When people take the accountability away from women and decide to place the blame on men like nearly most of the Modern Western Feminists™ for literally ALL of their problems, then they aren’t empowering women; what they are doing is basically relegate women to a victimhood, helpless position and make men have power over them by not holding women accountable for a damn thing. Ironic, isn’t it? 🤔
7 notes · View notes
I AM TRYING SO GARD T9 GET OVER MY INTERNALIZED MYSOGYNY BUT WHY THAT SHIT GOTTA BE SO HARD
Like damn I disliked Taylor Swift for a long ass time because she dated people???? Like how does that make any sense????? And I know now that it's from media and stuff like that but damn is it difficult trying to figure out this shit on my own
Still trying to figure out how to wear a dress without instinctively seeing it as weak and fluttery and not what I'm supposed to be doing/presenting
1 note · View note
I'm so tired of being told that men are terrible and bad and never do anything good and only cause problems
Can I just be a man in fucking peace?
1 note · View note
I hate women who hate men only because they’re men. It’s narrow-minded and plain sexist, please stop it.
10 notes · View notes
I have seen a lot of misandry on this website and I am appalled as a gay woman. I can’t stand it, there is no excuse to hate on a group of people based off of a few individuals. There are SOME bad men, but there are also SOME bad women too.
If you think that all women are superior to men and can’t be “evil”, fuck you.
-You’re saying my abusive ex girlfriend who drove me to suicide was a good person
-You’re saying that my best friend is scum even though he’s the only person who calls to make sure I haven’t relapsed into self destructing behaviors
1 note · View note
People online: indulging internalized homophobia in men as a meme is bad. Gender essentialism is also bad. Making jokes about how men suck into genuine ideology that villainizes having relations to men is bad.
Me: so true bestie a lot of people hide their reactionary politics behind some kind of pseudo-feminism and it's honestly so grating like-
People: which is why saying you hate men is bad. Distrusting men is bad, and misandrist. Generalizing men is bad. Making men feel bad for being men is misandry. Won't you PLEASE think of the transmascs.
2 notes · View notes
No Limstella, but we can get Orson. A man who ranked 337th. Below Nergal, who is himself far below Limstella.
Guys we’re never getting Limstella.
Anyway, the Fallen banner this time around is super boring. What used to be a fun, eclectic mix of characters from across the series, is now half Three Houses. Like everything else. I knew the powercreep banner would heavily emphasize Three Houses, but I’m surprised they then further restricted it to only two games.
So first, Dimitri. Infantry lance, not like we had enough of those. His weapon is...okay, real talk? This isn’t that great. Attack +3. Atk/Spd Solo 3, but also if he can’t double somehow, he deals an extra 50% of the difference between his attack and the foe’s defense. So remember Astra Blade on Valentian Catria? It’s just that but conditional, on two conditions: Solo, and also still can’t double despite obviously being really fast. So I kinda feel like this sucks, compared to L!Dimitri who got speed-based damage reduction and B!Dimitri who has DC and shit. His B-skill more than makes up for this by being pure garbage. Canto Rem+1, Spd/Def -3, and a Firesweep effect. So great, thanks for that, you can’t counterattack against him, he gets canto, and a nice debuff on the stats he wants most. Fantastic, they definitely knew the Save skills would be busted as hell and will now begin shilling counterattack denial as the new offensive meta. Can’t wait.
Male Morgan, who is a...red tome infantry. Again. It’s not quite as bad as Dimitri, but it didn’t escape my notice that the men of this banner duplicate their weapons while the ladies get something fresh and new. There’s that misandry we love from FEH. Anyway, his toolkit is fun and I kinda like him. Female Morgan is on the banner too, and she’s an axe flier. I love that she’s always a flier. Axe flier in particular is really unique, and I absolutely love that about her. 10/10, very appreciate. Both of them operate the same way. Male Morgan gets Attack +3, F!Morgan gets accelerated cooldown. If over 25% HP, inflicts Atk/Res -6 on foe during combat, and grants effects based on cumulative total of unit buffs and enemy debuffs. At 5 or more, foe can’t double. At 10 or more, unit guaranteed doubles. At 15 or more, inflicts a Guard effect. These two are going to be tanky as hell. Which is sad because one’s infantry, and one’s flier without built-in Iote’s. Guess which will be better. The fun thing is their C-skills, which seem to be unique since there’s not an associated 3 or 4 to indicate an inheritable tier skill. M!Morgan gets Atk/Res Menace, while F!Morgan gets Atk/Def. Both skills inflict -6 to the respective stats on the nearest foes within 4 spaces, then grants unit +6 to those same stats. This creates an immediate and very consistent 24 point differential, kicking off all their weapon effects. Unless the foe has the exact Lull to shut down your buffs, or the exact right Unity skill to invert their debuffs, you will have your weapon effect active.
Oh, and F!Morgan has Dive Bomb. Have fun with all the fliers now that that’s easily obtainable.
