Dua
LightNews LightNews
thefirestonian.bsky.social
Dua
@thefirestonian.bsky.social
170 followers 51 following 44 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
thefirestonian.bsky.social
reminds me of arguments with hotd twitter freaks on child marriages in the mediaeval era and them repeatedly protecting their precious ships by claiming it was normal at the time!! for grown men to marry 14 yos. can u imagine ANY other form of oppression being justified this way
taliabhatt.itch.io Talia "Estro Junkies" Bhatt ♀︎♀︎ @taliabhatt.itch.io · Apr 3
I fucking hate academiabrain. This post blathers on about Western sensibilities and posits that dutiful pre-feminist women would leap at the chance to be sold off to a random man as though societies where this is still the norm don't exist.

Spoiler: Women hate it, even without feminism!
Would a late medieval noble or royal woman be likely to think of her arranged marriage as degrading? In ASOIAF Cersei Lannister compares herself with Jaime, bemoaning that while his lot in life is to rule, "to fight with a sword and lance and mace," she was taught "to smile and sing and please." While he was heir to Casterly Rock, her lot was to be "sold to some stranger like a horse, to be ridden whenever my new owner liked, beaten whenever he liked, and cast aside in time for a younger filly." Having read some about the actual lives of medieval and early modern noble and royal women, this sentiment doesn't seem to be likely, and feels like projecting modern sensibilities onto a society that while not real, isn't anything like modern western culture and thus unlikely for someone raised in that society and culture. Real medieval and early modern noble and royal women were patrons of the arts, played important roles as ambassadors to their families and took an active part in the ruling of their domains, so it's hard for me to believe that they would likely feel degraded by being arranged to marry a stranger, rather than see marriage to a wealthy and powerful man as an opportunity for advancement of themselves and their families. Setting aside Cersei's personal reasons for feeling that way, is seeing being arranged to marry as something degrading and compared to "being sold like a horse" an opinion a noble-woman in late medieval Western Europe would be likely to hold? I'm aware of the "early feminist" writer Christine de Pizan who wrote several works that defended women from misogynistic rhetoric and questioned the mainstream view of women's inferiority, did she or any elite female writer comment anything on arranged marriages, criticizing them as degrading?
April 6, 2025 at 6:26 AM
Reposted by Dua
artie.gay
"Women are not patriarchal agents who can 'possess' each other. Only men can 'possess' women."

I know that to be a core tenet of patriarchy, of course, but have never heard it stated so clearly and concisely.
taliabhatt.itch.io Talia "Estro Junkies" Bhatt ♀︎♀︎ @taliabhatt.itch.io · Apr 3
A bisexual man could sleep would a single man and still be faggotized by it.

A bisexual women could sleep with a hundred women and still be sexual property waiting to be regendered, reclaimed, because women are not patriarchal agents who can "possess" each other. Only men can "possess" women.
April 3, 2025 at 1:15 PM
Reposted by Dua
miserableharlot.bsky.social
Not only do they want to insist that women are not oppressed now, they want to retcon women’s historical oppression to make it even easier to dismiss and vilify feminists as narcissistic miserable fear-mongering man-haters. And they do so on the basis of Game of Thrones.
taliabhatt.itch.io Talia "Estro Junkies" Bhatt ♀︎♀︎ @taliabhatt.itch.io · Apr 3
I fucking hate academiabrain. This post blathers on about Western sensibilities and posits that dutiful pre-feminist women would leap at the chance to be sold off to a random man as though societies where this is still the norm don't exist.

Spoiler: Women hate it, even without feminism!
Would a late medieval noble or royal woman be likely to think of her arranged marriage as degrading? In ASOIAF Cersei Lannister compares herself with Jaime, bemoaning that while his lot in life is to rule, "to fight with a sword and lance and mace," she was taught "to smile and sing and please." While he was heir to Casterly Rock, her lot was to be "sold to some stranger like a horse, to be ridden whenever my new owner liked, beaten whenever he liked, and cast aside in time for a younger filly." Having read some about the actual lives of medieval and early modern noble and royal women, this sentiment doesn't seem to be likely, and feels like projecting modern sensibilities onto a society that while not real, isn't anything like modern western culture and thus unlikely for someone raised in that society and culture. Real medieval and early modern noble and royal women were patrons of the arts, played important roles as ambassadors to their families and took an active part in the ruling of their domains, so it's hard for me to believe that they would likely feel degraded by being arranged to marry a stranger, rather than see marriage to a wealthy and powerful man as an opportunity for advancement of themselves and their families. Setting aside Cersei's personal reasons for feeling that way, is seeing being arranged to marry as something degrading and compared to "being sold like a horse" an opinion a noble-woman in late medieval Western Europe would be likely to hold? I'm aware of the "early feminist" writer Christine de Pizan who wrote several works that defended women from misogynistic rhetoric and questioned the mainstream view of women's inferiority, did she or any elite female writer comment anything on arranged marriages, criticizing them as degrading?
April 3, 2025 at 8:37 PM
Reposted by Dua
atrophous.bsky.social
I also love how a good chunk of apologia for patriarchal oppression (and frankly all oppression) rests on the notion of “what if they liked it? You ever thought of that?” as if it’s some deep and cutting critique.
taliabhatt.itch.io Talia "Estro Junkies" Bhatt ♀︎♀︎ @taliabhatt.itch.io · Apr 3
I fucking hate academiabrain. This post blathers on about Western sensibilities and posits that dutiful pre-feminist women would leap at the chance to be sold off to a random man as though societies where this is still the norm don't exist.

