Girly girls have such big persecution complexes

submitted by eddyelric from self.GenderCritical

I got banned from FemaleDatingStrategy because I said I don't understand how the sub can call themselves radical feminists and then praise femininity and claim that women have a natural femininity.

https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/comments/hkwt5k/just_a_reminder_that_being_a_girly_girl_is/

There was a recent post on FDS on how feminism is so weak and doesn't fight for women's interests: https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/comments/fgm723/feminism_has_argued_for_my_equality_but_has/

God I can't stop rolling my eyes. At the very least, can these ladies stop calling themselves feminists if they want a trad life and heavy femininity?

all 27 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 26 insightful - 1 fun26 insightful - 0 fun27 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Does embracing femininity and wanting a traditional lifestyle mean that a woman shouldn't want accesses to rights for herself and other women? End goals on what a woman wants for their own lives don't dictate that they expect other women to live for the same goals. Those women still deserve accesses to women's centric reproductive rights and spaces to discuss their concerns and feel safe, right? We can fight for the same things while some of us wear ratty band tees, and others wear dresses. That point needs to made to them as well.

I don't mean to derail, but this is stupid shit to be divisive over.

[–]Feather 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

It really is. If we have to argue about whether a woman in a skirt is a bad feminist, let's do it later. Right now we need strength in numbers to fight for our most basic rights. To be frank, our enemies have always been fantastic at allowing us to divide ourselves so that they can then swoop in and conquer. We shouldn't let ourselves do that work for them.

And as long as a dude is "sOoO brave" for wearing a skirt, I'm sure as fuck not going to tell an actual woman that she's a coward for wearing one. I don't want to go yet further into a topsy turvy world there are yet MORE things that are only okay if men do them.

With that said, the FDS sub does have a lot of questionable ideas about performing gender. But I'm not gonna kick them out of whatever club I'm in as long as they understand that biological sex is real, that women need a wide variety of urgent rights to be respected and re-gained, that porn is revolting and degrading, etc.

[–]DifferentAirGC 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It's ok to be girly, but performing femininity is not empowering or a feminist statement. It's a neutral act at best.

[–]Feather 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree. Maybe I didn't read through the linked posts well enough to notice whether they were encouraging people to "act" feminine instead of just saying it's okay to be girly.

[–]Thatstealthygal 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Seeing skirted garments as innately feminine is western centric also. They should consider that.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

our enemies have always been fantastic at allowing us to divide ourselves so that they can then swoop in and conquer. We shouldn't let ourselves do that work for them.

People keep saying this, and somehow every time it's said I still need to hear it. Thank you for saying it again.

[–]venecia 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Co-signed in entirety. I want this space to be free of petty in-fighting. We all have different views but agree on the core truths.

[–]Death_Tephra 13 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

They have to avoid GC and pinkpill debate or else they'll fucking PEAK. Then they'll abandon the idea of dating men and the sub won't exist.

[–]Asplenium 12 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Not really, as someone who frequented both GC and FDS. There were usually plenty of references to GC on FDS. Being gender critical isn't enough to stop some of us poor souls being heterosexual...

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I think a lot of women on there are past the point of wanting to date— the sub name is misleading in some ways. It can serve as a gateway to teaching a reality check to some women. That being said, I’m not sure why any woman centered sub would remain on Reddit, contributing to their profit.

[–]venecia 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

None of the moderators are married or seemingly even LTRs, despite marriage being the ultimate prize that users are told to chase. I think that alone speaks volumes for how well the system works.

