OP is definitely problematic, pictured bishie was 16 when the film was made and spoke out against the objectification he experienced as a result of the role he played in the film (an object of lust for an older man) in later life: >I was just 16 and Visconti and the team took me to a gay nightclub. Almost all the crew were gay. The waiters at the club made me feel very uncomfortable. They looked at me uncompromisingly as if I was a nice meaty dish...it was the first of many such encounters. Unsurprisingly it was men who were making him uncomfortable. More sus though is the fact that a picture of him was chosen for the cover of Germaine Greer's book, and he didn't like that either. Not to whiteknight because this is one guy while Hollywood churns out female starlets on an industrial scale, but OP, is this bait?

>>514 I feel like it is. This is such an odd thing to be worked up about as well alongside the the context behind the picture used for the OP. It would be one thing if it was "I think it is stupid how older women are shamed for being attracted to/being with age-appropriate younger men" but this is not that.

>>515 >>514 I remember an anon posting about male beauty and using that exact actor kid as representation of it. They had a particular autistic obsession with him on the "low calorie" board like at the beginning of the year or last year. It completely reads like bait but I think one or two of the anons in our midst just may be gross.

>>519 OP sounds like neccessaryspeed who kept trolling about this topic on LC.

>>547 Would not surprise me at all if it was her.

Banning porn might help. But when it comes to culture, the root of the problem may lie on eroticism. You can ban explicit sex scenes, but semi naked bodies and eroticism would still be all over the media

Taken from Wiktionary: “From French pornographie, from Ancient Greek πορνογράφος (pornográphos), from πορνεία (porneía, “fornication, prostitution”) + γράφω (gráphō, “I depict”). “ Pornography literally means the depiction of prostitutes, so it’s a term that meant something inherently exploitative. To talk about something that isn’t inherently exploitative, maybe the term “erotica” would be better. So yeah. I think that banning porn might help similarly to the way that banning it for children has probably helped, but hasn’t gotten rid of the issue completely. I think porn, capitalism, and misogyny perpetuate themselves in a vicious cycle. It reinforces the sexist/racist stereotypes perpetuated by capitalist society at large, while introducing males to new levels of depravity. It exists because of those reasons and makes it worse. Most people are only doing porn for the money, which I can’t consider true consent. Those who aren’t doing it for the money are sometimes unaware that they are being used in porn (spycams, revenge porn), groomed, and if they are truly freely choosing it, they make things worse for the majority who are coerced and tricked into it because the “positive” voices get boosted while the negative ones get suppressed and people get a distorted view of what the industry’s actually like. Sometimes people don’t even realize what they’ve gotten into until they’ve been out of the industry for some time, since they’re not allowed to talk negatively about it when they’re in it.

>>487 agree 100%. the porn is a huge problem but this is the gateway drug. it's in everything. everything is eroticized and i believe this is the first thing that needs to be tackled.

The thing is it's not to the government's job to enforce morality. Porn is banned in South Korea so you get risque K-pop instead.

>>497 We have tons of disgusting porn in America and we still have ultra sexified pop stars. K pop is tame in comparison. They're doing the right thing, but I'd still tackle the pornification of all media first.

>>478 I mean. The fact that we need male sperm to reproduce is kind of disgusting. I'd be for finding a way to have children without the aid of a man.

>>491 Don't complain about trannies then

>>492 Why not?

>>493 If you artificialize reproduction you automatically open the gate for all sorts of things than can undermine women, incluiding the creation of artificial wombs and eggs >But I'm disgusted by sperm eww Really? That's your problem? Well, just don't have kids then instead of relying on/ being depended solely on technology or some transhumanist future. It's like how trannies' womanhood is something completely depended on clothes, makeup and hormones. You take that all out and there are no trans women

>>494 dependent*

Stoked that another anon besides me is here to call out swerfs. >Others are frustrated that privileged women who can choose their clients pretend to speak for all of the industry, when most women want out. These women are the ones we're asking you to respect. By the way, they also do it to survive, just like engineers do engineering to survive, or professional artists make art to survive. Then you say that you support sex workers because you recognise that they are forced into it for survival. They're forced, it's not a choice they made, they wouldn't choose to do that. But you come over as hugely lacking in respect for women who choose to do sex work. >I have to take a lot of care to not come across as a tradcon or make it sound like I'm judging sex works for the same sexist reason other people do. But you do sound like a tradcon. You're all saying 'I respect sex workers as long as they didn't do it on purpose' like okaay it's kind of a gotcha don't you think?

Why even bother replying to the troll? They bring up no examples, reddit space and just spew autistic shit like "have confidence in yourself" when it comes to fucking camgirl nonsense. Literally a >>399 moment.

