[–] Alecto 26 points (+26|-0)

Phrasing it as an 'uncanny valley' is very apt. I think this is something we should dig into more. Identify the behaviors in women that provoke the strongest moral disgust and I think you'll probably see a pattern. The 'disgusting' behaviors are those which deny men, which give women agency, which give women power.

Ambition. Female separatism. Telling men 'no.' Lesbianism. Putting ourselves first.

All of these can be performed by women who are 'feminine' in every other way and provoke severe backlash as a result.

[–] AmyHousewine 15 points (+15|-0)

Women wanting to join the military/joint the combat arms.

Women swearing.

Women outearning their partner/men in general.

Women refusing to be bound by arbitrary boundaries that don't limit men, and women assuming roles of power (positional, financial, political) that men have basically been bred for millennia to assume are their birthright.

[–] Alecto 19 points (+19|-0)

I was thinking that 'moral disgust' explains a lot of the vitriol aimed at Hillary Clinton. Regardless of how one feels about her politics, she was (is) the recipient of an inordinate amount of hate...especially when compared to similar male politicians, and their own scandals. Even Mitch McConnell, who is singlehandedly responsible for constipating the federal legislative branch for the past decade, does not experience the mouth frothing hate that HRC did (does).

The closest comparison is Obama, and damn near everyone on the left will admit it's because he's black. Those same people will insist Hillary lost because she is unlikable.

[–] Hermione 16 points (+16|-0)

I remember reading somewhere that when HRC was asked why it seems men hate her so much she replied “I remind them of their first wives” which I thought was the best answer ever!

[–] Elegantissima 11 points (+11|-0)

The psy-op against Hillary has been going on for decades. She is a marvel of strength. I can't admire that woman enough.

When I first started hearing the attacks against her from the left in 2016, I spent hours every day for months researching her. Just as I did with the trans rights issue, I thought maybe everything I thought I knew was wrong.

I discovered that Hillary is far more amazing than we have ever been told. This is my favorite testimonial about her:


Of course, the attacks worked against her because she's a woman. Of course they did. The language alone is enough to silence most of us: English contains nearly infinite words to insult girls and women, while barely a handful to insult men (and almost all of those referencing girls and women). When you can hurl that kind of ammunition at someone, 99% of the time you don't need anything else.

[–] AmyHousewine 7 points (+8|-1)

And to some degree, the lesser disgust for Sarah Palin, albeit lower on the ticket: she was more feminine, wore skirts, was (seemingly) happily married, hyper fertile ...

[–] bornwithovaries 1 points (+1|-0)

Their standards are too exacting for likeability then. I like Clinton. Even if she's bought into TRA bullshit -- that's basically every high-ranking Dem and I honestly don't believe they've thought through all the implications.

[–] Verdandi 1 points (+1|-0) Edited

They actually did an experiment where they switched the sex but kept the personalities. People still loathed the male Clinton, and they were seriously enamored with the female Trump.


[–] hellamomzilla 14 points (+15|-1)

Mothers who refuse to hand over power to professionals over their children.

In retrospect, this might be the reason I pissed off an entire town...

[–] Alecto 4 points (+4|-0)

How does one manage to do that?

Tl;Dr - conservative town where hubby is the reverend, but I failed to show him "all due respect."

So, 8 years ago we moved to a town where hubby gets to be reverend. Of course, me also being one and high on ambition and low on experience, never backs down from a theological or biblical discussion. And as I've studied up on my feminism, I will talk about that a lot, too. Even during sermons. But it was Andrea Dworkin, I think, who said women don't want to be confronted with a new way of thinking, because then they would have to admit all the pain they'd suffered was for nothing. (yes, I mangled it a lot, sorry AD!). And I think these people didn't like this at all. Especially the women. They were the ones continually policing me. The men just basically shunned me, but the women policed me. Even had someone once tell me (and I kid you not) that I need to be "more blatantly subtle." I can play ignorant, but I know what she meant: I need to make a show of being hubby's lesser half. I'm missus reverend, not really a reverend, eh? Let's act like the missus.