But I believe I remember reading that they're jumping ship and making their own website, too.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Meh, although the name of the sub is what it is, I think it's kind of a "socially acceptable" veneer that hides what it's really become. I tend to think most of the moderators know on some level that they're not going to marry prince charming, and would admit that if pressed. FDS frequently suggests remaining single if one's needs aren't met, and promote being single as a valid option, which most relationship subs do NOT suggest. They don't allow men to brigade and harass posters. FDS also promotes the idea that women can dump porn addicts, sexual abusers, etc.. They show screenshot examples of men playing games, picking them apart, pointing out the tricks men pull, which is kind of an education for less experienced women on there. At least it opens up the eyes of younger women as to the tricks and traps pick up artists try to pull-- so many subs are devoted towards twisting women into putting up with anything and everything. FDS also attracts/accepts demographics that are usually ignored or harassed on reddit-- women from outside "the west", women who are in extremely conservative families, women of color, religious minorities.

I could see it as a lily pad to help move onto more GC thinking. Unfortunately, most women are groomed from early on to think "landing a man" is the ultimate goal in life. They're going to gravitate towards relationship subs to begin with. At least FDS attracts them and then makes them question some of their assumptions.

If they presented themselves as a "feminist subreddit" of any flavor to begin with, they would deter many women (unfortunately) right from the get-go. The sub skirts the "you're a bitter feminazi!" accusation by claiming to be a dating sub, having some emphasis on looks, but they are also encouraging women to be successful and to take care of themselves in their own right.

They can be ban happy, but I can see why as they get trolled A LOT.

I could be totally wrong about my assessment, though, as I was wrong about the vitriol from... well, certain people GC often discussed.

[–]Diversity_Racket 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

"We can be feminine for ourselves!"

Does this woman genuinely think she is wearing high heels for herself? High heels are purposely built to push your chest forward, stick your butt out, etc. -- high heels also create a host of issues like chronic pain, improper breathing, poor posture, etc. This isn't compatible with radical feminism. You're physically willing to suffer for... who? for what? why? And based on the comments, looks like the outfit is entirely designer. I don't see anything empowering in purchasing expensive, uncomfortable clothing.

All of this reminds me of the classic libfem retort: "It's MY choice. I wear it for myself!" If you peel back the layers a bit, you will see why it's not your choice at all.

To be clear: I'm not ragging on this woman, but I would like to see more people challenge themselves a bit as to the why - why they wear heels, why make up, etc. And I'm not immune to this either. It's a work in progress for many of us. I would just like to see more conversation around it instead of perpetuating the notion that these practices, created for the male gaze, are empowering. Especially in spaces where women call themselves radical feminists.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I want to make all of these arguments to defend the case for wearing makeup, etc., etc.. But then I realize that I don't have to defend shit. Neither do they.

Is this subforum about Gender Critical issues or strictly about being radfem?

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Is this subforum about Gender Critical issues or strictly about being radfem?

"gender critical" comes from earlier radical feminist discourse, as I under stand it. Before all this transgender stuff craze. The idea in radical feminist discourse is that there is something called "gender" which exists to help men exploit women. Most femininity stuff would be considered part of that.

/r/GC was a radical feminist sub and did not focus strictly on problems caused for women by the transgender movement. Things that were not in alignment enough with radical feminism as understood by the mods were removed.

There are probably different sorts of schools of radical feminist thought (that are also still female-centered) so I don't know about that in general. But I think that's what "gender critical" means in this space.

[–]Diversity_Racket 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for clarifying - I noticed bit of non-radfem commentary in /r/GC so I wasn't sure if the sub was intended to be radfem or not.

[–]Diversity_Racket 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I don't think it's about "defending" (but I can see how you might feel like you have to "defend" yourself) but I think if you disagree, it's worth it to have a conversation. I don't want anyone to feel like they're backed into a corner, but I also don't want to have to tiptoe around these important topics. Either way, I would still be interested in hearing what you have to say!

This sub is for Gender Critical issues - I brought up radfem exclusively because the OP mentioned the users calling themselves "radical feminists."

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

"Just a reminder that being a “girly” girl is totally awesome and valid and to shame girls for being feminine is to give in to a patriarchal culture that demonizes femininity because it’s largely associated with womanhood in a world that hates women. We can be feminine for ourselves, as well!"