>>469 >You're all saying 'I respect sex workers as long as they didn't do it on purpose' like okaay it's kind of a gotcha don't you think? That's retarded as fuck. like you can't respect people who make dumb choices? i don't agree with every choice people make. it doesn't mean i don't have respect for them. it's people who habitually make malicious choices that i don't respect, and i think most people who i agree with on this issue are the same way. tradcons genuinely don't respect these women because they think they're dirty. there's a huge difference and anon sounds nothing like a tradcon. these women and girls are conned and plied by society in general and in plenty of cases, directly, by men who stand to make a considerable profit off of them putting their health and safety at risk. i don't not respect vulnerable people who are desperate and conned by Herbalife or whatever MLM into believing their investment and dedication to it will afford them a better life. wanting these people to be critical of sex work as an industry so as not to contribute to a larger problem or end up harmed (in a multitude of ways) doesn't mean you don't have respect for them. it's also all very convenient, all these women who are actively in sex work, of course, tend to praise it, just as coal miners refuse to let go of their exploitative line of work and resist retraining, even FOR THEIR OWN SAFETY, but many of these women are candid about the emotional, psychological and physical damage they once they leave the industry and have a moment to step back. most people don't even realize the toxicity they'd been mired in until they are removed from harmful situations or environments.

>>477 This. Some radfems are way too concerned with shoving the ideologue on women prone to sexual violence instead of expressing empathy and genuine help. Sex work is definitely not work, but my beliefs doesn't mean I should just shit on prostituted women who disagree.. If you guys encounter a camgirl who is clearly trying to cope and was groomed with how she makes a living, you don't fucking call her a libfem handmaiden. It's pathetic when radfems who think they "know better" would rather initiate fights on Twitter rather than learning to find common ground while ALSO spreading awareness on the consequences of "sex work." No wonder we got alt-right assholes masking as radfems/allies in our movement.

>>482 ayrt here, to be clear(er) i was saying anon's strawman was retarded as fuck. like, you can be critical of someone's choices and still respect them. a lot of sex positive people claim that radfems "don't respect" sex workers because they believe their choices aren't made fully by them and because they believe that these industries are insidious, and that's what the anon i was responding to was saying. that anons in this thread were saying they don't respect them because they "choose" it. i haven't seen anyone say that or suggest it. i agree with what you're saying though, it's stupid to just call people "libfem handmaidens" about this. they're just going to get pissed and dig their heels in. that goes for anything though. i don't see anything wrong with us being frank with each other and being loose with our wording amongst ourselves if we feel that someone is sooo servile to men to their own detriment (and to the detriment of others), but it's just a bad idea to come at swers like that. more flies with honey and all that.

Not my art, but good. JK Rowling is iconic.

>>161 omg i love the creator of that she's great!

>>161 She's on instagram! She still posts from time to time, wonderful wholesome radfem art. I really like her but lately she's been feeling a bit down. It sucks, I hope she is okay...

>>318 Uhhh, let's not w this

>>170 wow i love this so much!

>>351 ...When you legally allow something, even if it is something very controvertial, it becomes normalized eventually. In the long term desensitized people might not have that much trouble with opting to abort 6 months old babies for reasons other than that their lives are at risk

>>352 >>351 Fetuses can be anesthetized. And if either of you are willing to adopt these fetuses that will grow to be children, en masse, then sure, put your money where your mouth is and make sure you have thousands of other people willing and able to care for these kids. Until there's more than enough proof that these children have guaranteed safety and security, it's best that people who are so committed to not having a child at this stage, despite how invasive it is and without the risk of death, NOT HAVE THEM for the safety of the future child. Some of these people are extremely mentally and psychologically unfit, etc. There's no safety net for these children. Condemning these kids to a life with negligent and/or abusive parents or a life knowing they are unwanted and are at the mercy of others and that they don't have real, lifelong advocates, is reprehensible, and is nothing but an attempt to soothe your own emotions at the expense of these kids. And no, when you "legally allow something", specifically in the case of a procedure that is unnecessarily dangerous and invasive, that isn't true. 91% of abortions are still performed before 13 weeks despite women in most states being able to abort until 20 weeks, if not later when it comes to viability and no limitation states.

>>354 None of what you said justifies why aborting at 20 or 24 weeks of pregnancy should be allowed in cases where the mother's life is not at risk. I'm totally in favor of mothers aborting kids they don't want, but come on, you have enough time to make your decision before the fetus is capable of feeling pain and is about to born

>>356 How? I literally just said there are women and girls who get pregnant who are not mentally or psychologically capable and they don't realize it until much later on and until shit gets really real, etc. There are cases where girls and women think they can handle a child or that they are ready for them, but either through abandonment of the father, or domestic violence, or financial insecurity, etc, they realize it's actually a terrible and dangerous idea. People overestimate their abilities and they overestimate how prepared their environment is for a child. Again, the ability to have an abortion later is there for plenty of women and girls and yet we're still seeing upwards of 90% of them performed before 13 weeks. And there seriously are plenty of cases where men have convinced the women in their lives that they really want these children or they goad these women into believing that they can swing it, but realize much later on that they want nothing to do with these children. Shann'an Watts and Laci Peterson come to mind, and they were murdered due to the fact that these men realized they wanted no involvement despite initially thinking that they did. A lot of men actually first begin cheating when their wives become pregnant, become abusive, etc, because they also overestimate their interest in having a family, responsibilities, their abilities, and realize that they don't want children. It's not just women choosing, I'm sure in a number of cases it'd come down to their circumstances drastically changing for the worst out of nowhere, too. Again, fetuses can be anesthetized and pain wouldn't really be a factor. The very, very few women that might do it just as form of birth control, essentially, absolutely SHOULD NOT be parents, and you're more than likely dooming these children to a waking nightmare of a life if they do become parents. You've offered no real response to the fact that fetal anesthesia can be administered, nor have you acknowledged the stark truth that there would be no safety net for these children anyhow.

