>>1949 what do you mean by "stopped being a radfem"? if your thoughts and ideas are still the same and you just don't have the energy to like, engage in activism, how is that very different? i don't think you've stopped being one, if so. it sounds like life has just beat you down, which is understandable. life is tough and i don't think you need to necessarily be a very vocal activist that sacrifices your few resources all of the time, to affect other people. sometimes just speaking to people, friends, and family, candidly, and normalizing stigmatized viewpoints helps. or do you mean you don't believe the same things anymore?

>>1950 I mean I stopped going online to radfem places ,stopped talking about radfem, and stopped reading radfem lit. I still believe that men are inherintly defective, but I don't want to label myself radfem or even think about these subjects anymore.

>>1951 if that helps you maintain sanity, i get it. i personally feel better and very slightly happier-ish, in a way, knowing what i see and feel is also seen and felt by other women. it feels much worse to be gaslit on the daily than to recognize these issues, for me, but ymmv.

reminded me of this

>>1953 Haha sounds about right. I need to hang out with my normie friends more. I got into it initially because I had a lot of time to waste and didn't have many friends.

>>1953 kek. honestly though, this happens with literally every community once you start getting involved with discord and group chats. i don't think they bring people closer together at all. i don't think i've ever seen a decent discussion happen when 12 people are talking at once. these communities should just encourage one on one bonding, if anything. though i really don't think that's even necessary to just vent and share ideas, etc. also, i think it's totally possible to have radical viewpoints and very strong feelings about things, but not expect that people irl are going to understand what you're feeling and expect them to do what you want. that's kind of crazy. these people have to be realistic. there should be more encouragement of maintaining strong beliefs but realistic expectations.

>>1956 Yeah, it got to the point where I got flak for saying I use a dildo bc penetration feels good, and they freak out 'what no penetration is AWFUL it doesn't feel good at all gspot is a lie'. Ok kek. Also multiple times where I said how matriarchies probably existed in tribal times, and men just destroyed that evidence. I got dogpiled for not being 'realistic'.

>>1957 >matriarchies probably existed in tribal times, and men just destroyed that evidence. This is an interesting one. I think there is some circumstantial evidence.

I feel like introspection is missing from a lot of online circles as a consequence of social media in general and that's partially to blame for that exhaustion. Everyone (from any side of the political spectrum) feels the need to spit out opinions all the time. "Why isn't anyone talking about X?" and suddenly no one is talking about anything, they're just jumping from one subject to the next until they burn out. I also think some people who have antagonistic personalities seem to lean towards making activism their whole lives. They might alienate everyone in their lives and then use that as proof of why they need to keep going down that path a la madalyn murray o'hair. General rule of thumb is to not trust anyone who tries to come across as a martyr. The ones who judge others the most always end up eating their words when everyone finds out they're some boring, engaged-to-be married normie who puts on a persona online.

>>1953 >going on discord I mean that's a mistake in any case tbh.

>>1957 >Also multiple times where I said how matriarchies probably existed in tribal times, and men just destroyed that evidence. I got dogpiled for not being 'realistic'. matriarchies have definitely existed in history. were you just saying that more have existed than we have been led to believe?

Using an ideology to cope with your issues isn't a way to go. I wish more people knew that because tendencies of extremism is exhausting and damaging for most. Go outside, talk to people outside the usual radfem space, engage in hobbies excluding political discourse. Seriously, it's sad and almost pathetic to see radfems post some unhinged shit that just reeks of personal insecurities and issues that are obviously irrelevant and try to hide with radical feminism.

>>1957 >>1958 I remember reading passage In a book by will and Ariel Durant about something like this, they theorized that their may been Matriarchal or egalatarian tribes and socities that were either conquered anx or destroyed by patriarhal societies spefically cause the advantage patriarchy gave in warfare, patriarchy allowed for a higher birth rate and sense of joined heritage, patrichal societies had more children which led to more soldiers that could overpower the more egalitarian states, the first written example noted were the Assyrians who were super pateichal even for the time period they were in and had a household system where the woman was constant pregnant till the day she died and children would be taken care of captured slaves, this gave the Assyrians one of the largest populations and largest army in the world ever seen, they conquered and destroyed the whole known world Semi egalitarian societies did exist for some time, the Sythians, the Britions, thr Gauls, the berbers (all of whom were warrior socities btw which might have been one of the reasons they survived as long they did) but eventually they succumbed to and conquered by people's who consideres them barbarians

>>1951 >I still believe that men are inherintly defective Do y'all ever read political theory, or do you think being a radical is simply all about hating men and having extremist views?