And finally...Hegemon Edelgard. Look, we all knew she’d be here, what does she do? Oh, Colorless Beast. Glad you finally got off Green, but I kinda wish you were color sharing with F!Morgan this one time. Also fuck Colorless I’m so mad at this godawful color. She’s an armor beast, which is...man, really? We had one (1) armor beast prior to this in Caineghis; we’re really just gonna dumpster the ONLY armor beast we already had? Why couldn’t she be Green? I know that’s bad for Edelgard Emblem but fuck Edelgard Emblem, Caineghis didn’t deserve this, and I’m tired of them powercreeping units who are the only ones in their class. First Winter Sephiran shows up and just completely outclasses Winter Eirika by being her but with better stats in a similar spread, and now Edelgard’s showing up taking the same goddamn thing Caineghis had, and again is just going to be better stats and a signature B-skill for better Arena scoring and everything. I’m just tired, IS. Do something different.
Ugh. Anyway her kit is neat, but in a dumb way. Accelerates special cooldown trigger. If 25% or more HP, inflicts Atk/Def -6 on foe, and also Wary Fighter. Meaning she cannot double either. Not that this was in question but still. The fun part is she’s got Raging Storm. This is Legendary Edelgard as a Beast, and I’m kinda here for it. Of course it also comes with the standard +2 attack and DC effect for transforming. Armored Wall is funny too. It’s Special Fighter but 25% instead of 50%. That’s already good. But then it’s like “Oh, but if she’s transformed, in the first combat of both phases, the first hit from the opponent is reduced by 40%.” Like...why? That’s stupid good. You can’t get your special off, you can’t double without NFU. Like, this is actually a good effect on this kind of unit. Oh, and also it gives 7 healing after each combat, because why not. No color weakness, gonna be min-maxed to hell, great dual phase potential with the extra action and immediate retaliation Bonfire in Enemy Phase, self-healing, buffed Special Fighter, and dual phase damage reduction. Good thing armor weakness is real. As is beast weakness for all four units who have the ability to exploit that.
And Orson as the GHB, because I guess this is Sacred Stones time after all. I also don’t think he qualifies as a Fallen, so this bugs me, but maybe he’ll be an axe cav and we’ll get another of those to invalidate the last two.
I dunno, I’m not feeling this as much. I adore the Edelgard and F!Morgan, but overall I just find myself wanting on this one in a big way. I’ll pull to spark, probably for Edelgard because you know how I am, but I dunno. We’ll see how it all goes. I’m kinda bummed, not gonna lie.
9 notes · View notes
something that really sucks about speaking out against sexism and sharing my own personal experiences with it, is that terfs are drawn to it and try to use it as ammunition for their misandry and anti-trans cause. like i don't even feel comfortable posting about misogyny on here despite it being something very prevalent today and in need of discussion, because I'm afraid of giving terfs a platform to spread their transphobic hate speech and making my blog an unsafe place for trans people, which is the opposite of my blog's purpose. it also worries me that people see "sexism" and immediately think "terf," because they have invaded and taken over every conversation about women's equality. I want to talk about my experiences without them being used to invalidate others'. my oppression shouldn't be weaponized, or used to justify the oppression of others.
i just wish i could discuss sexism and feminism without it becoming a basis for others to spread anti-trans rhetoric.
649 notes · View notes
8uilding on that last post (and not saying misandry is real or something) 8ut I think the “dads suck” thing affects me very personally in two ways
- my mum sucks. admitting that is hard. admitting that my dad sucks is easy 8ecause dads are supposed to suck or whatever. 8ut if I 8ring up my mum no8ody takes it seriously
- I wanna 8e a parent one day. May8e even a dad. And I’m so terrified of 8eing like my fathers, scared that it’s inevita8le.
4 notes · View notes
Martins mother being fond of Jon for being an ass is such a wild take. AU where somehow Jon meets martins mother before she dies (Either because Martin and Jon are together and want to do some strange version of the "Meet your parents thing! or for some work related nonsense) Would martin be relieved?? jealous?? shocked?? all three???????
Okay normally I answer asks in order but I had to make an exception for this one because making sure the next Mrs. Blackwood ask comes right after the last one Makes More Sense in my head.
Anyway, I am delighted by this proposed AU.
I’m going to go with “they meet because of a weird work thing” and I am going to add it’s early on. S1-S2ish. Martin is so, SO worried that his mother is going to piss off Jon. Then Jon opens his mouth and Martin realizes that the opposite scenario is equally likely and he’s about to scream.
And then they get along famously instead. Bastard to bastard communication at its finest.
Relieved? Shocked? Jealous? Martin is DEFINITELY all three. Like it’s--it’s good, it’s better than listening to a shouting match. But now he can see what it would be like if his mother had just a shrivel of affection for him and--it’s directed at someone else.
Martin proceeds to have recurring nightmares of Jon and his mother talking about him behind his back.
I am imagining that Jon does meet Mrs. Blackwood a few more times, and even talks to her without Martin there. But instead of trash-talking Martin he’s snippily defensive of him to her, not at all afraid to contradict anything she says.
“I think I may want to date him, in fact.”
“Bah!” Mrs. Blackwood says to that. “Stay away from men. Men will take everything and then they’ll suck your heart out through a straw.”
