issues with gender critical ideology because it is built on gender and falls apart without it.

I am aware gender dysphoria exists. Gender dysphoria would not exist if gender did not exist. Would you rather children develop gender dysphoria and spend thousands of dollars attempting to free themselves of it, suffering for years in the meantime, or that that suffering not exist in the first place? You can argue all you want that sex dysphoria is the real issue, but if that’s the case, call it such and we can learn to deal with it, but for now it’s an entirely different topic since gender ideology chooses to revolve around “gender” instead.

I find it interesting how, when you criticize Islam for misogyny, they call you a bigot and "Islamophobe" and tell you it has nothing to do with the religion but with the culture of the geographic region, regardless of what their "holy" book says; however, when you criticize the people of a certain geographic region for their misogyny, they call you a racist, xenophobic bigot and tell you it has nothing to do with the region and instead with the dominance of Islam there and that not everybody there practices Islam. Seems like they just want you to shut up and to not call out misogyny.