Posts tagged male privilege

peakradfem:

“No. And if people don’t use preferred pronouns, you have no right to threaten violence against them.”

—Cathy Brennan

This is not true.

They do, indeed, have a right to threaten you.

They do not have a right to follow through with that threat, nor do they have a right to actually do violence to you.

Threats which are not fully credible are protected free speech.

Which is a right.

Stop lying.

Males making use of dumb legal bullshit to defend their right to threaten women.

(Source: )

peakradfem:

Gawds, yer a bad liar.

You do realize that agree with and reblog pretty much every time that Cathy Brennan says it, right?

Oh, wait, that’s right, you are going to not claim responsibility for spreading the same lies she says in her (and your) unending quest to demonize Trans people.

You see, every single time that she, Rose, Smart, or any of the others say that women cannot have privilege because they are female, they *are* saying that [women cannot have white privilege or class privilege].

If they aren’t, then they are admitting to lying every time they say that they do not have cis privilege, even by their own faulty and fucked up imaginary version of what it is.

And that includes you, straight girl pretending to be a gay man.

Wait, what?  You say that doesn’t apply to you? That its a lie? That you really are a gay man and we don’t have the right to tell you what you are?

How very “deluded trans people”-ish of you…

Lies lies lies.

(Source: , via )

sendforbromina:

i was talking to one of my male friends yesterday and he’s been experiencing his ~*political transformation*~. as in, he’s discovered what i guess you could call “radical politics” (this includes feminism). and one of the issues that we were talking about the relative scarcity of people who share our political views. this can be frustrating for lots of reasons, and just in general it’s nice to talk to people who agree with you (or at least share your general worldview, even if it’s not point-by-point). 

i agreed with his point overall but thinking it over some more it’s one of those issues that really is different when you look at it through a gendered perspective (especially in the case of radical feminist politics). there’s much more at stake for a woman than a man (obviously only dealing with heterosexual relationships).

if you’re a pro-feminist guy and you date a woman who is apolitical/uninterested in feminism, she’s still going to be reaping the “benefits” from dating you, as compared to a non-feminist man. if you aren’t watching porn/visiting strip clubs/pressuring her into conforming to patriarchal beauty standards, even if she is unaware or doesn’t care why you believe what you do, she still comes out ahead. it can mean the difference between a relationship that’s approximating equality and one that’s filled with a lot of misery (at least) for the woman. 

my friend pointed out that it’s not uncommon for women to watch porn now, but thanks to the gender hierarchy, the implications of this are entirely different. if you’re a woman who’s unhappy with her boyfriend watching porn, you’re told to suck it up and deal, because it’s his divine right to have 24/7 sexual access to women. if you’re a woman who watches porn herself, and your male partner is unhappy with it, you’re more likely to stop. because 1) women aren’t groomed to treat their sexual needs are more important than other people’s feelings (we’re taught to ignore our sexuality at all costs, rather) and 2) women are taught that they need to appease men at all costs, either out of a fear of male violence or a fear that your partner is going to leave you.

this is all old news, but i guess what has got me thinking is the difficulty in constructing a model for healthy heterosexual relationships for the future. because i do think that one of the side effects of the end of patriarchy will be the ability for women who want sexual relationships with men to have them. but it’s almost impossible to imagine a way to carry that out. 

part of this (for me, at least) is due to a lot of the language that’s used regarding the end of male dominance. a lot of people like to say they’ll “smash” patriarchy. which implies something really quick, or at least an abrupt change. patriarchy exists as this large, overarching force, but then it just…disappears. i think this makes a lot of sense in a liberal feminist context, because the markers for progress are more obvious. once women make up 50% of every major government and economic institution, patriarchy = over.

that’s why (even though it’s only a minor difference) the word “dismantling” is more accurate. it reflects the fact that it’s actually going to be impossible to know when patriarchy is fully gone. it’s very romantic and nice to think about time in terms of “before patriarchy” and “after patriarchy” but in reality it’s more complex than that, we aren’t going to see the progress (or regression) that we’ve made until long after the fact.

i guess my basic point is. it’s obvious right now that heterosexual relationships are unequal and privilege male interests. it’d be nice to think that in the future, women could have equal sexual relations with men. right now it’s really difficult to see how we can get from point a to point b. because there’s still so much baggage surrounding how men and women view each other, even if you’re a radical feminist, you can never really unlearn that or get rid of the instinct that you need to do everything you can to “keep a man”. so if you find one that is in agreement with your politics and whatnot, you’re still going to do everything you can to hang on to him, even if you’re doing this subtilely or even unconsciously.

If I had a screwdriver, I’d dismantle patriarchy.

queerandpheasantstranger:

the only biological privilege is dyadic. women who were designated male at birth experience institutionalized oppression even on a biological basis.

Literally denying that male privilege exists. Nice.

(via themisandristwhore-deactivated2)

hedonisticparadise:

kinseysixbitch:

hedonisticparadise:

i’m oppressing a male of colour by disagreeing with him? Oh wow, I didn’t know i had that kind of institutional power, thanks for enlightening me, bby 

work your newfound institutionally-gifted instrument of violence against a marginalized class, it’s truly miraculous

so disagreeing with you, as a male, is violence now? 

no please, tell me more hun, mansplain the idea of privilege to me, it’s so hot 

Institutional female violence against males.