Spoiler: Women hate it, even without feminism!
Would a late medieval noble or royal woman be likely to think of her arranged marriage as degrading? In ASOIAF Cersei Lannister compares herself with Jaime, bemoaning that while his lot in life is to rule, "to fight with a sword and lance and mace," she was taught "to smile and sing and please." While he was heir to Casterly Rock, her lot was to be "sold to some stranger like a horse, to be ridden whenever my new owner liked, beaten whenever he liked, and cast aside in time for a younger filly." Having read some about the actual lives of medieval and early modern noble and royal women, this sentiment doesn't seem to be likely, and feels like projecting modern sensibilities onto a society that while not real, isn't anything like modern western culture and thus unlikely for someone raised in that society and culture. Real medieval and early modern noble and royal women were patrons of the arts, played important roles as ambassadors to their families and took an active part in the ruling of their domains, so it's hard for me to believe that they would likely feel degraded by being arranged to marry a stranger, rather than see marriage to a wealthy and powerful man as an opportunity for advancement of themselves and their families. Setting aside Cersei's personal reasons for feeling that way, is seeing being arranged to marry as something degrading and compared to "being sold like a horse" an opinion a noble-woman in late medieval Western Europe would be likely to hold? I'm aware of the "early feminist" writer Christine de Pizan who wrote several works that defended women from misogynistic rhetoric and questioned the mainstream view of women's inferiority, did she or any elite female writer comment anything on arranged marriages, criticizing them as degrading?
April 3, 2025 at 9:58 PM
Reposted by Dua
taliabhatt.itch.io
I fucking hate academiabrain. This post blathers on about Western sensibilities and posits that dutiful pre-feminist women would leap at the chance to be sold off to a random man as though societies where this is still the norm don't exist.