Ok, first off, I've mostly only heard men bitch about makeup. Heels are stupid. I won't make a case for them, they're blasphemy etc etc.. And as far as them calling themselves radical feminists for putting on a dress to catch some "D" and treating it like they've cast a high level "Orbs of Distraction" spell.. just laugh and try to push points that matter.

We do have the ability to find beauty in our own self decoration. To decide what parts of ourselves that we find aesthetically pleasing, and then cake on whatever cosmetic to accentuate it. To be honest, when I've made sure to put on makeup in the past (and even now) for the purpose of going out, it's been because of a slight fear of other women seeing me and thinking that I don't have my shit together that day. No, that doesn't imply that makeup is required to make you look like you can take the day by the balls. It implies that in my own experiences, women are a lot less forgiving of one another and have been pretty fucking mean over less.

For the sake of another point though, let's say that a woman wants to wear a top that shows cleavage. She can ALSO like how her boobs look in that top. She might even be a lesbian and trying to attract another lesbian that will like her boobs just as much. It's sexualization of ourselves, but when the point is to have sex...

I'm all over the place and hope that someone at least got a giggle out of my shit.

[–]Diversity_Racket 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Thanks for elaborating!

I agree with you re: putting on makeup because you have a fear of other women looking down on you. I've had the same thoughts. I think we have all at some point felt this. It's so ingrained in us (through media, pop culture, society, etc) and it's partly this that foments the normalization of make-up. But I've noticed when I don't play into that, I find that other women are able to breathe a little easier, too. Once you're aware of this, you can either continue "playing the game" or challenging it. I think it's our responsibility to challenge this, not comply to it just because it's the norm. This is what real empowerment looks like to me.

As for your point about cleavage, maybe this is an unpopular opinion, but showing my cleavage purposefully, even if it is for women, is still objectification. I don't see the need for it, even if the end goal was sex.

Re: terms like 'self decoration' and 'aesthetics' - I've noticed these terms are commonly used in libfem thought. I don't agree with their usage because the former implies there's some sort of ritual behind 'self-decorating' as if you're putting on a costume. The latter is just another way of saying "I just like how it looks on me.." which again I think is rooted in socialization/pressure, etc.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Thank you for being open to talk about it and for not being dismissive or demeaning.

I see your point too, and it's probably not an unpopular opinion at all to view it as a form of objectification. I guess I feel like there could be an empowering feeling in both views depending on the viewer's lens and individual experiences. I don't agree with a lot of lib fem ideology, and I agree that my terminology reeks of it. It wasn't intended to.

[–]Diversity_Racket 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I like these discussions because they challenge me to unpack my own beliefs, too.

And yeah, my mind went to 'libfem ideology' first but I understand how that probably wasn't the intention.

[–]Thatstealthygal 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

High heels do do these things to a degree but they were originally worn by noblemen.... do you think they served the same purpose then?

[–]Diversity_Racket 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

From my understanding, back then, when men wore them it was a status symbol (but they also used them for practical uses like horseback riding). They also looked very different structurally (thick, flat, supportive heels). The high heels of today are built very differently, that serve the sole purpose of "enhancing" certain features/appealing to the male gaze. There is no practical use for them. They slow women down, they're impractical, painful, and they cause a number of aches/pains/strains, etc.

Both serve very different purposes.

[–]jkfinn 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The reason for "girly girls" is to split off young females from the old, gray, sexless, obsolete ones. When they do this they can call themselves "radical feminists" since they have no idea what it is. So, "femininity" is power, the power of sex appeal, and politics is a bore--and threatening to boot. It's an effective divide-and-conquer strategy employed by the male media. It always works like a charm--except in the early 1970s, perhaps.

[–]DogeWalker 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"radical" only means cool/edgy to them. let's read books and get back to our roots.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That sub is a better option than most remaining subreddits. I’m shocked it wasn’t banned.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do they call themselves radical feminists? I thought they were a different, but female-benefit-centered group.