>>359 I don't know exactly how fetal anesthesia work in these cases but I just... I don't see why make it legal to abort almost new born fetuses when the mothers have no risk of dying at labor and they had enough time to make this decision. According to your arguments, should we also allow it that a mother kills a new born or a 1yo baby if she is not mentally or psychologically capable of dealing with them but hadn't realized it until much later on?

>>254 This. >>257 And also that bit at the end is part of the reason why the anti-pp anons wanted us gone in the first place lmao. Some of you need therapy not radical feminism, because it's obvious that you aren't in the right mental state to be able to deal with serious topics without spouting insane shit like this.

women can't all be filed under man haters/handmaidens. I don't think the most man hating women in the world could do much damage to men/men-loving women even if they all collaborated (that's a small number compared to men who hate women). I think discussions always hit a dead end when they get reduced to saying women who are focused on broader goals (i.e. involving men) = handmaidens, and radical feminists = middle class white lesbians up in their rich lesbian tower chewing on the entrails of working class men

>>260 Many lesbians get accused of being handmaidens though

>>262 that's my point. any discussion can get shut down by women accusing each other of being handmaidens. at the end of the day it's pointless to accuse someone of something here because we could all be lying about our experiences since this is an anonymous board. I haven't really gotten to a conclusion about this issue or have any suggestions, really. Just half a thought.

>>316 I feel the label handmaiden gets thrown around way to much and we get into rather silly debates on what makes a handmaiden and whose the real feminist It's so fucking dumb and nothing gets accomplished, this isn't just a feminist thing I just think this is a problem with the modern left as a whole

>>190 Radfemtori and topdyke both being straight and having secret boyfriend and husband was such a fucking embarrassment, and topdyke wasn't just In a relationship, she was a goddam military housewife

>>192 >>190 idk why this is still such a prominent part of radblr lore and spoken about like this is something that happens super frequently. like, it's tumblr. i 100% expect any group on tumblr to have a few wackies, or just any group of people online, honestly. it's not surprising. lot of untreated mental illness on the internet, lbr.

>>193 That's just one part of it, I have been in various communities and without a doubt the infighting in radblr was the most frequent, literally everyone would accuse others of being a handmaoden or a pick me or a PIV slut e.t.c

Cocksmasher69 was great. Also this rudefem named LARPS who was totally a farmer was fun too.

What do you think about the eltigrelibre drama?

>>127 Yeah I guess the difference is that I see even supposedly intelligent men acting this way.

>>128 Yeah, because their idea of intelligence is just an exercise in ballfluffing. It's generally definitionally designed to favor them, basically always. Ime, men that are "intelligent" are not intelligent, they're just extremely autistic about like, one topic or skill. That's a joke. The definition of intelligence is typically and purposefully androcentric. I'm talking about people who aren't just extremely proficient in one field and yet are a complete knuckledragger that needs to be mommied and led through life outside of his given field. When given a fair shake, women outcompete men in basically everything. I also think we generally don't have the time or privilege to become earthshatteringly autistic about one thing because we're saddled with a lot more responsibility and the pressure to be somehow held accountable for everyone else, from day 1.

I wanna talk about intersectionality, I actually do think it has its merits. I do think it does make some good points about the intersections of privileges and oppression. The problem is that it's permeated so widely down to a much more simple analysis for the average person. It's set group against group and now it's clear that we're starting to think in more tribal political terms than we did in the past. You can be called an "oppressor" now, despite the fact that only three generations back, your great grandparents couldn't read, didn't have the vote, and spent 14 hours a day in darkness down a mine. People instantly categorize other people according to the group they belong to and all the other important factors (class, mental health, Past experiences etc) tend to overlooked in any individual exchange. We are steadily descending to the types of politics one sees in places like the Sudan were people vote entirely on identity lines with zero concern for policies or what makes someone an individual.

>>131 I have nothing much to contribute to this board beside noob questions but I found your post interesting and overall I'm happy to see cordial and intelligent anonymous discussions about feminism. Cheers

>>176 That's how I came to a be separatist, anon. In my country no democratic methods have worked ever, especially now, political opposition is targeted and sometimes murdered, and the economy is down-spiraling to shit at a breakneck speed. So participating in peaceful protests and organisation is not much of an option. I don't see how socialist methods of "let's put a fuckton of taxpayer's money to good use" would work here, where corruption is king and poverty is a norm either. The one thing we can realistically do is to encourage other women to go their own way, and encourage their daughters not to choose men, to put time, energy and resources into sisters instead. Some women who can not spell the word "feminist" correctly cause they don't know it choose separatist-ish way of life too, without reading dozens of theory books etc. though. Gives me hope.