Of course I did not comply. Even tried to apply for a job opening in neighboring congregation, but they litterally oughtn't bother, they're looking for a "big sting man to come lead the congregation." Gosh, said that once on Twitter, had this lady freak out about how I must be lying.

Anyway, they did hire Aman. But he was a weakling I knew by reputation, as it turned out. He was from the neighboring town I grew up in. On his 3rd wife (not good if you're a reverend, eh?), and had basically been kicked out of that previous congregation for his porn addiction (fortunately we still think that's a bad thing in the church).

He also recognized my accidentally, and suddenly a lot of charges were brought against me. But that was him all the other stuff was women hating that I did not uphold their patriarchy. Because if I didn't then I was this "other" that was a wo. An but not a woman, man but not a man. And they would have to face the realities of their own lives.

They Facebook stalked me for months. Wow, fun times!

[–] Elegantissima 14 points (+14|-0)

Did you read the comments? One woman tells a story about discussing transwomen in women's prisons with a friend, including citing data on transwomen crime and instances of rape, until the man replies, "The reality is that you are sending women to men's prisons."

"The reality is that men get to define women."

This is what they consider reality.

[–] [Deleted] 13 points (+13|-0)

I think it's also worth pointing out that it isn't beyond the pale for women to ban other women from their spaces. The (2) lesbian subs that got deleted off Reddit banned bisexual and straight women as well as trans women. The bisexual and straight women took no offense. The trans women did. And I personally would not at all feel insulted to be banned from a black women's space, a Muslim women's space, a bisexual women's space, or hell, even a straight women's space. For as much as I love lurking on Female Dating Strategies, I never post there, as I am not a straight woman trying to navigate her way out of the cesspool that is low-value males. Women seem to get that exclusion is sometimes about creating safety and sanctuary for the included rather than projecting "hate" against the excluded.

[–] Perseph265 10 points (+10|-0)

I know; I don't mind being excluded from lesbian spaces or black women's spaces or Latina women's spaces because I know those groups aren't meant for me. These women have experienced things I will never experience because I am not of that specific demographic. Sometimes having that space is necessary for discussing pertinent issues and consciousness-raising. I take zero offense to being asked to step out of the room; it's not my space and that's that.

Men, on the other hand? I was a member of a women-only business group in college. I remember one time a woman's boyfriend tried to come into a meeting; he was (politely) told that regular meetings were women-only and to please leave. Thankfully he didn't pitch a fit, but he came off as low-key passive aggressive and acted like we weren't letting him in specifically to spite him.

[–] Elegantissima 7 points (+7|-0)

This is an incredibly important conversation.

I too have nothing but respect for women's spaces to which I do not belong. Why would I pretend that I share the oppression of lesbians or BIWOC? What kind of a narcissistic monster would I have to be?

Women are excluded from spaces all the time. My god.

Even the woke media darling "Woman of the Year" Jenner has belonged to a golf club for 15 years that offers better dining to men than to women: https://www.eater.com/2015/6/3/8721285/caitlyn-jenner-country-club-california-bruce-jenner-rules

If women threw hissy fits every time we were excluded from someplace, we'd never do anything else.

Only men, with their higher incomes and greater social power and vastly fewer opportunities to be excluded, have the time and social rewards for crap like this.

[–] AmyHousewine 9 points (+9|-0)

If Angela, who is a man I assume, had that violent a reaction to be told "no" by a woman, that's not phobic, that's rage: the age old male rage at women not complying.

There's another dimension, too: rejection feels bad. Sometimes somatically bad. I got queasy with nerves trying to express my feelings to a boy in Grade 8. When I found out he was dating a friend of mine, it hurt emotionally and made my stomach hurt for a bit. Being rejected is an unpleasant experience, mentally and sometimes physically. I know people who had nervous collapses after getting rejection letters.

None of that means the rejection isn't legitimate, or that the rejection should be reversed to protect feelings. Teen boys don't owe it to teen girls to like them back, even if the girl is so upset her stomach hurts. Doctoral programs aren't obliged to accept applicants, even if the rejected applicant goes to bed for a week in depression after. And women's spaces don't have any moral duty to admit transwomen, no matter how much their legs turn to jelly and they are literally shaking as a result of the exclusion.