>>2070 Calm yourself, we didn't say anything about your super-special fuckbuddy, madam academic.

>>2071 I'm volcel, dumbass. It's just brain rot inducing to see people slap labels on themselves that they don't even know the meaning of.

>>2070 Kek if you don't hate men after reading radium stuff and history, then I don't know what to tell you. Maybe look at your special mens phone history.

>Terri who got with some conservitard because she was feeling low. My fucking sides lmao. Terry was always a big lolcow anyway, I am not surprised at all. She represents all the things that are wrong with this generation of radfems and why I can't believe in the movement anymore. Obsessed with attention, with the appearance she gives, and with looking "alt" and quirky, and not in the message they are supposedly trying to spread. I miss Magdalen Berns, she was the only youtuber radfem who didn't seem a raging hypocrite and actually believed what she preached. >>2064 you just described most of radfems I see online honestly, specially at radblr. All reek of insecurity and mental issues, and all of them keep repeating the same points about men being devils without new input. It's exhausting. >>2070 >do y'all ever read political theory >average milenial/zoomer radfem >actually into reading and politics kek good one.

>>1953 God this is so on point. It makes me ashamed that I felt for the discord meme. I just want to go back to be a happy normie away from the political crazies, from either side. I've seen servers where everybody would have a boyfriend or even a husband while preaching men r bad and it really fucked me up. For that shit I'd rather share my space with conservative women who are at least politically coherent and still think troons, pedos and prostitution are bad than with doomer fake radfems.

>>2170 >>2168 Okay, see, imo, this is ridiculous. You guys do realize a lot of women are in transitory stages and it takes time and the development of inner strength for women and girls to feel confident in their feelings and desires enough to act on them? No offense but this is judgmental to the point of senselessness, and simplistic. Life just isn't like that for a lot of women. A lot of women have very low self confidence, they are purposely alienated from other women mostly due to little fault of their own, they are taught to always second guess themselves, and think that they're incapable of happiness without playing a role in a man's life, and life can be scary, period. It's no surprise people want partners when life can be so frightening. It's one thing for these women to rabidly cape for men, but you can't fault them for being realistic about men, while still struggling to gain independence. That's a GOOD thing, actually, that they even have the sense to see and admit that. Any progress is something to be celebrated. You have to realize that everything outside of small tumblr or discord or whatever circles, is telling them the complete opposite of what you guys think ALL. DAY. LONG. Their families, media, their colleagues, bosses, friends, are likely saying the opposite of what we believe. It just takes time. The one thing I very vehemently advocate for is the avoidance of marriage and children, because that can nearly seal their fate, but it takes time. You guys really can't be expecting this much from people who just aren't you, either.

>>2191 Yeah de female socialization is important, but I just can't take seriously the ones who have bfs and husbands while they go "all men are horrible" then turn around and go "but not my Nigel! He's special". I get they're going through unbrainwashing themselves but its important to point out that its most likely modern bc and living conditions that prevented their man from treating them like bang maid broodmares. Its just delusion, and if we don't call it out then they'll just stay brainwashed. But yeah I agree we need to focus more on de female socialization more than anything. Talking about how men are shitty doesn't accomplish much if women still depend on men for validation for their low self esteem.

the only time this board gets moving is when people start arguing about whether or not the correct path of life is abdicating men or settling down and having a family with a man, still centering everything around men. why don't both sides of this discussion get over yourselves and stop expecting validation for every single choice you make. yes, women are socialized a certain way and that affects everything in our lives, that's why the few choices we do have are very important. yes, people are going to make fun of you if you are constantly going on about how much you hate men while thinking your boyfriend is the exception. no one is forcing anyone to leave their boyfriend. no1care

>>2194 you're missing a main part of the argument. the anons above weren't mentioning not my nigeling. they were only complaining about women who hate men but are still in relationships with them. their complaint is that they're hypocritical for dating men while hating them.

