theeirini:

morphodyke:

scumfuckflowerboii:

morphodyke:

ignis-divine-eleison:

screamingsiren:

ignis-divine-eleison:

screamingsiren:

morphodyke:

well, contingent on the situation, since as monique wittig, simone de beauvoir, andrea dworkin, and many others have pointed out, the category of woman is socially constructed after the fact to excuse the material exploitation dynamic between emergent social labor classes. if you’re asking for my definition of woman, i would say anyone who is traumatically linked to the conceptual nexus defined as “woman” for their formative context, to a level determinative of identity, which is also to say people who are exploited by men (because traumatic identity-attachment is always also social. if that’s too technical you could simply say “everyone who is classed as the exploited category under patriarchy relative to the subject-identity category ‘Man’.” but none of it’s simple. go figure, it’s hard to accurately describe the real nature of patriarchy in a language designed by patriarchs. hope no one does anything as foolish as taking their given definitions at face value.

You’re just talking in circles, and using a lot of words to essentially say nothing. Woman has a very clear and simple definition: adult human female.

the original post is so pretentious. it’s exactly how i’d fill in a question on a history test i don’t know the actual answer of; unnecessarily high vocabulary, extreme reaching & adding shit that’s vaguely related when the question is some shit like. “what’s the tool called used to behead louis xiv”.

“I would say anyone who is traumatically linked to the conceptual nexus defined as “woman” for their formative context,”

Womanhood is about experiencing trauma, apparently

this just in: you don’t experience trauma because you’re a woman, trauma is what causes you to be a woman!

the really wild thing about these replies is that i was just summarizing radical feminist theory. i literally namedropped radical feminist theorists in order to make that point crystal clear. you, who are calling yourself a radical feminist, are arguing against radical feminism. what are you doing? when you’re mocking these perspectives, you’re mocking your own movement, or at least what it used to be before it got derailed away from analyzing patriarchy and into prioritizing enacting bigotry to shore up the categories of gender. these thinkers you are mocking are the women you’re claiming to represent.

how

did you all

get this stupid?

jesus you’re a mess

your url is “scumfuckflowerboii”

literally no one is even trying to argue the point??? what the fuck??? this is literally basic materialist feminism, anyone who bothered to read anything by these writers would have instantly agreed with you, yet apparently its postmodern crap??

This is so sad lmfao its so obvious terfs care nothing for women and just want to attack and dehumanize one particular section of them lmfao.