Spoiler: Women hate it, even without feminism!
Would a late medieval noble or royal woman be likely to think of her arranged marriage as degrading? In ASOIAF Cersei Lannister compares herself with Jaime, bemoaning that while his lot in life is to rule, "to fight with a sword and lance and mace," she was taught "to smile and sing and please." While he was heir to Casterly Rock, her lot was to be "sold to some stranger like a horse, to be ridden whenever my new owner liked, beaten whenever he liked, and cast aside in time for a younger filly." Having read some about the actual lives of medieval and early modern noble and royal women, this sentiment doesn't seem to be likely, and feels like projecting modern sensibilities onto a society that while not real, isn't anything like modern western culture and thus unlikely for someone raised in that society and culture. Real medieval and early modern noble and royal women were patrons of the arts, played important roles as ambassadors to their families and took an active part in the ruling of their domains, so it's hard for me to believe that they would likely feel degraded by being arranged to marry a stranger, rather than see marriage to a wealthy and powerful man as an opportunity for advancement of themselves and their families. Setting aside Cersei's personal reasons for feeling that way, is seeing being arranged to marry as something degrading and compared to "being sold like a horse" an opinion a noble-woman in late medieval Western Europe would be likely to hold? I'm aware of the "early feminist" writer Christine de Pizan who wrote several works that defended women from misogynistic rhetoric and questioned the mainstream view of women's inferiority, did she or any elite female writer comment anything on arranged marriages, criticizing them as degrading?
April 3, 2025 at 3:56 PM
Reposted by Dua
taliabhatt.itch.io
*whistling innocently*
I must confess that when I began to conceptualize this essay, I had consigned myself to arguing my case on largely autoethnographic merits, to forefront personal experience and brace for the eventual charges that I was exaggerating a rare reactionary tendency, or generalizing too much from my own accounts. Imagine my delight, then, when I came across a 2010 paper that not only points to these discursive tendencies in both academic and activist settings, but also argues vehemently that this is a misuse of intersectionality theory. The author definitively states that the alleged incompatibility between dominance feminist paradigms and intersectionality is not merely exaggerated, but outright incorrect, and places an undue, unfair burden on feminist theories that other social paradigms, such as antiracism, are not expected to answer for. That—I dare infer—the very charge of ‘essentialism’ is being misapplied for grotesquely antifeminist ends! Strong claims, all. Hopefully, whoever made them can back up the assertion that their understanding of intersectionality is indeed more thorough than most others’, even that of many academics! Part Three: That’s Not What ‘Essentialism’ Means I am of course referring to the 2010 paper, 'Close Encounters of Three Kinds: On Teaching Dominance Feminism and Intersectionality', authored by Kimberlé Crenshaw.
April 2, 2025 at 4:51 PM
Reposted by Dua
taliabhatt.itch.io
Here ye, one and all, for we are gathered today to put feminism on trial, and at last hold it accountable for its many white, affluent, imperialist sins ...
Introduction: White/Rad/Fem There is a specter haunting feminism: insubstantial, ghostly pale, and—so goes the charge—one highly resistant to exorcism. Too long has this ruling-class pastime, borne of diabolically idle minds and idler spirits, threatened to undermine the solidarity of true, revolutionary movements, seeking to sow the seeds of separatism such that sexed solipsism supersedes syncretic struggle! Splitting sister from brother, wife from husband, and maiden from suitor, the forked-tongued feminist flits about in the garb of a noble liberator, pouring her racist, bourgeois, and essentialist poison into any unwitting, innocent ear she’s lent, corrupting the minds of young women with her preposterous ideas. For the feminist is always white, affluent, and biologically-deterministic, an individual that does not truly suffer in any meaningful way, yet consistently and exuberantly cites her sex to obfuscate her privileges, exaggerate her marginalization, and deny her capacity to harm. In doing so she aims to engender a false consciousness, concocting an ersatz sorority between herself and the actually oppressed women whose subjugation she benefits from, and is invested in perpetuating. Of course, women are actually oppressed—no one denies that—but marginalized women (a category mutually exclusive with the feminist, of course) have real actual oppression to combat, unlike the silly sex-antagonism that feminists concern themselves with. (Continued in next image) The racialized woman aspires to the dismantling of white supremacy, the proletarian woman an end to capitalist hegemony, and the colonized woman longs for the emancipation of all her people! Meanwhile, feminists—being the ultimate beneficiaries of all these systems of exploitation—wish for marginalized women to quarrel endlessly with men of their own class and race and nation. Marginalized women are thus enticed to ally with their oppressors— that is, feminists. Their fellow men, naturally, have always taken their concerns seriously—which is to say, guided them to focus on the issues that affect them all, rather than quibble over frivolities such as domestic confinement and reproductive labor and sexual violence, which affect only some of them—impossible to tell which of them, even. Unlike the feminist, the actually oppressed marginalized woman understands her place in the movement. She nobly supports her comrades, magnanimously upholds the common banner, and places the collective’s concerns aboveover her own with divinely-feminine grace. She is a mother to the movement—and wife and lover and scullery-maid, too—happy in her place and overjoyed to do the thankless, joyless, uncompensated, unrecognized, and uncredited work that must be done. Could there be feminists that are not manipulative, deceitful mouthpieces of the ruling-classes? Perhaps someday, there may yet be. Today, however, there is no such thing as a non-white, non-Western, non-rich, non-cis, non-ugly feminist, as surely as there does not exist a non-misandrist lesbian. Do not fall for their propaganda, comrades, and do not shirk your duty to the cause by presuming that your gender matters more than any other identity through which men can lay claim to you. Do not forget who your true enemy is: other women.