>>2197 then I think we are on the same page. nobody trusts a hypocrite, I guess.

>>2200 you guys need to re-evaluate your lives. you guys are teetering on the edge of earth-shattering autism that is completely ignorant of real life and takes into consideration none of the real life circumstances or situations women are put in

I think dating men is only hypocritical if she lets him get away with shitty behavior. We don't hate men just for no reason, we hate them because they're misogynistic more often than not. If he genuinely isn't then what's the issue?

>>2212 I know where this is going with this "out-of-touch" crap. You're going to fucking reee about girls involuntarily married off in extremely patriarchal countries and young women who literally can't achieve indpendence on their own terms and/or have to escape their abusive family so they have to marry young. You're going to ree about that type of situation as if anybody criticizes these women and as if these women would choose the same fate if they did have a feasible choice. We are not talking about them. We are talking about hetero/bisexual first world women who have some connection to radfemosphere who do choose to have a romantic live-in relationship with a man. Who can live on their own, but choose to engage with oppressor and give up to 90% of their free time and resources to an oppressor because this is how romantic relationships work. For what? For somewhat better socioeconomic status (and that is not a given) and het privelege (and we know this ain't free). Then they feel defensive about their cooperation behavior and sunk cost of investing into a scrote and start shitting on asexuals and lesbians, say that any woman ever, especially a lesbian, who isn't in a 24/7 het s&m deal they voluntarily choose as adults, are literally super rich mega white privileged princesses and other blatantly untrue things; ignore that voluntary celibate women exist; and my favourite, declare anyone who calls for more interpersonal cooperation, for women pooling resources together, and, god forbid, the tamest forms of separatismto be the evilest, most privileged, most oppressive evil meanie ever. I find all these disingenous accusations really nasty, as someone who only got out of family abuse through entering unequal relationship with an older guy and as someone who family pushed hard to marry a muslim far cousin as a teen. I'm incredibly lucky the second guy died in an accident and I wouldn't move in with a man I barely knew if I had more options or were more strong mentally. I will never fucking live with a man if I can help it ever again, and I was't even abused by a romantic partner ever. I cherish freedom and free conciousness even though I don't have much now and the prospects frankly aren't bright. But you types defend against criticism by twisting situations like my own to present your choices as untouchable, choices I'd never make while a radfem. You make me feel more schizo than autistic.

>>2262 Being gaslit is the worst feeling in the world.

>>2262 i wasn't going to say any of that, at all. none of the recent posts about this topic have been about women in relationships with men shitting on lesbians or defending men while dating them, and the very weird screeds in the vent thread (posted within a day or two of the posts that started the kick-up in this thread) haven't mentioned any of this actually problematic behavior. no, every complaint has specifically only centered around the fact that they date men while also saying they distrust and dislike men - not that they cape for them, not that they're shitting on lesbians, not that they are defending them - just that they're dating them while still claiming to hate them. it'd make sense if ANY of these complaints mentioned actually problematic behavior that deeply affect other people, but that's pretty obviously not what's really concerning these anons. it's pretty insane that they feel they should dictate where and when women can and should make moves that happen to align with their ideals. it's not satisfactory that they should, in time, do so when it makes sense for them and when it's personally most beneficial. it has to be by their exact tabletime? that's absolute insanity. i'm not a defender of heterosexual relationships in any respect, but i think it's pretty entitled and insane to even complain about completely different people, people who aren't you and will never be you, who have different weaknesses and vulnerabilities, different circumstances and paths, solely for not PERSONALLY embracing separatism quick enough.

>>2262 I'm sorry you had to go through all that. Heterosexual/bisexual first world women are not going to "validate" your trauma or experience in radfem spaces by doing a sudden full 180. Like the other anon said, women have different experiences.

>>2267 But why flirt with death when you know how men are. I'm talking about radfems who still date men. I'm not talking about ALL het women of the west and never did.