[–] bornwithovaries 5 points (+5|-0)

I think their absolute rage at being told "no" is related to their tendency to get ever so much sicker with every bug they catch. I had a boyfriend once who developed a fever and dude acted like he was dying. I once had a 103.5 fever develop out of nowhere and was like, "Okay, this is weird," and actually felt stupid taking time off work even though it was just a degree or two away from a medical emergency. (Turned out I had walking pneumonia. With zero cough. Weirdest. Illness. Ever.) It's funny, they make fun of us for crying out in pain but they can't take a little feeling bad. It works the same way on the social/ emotional level.

[–] MelMarieCurebee 9 points (+10|-1)

Yikes, a post from 2014? Has anybody checked up on this woman? If I peaked 6 years ago I'd be in the depths of despair right now.

(Haven't read the piece yet but opened it and saw the date).

Please don't fall into despair yet! As someone who has charted its doeths, I can tell you it's not all it's cracked up to be! Fight the good fight. We can do it tag-team style. I'll take one week, you can have the next, and so on...

[–] AmyHousewine 4 points (+4|-0) Edited

I'm pretty sure I've seen her on Twitter - same handle, IIRC.

Assuming that since it's the same handle and she links her blogs I can post this, apologies if not:


[–] MelMarieCurebee 2 points (+2|-0)

Thanks! She seems as sane as ever. Props to her, I don't know how she's doing it.

[–] AmyHousewine 4 points (+4|-0)

She may be here!

I think, based on other tweets, she's Russian? They've been mindfucked for over a century and have tough skins for that sort of thing.

[–] Verdandi 3 points (+3|-0)

Yeah, it's pretty dark down here lol. It's been a long 8+ years.

[–] MelMarieCurebee 0 points (+0|-0)

Oh god. I didn't even really know about trans issues back then. I can't even imagine.

[–] lucrecia 1 points (+1|-0)

She wrote a new preface for this essay and republished it in the first issue of The Radical Notion, so I think she's doing okay. :) Though that preface does note that she's struck by how similar things are today, in terms of the style of discourse...

[–] RikkiTikkiTavi 7 points (+7|-0)

I liked the article. Really food for thought - a banquet in fact.

I just cannot abide someone using their emotional/psychological/physiological reaction as a leverage tool. I do not want to be someone's emotional pack mule.

Shall we fall down on the ground and have a tantrum. That is about the logic of it. If I had such a reaction to a person raising their hand, I would not have admitted it - in fact I would have taken a good look at myself to find out why I was such a wimp.

"Larks - I do swoon upon hearing such an idea! Seeing such a bold palm raised... Fetch the smelling salts - I am about to get the vapors!"

People do pass out - sight of blood - white coat syndrome, etc. That is just its own thing and I don't belittle anyone for having such an affliction. But nor do they petition to stop people from drawing blood or being doctors.

[–] sanriodyke [OP] 3 points (+3|-0)

I completely agree. You make a great point and you worded this wonderfully!

[–] bornwithovaries 2 points (+2|-0)

What do you want to bet that the "Angela" she mentions early in the post is a man?

Ugh, that's what makes these conversations impossible. People deliberately misusing words. I can't picture a woman reacting to her hand held out in a "no" gesture that way, and a man would only do it to score points.

[–] Verdandi 1 points (+1|-0) Edited

This is a great essay, I just really wish she didn't take so much pride in her inaccessible language. I consider myself a fairly intelligent person, but after I suffered an injury years ago it's sometimes difficult to parse really overly academic language like this.

I know if I struggled, the average to below average women definitely will. This is a reoccurring problem I see with radical and gender critical feminist texts. I understand taking pride in your intellect and vocabulary, it really is impressive to see someone who knows the language well. But the sheer "word salad"-ness of this piece made it a bit difficult to read. It was tough to sort out exactly what the ideas were sometimes, although I got there in the end.

I do agree wholeheartedly with what she had to say. We don't make any sense to liberal feminists so they react like audiences did to Tom Hanks in The Polar Express.