March 25, 2025 at 1:29 PM
Reposted by Dua
collie.bsky.social
It’s incredibly gendered, many “working class” jobs are held by women now but they aren’t seen as blue collar work. A barista is more working class than Union autoworkers.
April 4, 2025 at 5:02 PM
Reposted by Dua
paulcrider.liberalcurrents.com
Obviously you have access to bigger platforms. But write this essay at Liberal Currents and you'd have unlimited space (word limits are oppression). I really think it's not broadly understood that misogyny is central to fascism, and thus feminism has to be central to its response.
paulcrider.liberalcurrents.com Paul Crider @paulcrider.liberalcurrents.com · Mar 19
Judging by Tate's popularity with the youth, the Republican party will get even more misogynistic in the coming years. Maga, like all fascisms, is a political movement of rape and male domination. An effective antifascism needs feminism to understand its foe. Read @aselrod.bsky.social.
Guys Win: Andrew Tate, Rape Politics, and the Authoritarian Right
Misogyny is a preeminent feature of authoritarian politics.
www.liberalcurrents.com
March 19, 2025 at 4:45 PM
Reposted by Dua
sjshancoxli.liberalcurrents.com
as moira donegan put it: you have to understand rape as absolutely central to modern reactionary ideology
March 23, 2025 at 2:45 AM
Reposted by Dua
jonathancohn.bsky.social
I would like to read an essay about how anti Me Too backlash is central to understanding what Democratic elites and journalists mean when they talk about the party becoming “too left.” They will never say it out loud, but it’s 100% there.
moiradonegan.bsky.social Moira Donegan @moiradonegan.bsky.social · Mar 29
It doesn’t get addressed in most assessments of Democrats’ run to the right and antagonism of their base, but part of that strategy has been the abandonment of Me Too and its moral authority—and the unwillingness to go on the attack over stuff like this.
March 30, 2025 at 2:49 AM
Reposted by Dua
moiradonegan.bsky.social
This has been empirically demonstrated many times! You can’t expect men to have a place of domination and superiority over women in the home and treat women as equals outside of it.
merylfed.bsky.social Meryl Federman @merylfed.bsky.social · Apr 1
Also, men who have traditional, stay-at-home wives treat women in their workplaces extremely unfairly, meaning that the choice to stay home *actively hurts* the choices of women (mothers or no) who want to work... while women who work do not hurt stay at home moms at all!
April 1, 2025 at 4:51 PM
Reposted by Dua
moiradonegan.bsky.social
One of my more niche grievances is that sometimes you'll read someone calling feminism "bourgeois" and then later find out that they went to like Dalton, Harvard-Westlake, or St Anne's.
moiradonegan.bsky.social Moira Donegan @moiradonegan.bsky.social · Apr 2
Also a lot of bargain basement class critique, a signature of current antifeminism. “These women are rich and can afford to get divorced” when in fact if you read, a lot of them can’t. An effort to paint women’s desire for independence as a contemptible bourgeois decadence.
April 2, 2025 at 8:12 PM
Reposted by Dua
moiradonegan.bsky.social
The divorce memoir genre tried to make the most feeble and elementary feminist case—that marriage is asymmetrical in ways that hurt and exploit women, and need not be so central to their sense of self—and is mocked and hated with a vitriol that frankly creeps me out.
April 2, 2025 at 2:16 PM
Reposted by Dua
moiradonegan.bsky.social
One thing you notice as a feminist is that feminism gets linked to, and implicitly blamed, for every malignant political force or failure. Feminism becomes a collaborator with empire, a driver of neoliberalism, a motivator for the carceral state. Malignant and all powerful, yet never defined.
April 5, 2025 at 3:16 PM
Reposted by Dua
taliabhatt.itch.io
... so guess which draft I just sat down to work on, Moira.
Title of a Google Document: "Intersectional Antifeminism, or: What is a white feminist, anyway?"
March 22, 2025 at 1:51 PM
Reposted by Dua
moiradonegan.bsky.social
Poor Kimberlé Crenshaw, doing all that vital and hard work to illustrate how civil rights law didn’t adequately account for how racism and sexism are mutually constitutive and reinforcing, only to have illiterate antifeminists be like “actually intersectionality means that sexism doesn’t count.”
March 22, 2025 at 1:26 PM
Reposted by Dua
maiamindel.bsky.social
It's genuinely astounding how Trump's main thing is that evil foreigners are coming to the United States to rape white women and yet they pressured Romania to release a serial rapist so he could go to the US and rape women there
February 27, 2025 at 1:11 PM
Reposted by Dua
tznkai.bsky.social
An almost atavistic hatred of an ur woman figure who is their ex wife and that bitch in hr and possibly their first grade teacher
tznkai.bsky.social K. Chen @tznkai.bsky.social · Dec 18
I really do think it works surprisingly well.

twitter.com/tznkai/statu...
And yet so much of politics is men voting against that one bitch from HR and/or their ex-wife. It somehow bound them together and lets them elect a monster for president.
February 6, 2025 at 9:21 PM
Reposted by Dua
donmoyn.bsky.social
Trafficking is a central theme of the QAnon worldview, with the idea that Trump would act to stop it when in office. Instead...
February 17, 2025 at 3:24 PM
Reposted by Dua
goddessblade.bsky.social
Saeed has been having trouble keeping his account from being closed here, so he needs to rebuild visibility every time. Please help me circulate his crowdfund!
February 16, 2025 at 9:57 PM
Reposted by Dua
cmrosens.com
Saed is already working on a well project, and is raising funds for his mother's eye treatment, and all without electricity - on top of huge costs for limited food and essentials. If you can chip in, you'll be supporting their daily needs and giving them a sustainable way to live while they rebuild.
February 16, 2025 at 10:37 PM