If Kenyan and Nepalese can work towards their separatism, I'm sure 1st world radfem women can do it too. Too bad their love of cock gets in the way sometimes.

I see some of you still romanticizing relationships about men, still projecting your humanity onto men, holy shit, look at the world around you and WAKE UP. Voluntarily being with men is courting with the devil. Flirting with death. You can't change them, it's not socialization, men are here to make women's life hell. WAKE. THE FUCK. UP. Separatism is our only choice.

>>2272 1st world radfems can only stay in their fantasy because they have birth control std meds and police. I remember watching a female separatist village vid and when the reporter asked the local women what they do when they want to have sex for fun... the local looked at her like she was a fucking dumb ass. Women are socialized to hate themselves and worship dick no matter what, but at a certain point you have to grow up after having so many bad experiences with men.

>>2274 Hats off, anon Based

>>2273 >>2274 You're seriously glorifying the concept of separatism in those third world countries? You do know that's only the result of the abuse and trauma that they have received within their village and communities, right? Separatism is a great solution to avoid men and to be free from male trauma, but not every women are going to participate SIMPLY because they have different experiences. Sexuality isn't a choice either. It's great that 1st world radfems have access to birth control. Women in 3rd world countries don't even have reproductive rights, and that's what we're literally fighting for. Are these the leftovers of /ot/ or cc?

>>2319 Aka "lots of women too are ruled by their reproductive organs, like men, and will submit to having a master if it means she gets a little better treatment than most women". >that's only the result of the abuse and trauma that they have received within their village and communities I'm objectively less traumatized than most women, yet I love separatism. There's tons of women who get raped and go straight back to looking for a bf. I don't think it has to do so much with trauma. Honestly I've found that the only women who don't get separatism are the ones who've never had the chance to experience it for a bit.

>>2320 AYRT, went to an all-girl's high school, and majority of my household members are women. >Aka "lots of women too are ruled by their reproductive organs, like men, and will submit to having a master if it means she gets a little better treatment than most women". ...What? My only point is that because 3rd world countries are often religious, women in the 3rd world have to go through the stigmatization of their bodies and sexuality, and they don't have access to reproductive rights. You assume their actions are often a voluntary and a conscious feminist choice than it does have to do with their repressive culture and traumatic experiences. Even then, there's nothing wrong with women in the 1st world practicing their rights and having birth control access. How women practice it is another different discussion. >There's tons of women who get raped and go straight back to looking for a bf. I don't think it has to do so much with trauma. A woman who has been raped and goes back to looking for a boyfriend right away seems like attachment issues. That can result from trauma. I support separatism as it makes women's lives better and safer, I mean, that's literally the reason why we have women's shelters. Point is, glorifying separatism is just wrong, and pushing it on other women and shitting on them for disagreeing and having different lifestyles reeks of incel energy.

>>2319 Yes, anon. And be damn sure I'll glorify separatism in every corner of this planet, because it's the only possible route to be free from men's degeneracy and destruction, that's the whole point of it, either in California or in a Kenyan village. And yeah, not every women will participate and that we already know. We can't save everyone.

Men colonized women's bodies and minds to an extent that the mere thought of living without them is abhorrent and unthinkable. Sexuality also plays a part on it, It's certainly not a choice, but a great part of heterossex. culture is compulsory and tied to patriarchy; and it's easily observed. That's why separatism has - and it'll always have - lesbian/ace/celibate women at its core.

>>2319 >Women in 3rd world countries don't even have reproductive rights, and that's what we're literally fighting for. Which is impossible if not all women want to couple with men? What, in your opinion, separatism means, exactly? I just don't think that the only purpose of feminism is to ask men to treat their women more nicely. It's not gonna happen if women don't have an alternative way to survive and thrive anyway. There were some 1st world separatists when american women fought for their reproductiv rights too. Sexuality isn't a choice, sure, behavior is.

>>2324 Separatism is scrote-free, male-free. Feminism is inherently separatist: by women, for women. I support that, I'm not gonna argue against/opposing separatism because that is stupid. Have a lesbian commune, female-only bars, that's great! The main point of reproductive rights isn't so that we can let straight women fuck their misogynistic boyfriends safely, but because we have to acknowledge that women are human beings that deserve to have legal rights over their bodies. >I just don't think that the only purpose of feminism is to ask men to treat their women more nicely. It's not gonna happen if women don't have an alternative way to survive and thrive anyway. I agree, that's why you don't *glorify* separatism when even separatism itself can be the only choice for those women to survive. >Sexuality isn't a choice, sure, behavior is. You do know that there are a lot of factors that contribute to behavior among women? socialization is one of them. We can argue all day whether or not women consciously chose to date men, either way, I just think it's regressive and dumb to shit on women with different experiences by sperging in the vent threads instead of offering worthy discussion. >But we're talking about 1ST WORLD RADFEMS!! Radical feminists are women first before they are radfems, the same goes for liberal feminists, and even those tradthots. It's funny how some of you think those labels are eveything to care about in feminsm.

>>2325 >>2325 I agree with you, mostly, but I think it's less about bodily autonomy, and more that it's fucked up to deny women their trauma that comes from so many things, including socialization, and for these anons to deny that very real systems exist to discourage psychological and emotional independence (try to explain separatism on the basis of preserving your health to a psychologist and they'll treat you like you're an evil wackjob that needs to be sectioned for the safety of others), and it's fucked up to act like women aren't abused (sexually, physically, psychologically, etc) by their family members and their "support system", or are just more emotionally and mentally unsure of themselves. Like their vulnerabilities and situations don't matter because... they're from the first world? So they can't possibly try to mitigate harm or try to feel out their situations or lives, or figure out their desires fully? I think separatism should be the goal, but pulling the "WELL I DID IT AT 19, THEY'RE JUST WEAK AND PATHETIC FOR NOT ALSO DOING IT" is pretty sad and stupid, especially if you claim to be very aware of these very real structures that exist, yes, even in the first world, to disempower women and destroy or completely prevent the development of any mental fortitude. It's a lot to buck, a lot to come to terms with, and I think it's insane to deny women understanding for taking time to get there, especially when these anons don't know their circumstances, and they're just different people, full stop. There's also a major issue here with being "the right type of victim". The "right" victim leaves, the right victim has a backbone, the right victim never gives up, when victimized people just don't always work that way. Some people just have no fight, some people don't have the will that these other women have. That doesn't mean that they're pathetic. It depends on the person and the situations, and I'm not really speaking about women who are directly abused physically by their men, more women who have been beaten down by life and are in relationships that, while not typically "abusive", still aren't serving them. Why literally just get pissy and resentful of people who agree with you, admit they don't trust males, don't owe you anything and who aren't hurting you, and most importantly, are on your side? IDGI. Women in relationships with men being assholes to other women is an entirely different topic. The entitlement, and the withholding of understanding, is very stupid. You can't will people to do what you want. Their best bet is to encourage it by being supportive, not to sow division and resentment.

>>2331 back2lc

>>2332 There's a difference between expecting women in your camp to have the same or similar ideals and work towards them, and demanding they necessarily live by them exactly when you want and how you want, with no regard for women as people with situational complexities and vulnerabilities.

I feel like I've made this post 5000x but I really think that some of you need to go back to liberal feminism. I do not mean this in a bad way, because trying to insert radical ideas into the most palatable form of feminism is better than watering down radical feminism and constantly infighting about purity politics. Radical feminism shouldn't be het woman's couples' therapy. As a hettie Betty radical leaning libfem myself, I cannot really shoot down the concerns that separatists bring up. How long have humans lived in settled societies? And how many of those settled societies treated woman as more than bangmaids and broodmares? How many of those societies had rights for women and the humanity of women recognized from the get-go? Not many. Our foremothers had to fight for the most basic shit. Even now, in the arguably most "enlightened" societies we still have to argue about our humanity. Look at the current backlash from men over the most watered down form of liberal feminism. Look at how (at least in the US) we could be in a position where we might even have to fight over Roe v. Wade in the near future. Seriously, we in the US anyways might have some legal equality, but I'm sure at this point you already know about the shit ton of cultural problems that still pervade. So any kind of feminism is going to be a long fight. It is going to be a long fight with backlash after backlash that we will have to prepare , so honestly, I can understand the frustration that separatists have. Like....sure the vast majority of women may have their blinders on about certain things but like....us? After reading about history and looking at statistic after statistic about how het relationships are like and all that shit? This is just rambling , at this point but at some point radical leaning women and radical feminists should start doing...something. Maybe not a commune where every woman would flock to, but just promoting alternative female only spaces. I wouldn't mind living in a female only apartment building and going to a female only gym. Just an example, I remember reading a post of three friends that got a house together and are just thriving. Shit like that should be made normalized so you can at least help break socialization. That if you do not find your acceptable unicorn Nigel, it is not the end of the world. Two things can happen at once-- simultaneously try to advocate for normie women that want to stay normie women through a competent form of liberal feminism while also offering some radical feminist alternatives.

>>2333 Tolerance breeds nothing but half baked ideologies and movements. How is seperatism supposed to be radical if everyone in it can be excused or accepted into it?

>>2334 Word!

>>2334 holy shit, thank you anon thank you

We can't expect the majority of women to truly understand what's going on, but for us, radfem women? There's no excuse. You know too well the nature of men. They kill and torture us in the thousands every single day solely because of hatred. Men will actually kill us en masse in the distant future, so separatism won't be just a choice but a survival strategy. This isn't fearmongering, it is real. With downfall of humanity, we'll keep being the first and most affected target. Once a biological parasite is dying off, they bring the host with them. Remember that.

Would anyone please point me in the right direction for radfem reading material? I guess I'm your basic libfem at the moment but the more I've been hearing about radical feminism, the more it makes sense. I'm particularly interested in learning about the ways women have resisted patriarchal rule and carved out more rights for themselves over time. I want to know what it's taken so that I can help create more opportunities for women now and in the future. I feel that will involve learning about much more than women's suffrage in the U.S. and a handful of global women-centric nonprofits. I found this list - https://radfemagpie.tumblr.com/literature - any thoughts on where to start within that, or other recs in general?

>>2345 integrate better, there's a thread for feminist book in the catalog. radicallyaligned and a few other radfem tumblr blogs are good places to ask questions. https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/radical-feminism https://radicallyaligned.tumblr.com/post/632153359409987584/do-you-have-any-book-recommendations-for-a-baby#notes Also Why Does He Do That and Gail Dines' work on pornography should be helpful.

>>2368 My bad, since the line between liberal and radical feminism was being discussed here I thought it might be a natural extension of that to ask if there were specific books that addressed the topic. But you're right, my question also went beyond that. I appreciate the links and I found the book thread as well; I will start parsing through those.

>>2334 Exactly, I'm personally coming to the realization that I absolutely need to distance myself from men in all aspects of my life, but that also means I need to build a support network of women. Real-life women living real-life lives together and relying on each other is what makes separatism work, not me being a lonely autist just giving up on men.

>>2579 >relying on each other is what makes separatism work, not me being a lonely autist just giving up on men. louder for the people in the back

>>1949 I feel somewhat similar to how you're feeling but it has nothing to do with radical feminism, it is men. Scrotes give me depression. Living in a world m*le dominated is depressing. And after personal experiences, observing them and realizing what they are, also hatred and frustration like I had never felt before. The problem with radical feminism is that so far I haven't seen many proposals of solutions to the scrote problem, so I decided I'll just live my life and focus on my career and have no relationships with men, not think much about them and avoid interactions with them as much as I can. As you said, there are too many handmaidens for a change to be made, too many women who spend their whole lives living under a complete illusion and refuse to see the truth, and if I continue to feel the way I'm feeling, I would probably fuck with my life. I just hope I don't live long enough to see scrotes taking our basic rights again. I'll do what I can, but I won't wear myself out psychologically again

>>2334 Spot on anon > Radical feminism shouldn't be het woman's couples' therapy >but like....us? After reading about history and looking at statistic after statistic about how het relationships are like and all that shit? Yes, I was thinking about that the other day, about how lesbians have to deal with many het radfems complaining about dating scrotes even in radfem spaces, or at least spaces that were supposed to be radfem and how they could perharps end up moving away from these places because of this. At the same time though, we can't expect that most women will adopt political lesbianism right away and to become radfem might be a bit of a slow process for some so I don't know >I wouldn't mind living in a female only apartment building and going to a female only gym. Just an example, I remember reading a post of three friends that got a house together and are just thriving. Shit like that should be made normalized so you can at least help break socialization. That if you do not find your acceptable unicorn Nigel, it is not the end of the world. This

same here, i dont believe it is possible to achive something through legal mesures. it is a reformist approach and what we would be reforming with it would be patriarchy. btw i have noticed that all of the so-called radfems online are just oldschool libfems from 60-70's (like a fucking gloria steinem),wtf...... is being a libfem radical now, lol?? we are fucking doomed, sisters.

>>2609 As someone from Pakistan whose a bit of history nerd I think communism and state athiesm was the only realistic option and hope me and half a billion other Muslim women had, I know things would have not have been perfect but at least we wouldn't have legal laws that call for women to be stoned and mullahs wouldn't have all the power but that's not the world we live in For us there is no hope or anything, No protest and not even a chance to raise our voice cause well get killed for it, we havennt teacher the standards of the 1800's by European standards and we will die suffer cause of the saying of an deaert pedophile and warlord that Muslims around the world believe was the greatest human being who ever lived and will ever live

>>2610 dunno, sister, communism and atheism sounds like harm reduction to me, not abolition of patriarchy. like, yeah, i am aware that in socialistic countries being a woman is better than in capitalistic ones, but still the terra firma of society (=male rule) remains intact. in the entire history of ussr there were less female politicians than nowadays in russia during putins (!! which, mind you, is only 2 decades long) reign. also "atheism" in patriarchy is just gaslighting bullshit. because the main religion of the entire world - male supremacy, always remains unquestioned and, obviously, never completely abolished. (dont get me wrong i am really sorry for you living in that muslim nightmare, i just wanted to show that harm-reduction != radical approach)

>>2611 It would still be a million times better then any Islamic nation, I'd rather live in some poor south American country then Pakistan, I'd rather be a woman in England in the 1800s rather then in modern day Pakistan, unless you live here and understand what Islam truly is you can't know what its like here I am not legally allowed to change my religon to anything other then Islam in Pakistan, I will be executed by the state, I'f I'm not executed by the state a vigilante will kill me who in will be hailed as a True "Ghazi"(Islamic warrior) in 2011 a politician and business man in my county who was campaigning to end the blasphemy law was assinated by his own bodyguard, and what happened was millions of people celebrated this man's murder and hailed the assasian as a Ghazi(pic related are millions of men at the assassins funeral carrying his body) 3 mosques were built in his name and his wife said she was proud of her husband for defending Islam Can you even comprehend this, it doesn't feel real sometimes but it happened and its hell here, cause everyday I have to say that the figure of Muhammad who raped a year old girl and executed a man and took his wife as his own was the greatest Human being who ever lived, if I make any type of comment against him I will be murdered and who ever kills me will be a hero My will to live keeps me from killing myself everyday but if I can't find a way out I will do it cause there's no hope here, communism was the only historical and realistic chance we had and its gone

>>2612 Samefag I really hate the take that "le all religions are the same" no there not, religions are complicated and no one makes one up, there Menes that spread and evolve but some have natural regressive tendencies Judaism was a semitic faith that become henothiestic and then monothiestic and most of it Is an exegerated history of the Hebrew people Christianity went all over the place with its theolgy, with dozens of bizzare interpretations of Christ , the one that ended up coming out on top was the nycene creed which was adopted by the Romans as the state religion Islam however is more odd, many historians have noted that Islam likely Began as a form of non-trinatarian Christianty(Cause there are passages in the Quran explicitly against trinatarian Christianty) what disguishes Islam however is the overwhelming amount of 7the century Arab paganism and social values In Islam the language of Heaven is said to be Arabic and the Quran even states that it's an Arabic book, then stuff like the Hajj(likely some pagan Arab gathering) and the Semitic Animal sacrifice The main theological problem that makes Islam the worst is those 7th century Arab Social values became in themselves, those backward social values were now transcded as the Highest values that all human beings should follow Do you get what I'm saying