“Perhaps the nurses should schedule an appointment with an eye doctor,” Jon says, in the tone of voice that implies she’s an utter idiot, which she appreciates. “I am a man.”
“And what of it?” she snaps, and then she starts rolling her wheelchair. “That doesn’t make you safe from them!”
(If misandry is not a serious social problem, it’s not for lack of effort on Mrs. Blackwood’s part.)
Perhaps in this AU Martin’s mother even lives in S4 because, idk, the Supernatural finale aired earlier than in our universe and homophobia passively adds years to her lifespan. When Jon is super lonely and having a rough time at the Institute he ends up visiting her.
He asks Mrs. Blackwood if Martin has come to visit her. He hasn’t. He didn’t even call on her birthday
“And good for him! Good for him!” she says. It’s proudest she’s ever been of him. “And has he spoken with you lately?”
Jon lets out the most miserable sigh and Mrs. Blackwood bangs her fist repeatedly against her chair.
“I told you!” she says. “With a straw, I said! With! A straw!”
They then proceed to bond, irritably, over abandonment, the sinking feeling that you shouldn’t still be alive, and how one manages to live on in spite of the former two.
39 notes · View notes
My sister is so weird and inconsistent like she did this "men suck" tirade about a movieplot we saw and then like an hour later i showed her this vague mild misandry graffiti my friend had taken a picture of on IG and she made this face like ~misandry is wrong and that isnt funny~ like??? It ruined my mood ughh like i just cant be natural with u ur so weirdly condescending & hypocritical??
I feel like you’re not taking into account that cas is a sweetie and dean is a guy who just kind of sucks. Scales are already tipped so far in cas’s favor that even with all his atrocities he comes out winning the divorce
The unabashed misandry of this ask... implying that dean is a worse man just because his war crimes aren’t as sexy and numerous as his husband’s... just SAY that that’s the reason and go. Why do we have to pit two bad bitches against each other??? Oh shit I forgot it’s because they’re getting divorced
3 notes · View notes
genuinely wondering how you can have intersectional misandry? either you hate the male sex or you don't. you sound like one of those weirdos who think it's okay for moc to be misogynistic or gay men to be misogynistic, even though their victims almost always are women from their own demographic. a trans woman is still a member of the male sex, is still educated as the male sex, is still given medication doseages that won't kill them, will never be forcibly impregnated, etc. a male is a male.
I hate cis men, that includes gay and moc cis men. I don't care you think trans women don't experience misogyny, that's a you problem.
Basically kill all cis men, but I'll still lovingly suck my lesbian girlfriend's dick.
*a stream of consciousness that might or might not make sense and no im not editing it cuz i'll prob delete later..
as a libra (sun & rising) we're known to b mirrors to ppl which a lot of times ppl mention as a negative trait to our personalities.. which whatever suck my dick.. to me its a fucking skill. ppl think we dont know what we like or want or who we are, but we do. its just not your fucking business so we dont tell you. Which really comes in handy when dating cis men.
I love mirroring the energy the cis men i date give me, Its taught me how not to expend any more effort or energy than I receive. I treat them how they treat me and I never have any qualms about it.
One thing that i never really did is that really fucking irritating thing that cis men do when they have you in your life and sort of use you to better themselves and then they leave with all this self improvement and youre like.. hmm interesting look at you with all these gifts you got from my presence and here i am worse off than i was alone. I dont think its something they always do intentionally, patriarchy allows them to coast certain aspects of life in a way we're not afforded to. soo we actually have to be the best at everything we do we have to have our shit together in ways they dont even have to consider.. especially as a black woman.
I remember so vividly one day i was on the couch with my ex (rip but also fuck him) we were having one of those kinds of conversations and he started tearing up and went on this whole monologue about how much hes learned from me and how much I changed his life for the better and at first it warmed my dumb ass heart until a switch flipped and i was like.. hol'up wtf did i learn from you? How the fuck have you improved my life, my perspective, my situation? (spoiler: he fucking didnt at all)
That day imprinted in my mind and i wasnt aware of how much i had been giving without receiving a damn thing. it was so easy for me to just give everything i had cuz i loved him but without any replenishment from him or even myself i left that relationship so depleted it literally took me 2 years to feel like myself again.
SO, now that im kinda back on the dating scene again Im putting my Libra mirroring skills to good fucking use and Im officially on that wave and wow i really like it here. Im really not fucking with someone who I cannot learn or gain something from and instead of matching that energy im literally giving them crumbs. I will not b your inspiration, or your muse, I will not change your life or advise you or play mommy. its not flattering to me to hear how much I inspire you. Ive been around long enough to know what that means when you niggas say that shit.
Im saving myself for myself....for now at least.
I have always said that I never met a man that was better than me and now im even questioning if theres a even a man thats at the very least on my level? Like..????????? Call it misandry if you want but I'm literally never impressed and that sucks for them.
28 notes · View notes
Pls read if u have time, TW: s*xism, misandry, mentions of h*m*phobia
Ok yall, so i just came across this meme that says "girl you are crying over a guy who is literally a guy please seek help❤️" and omg, i cant express how f sick i am of this
👏Stop👏demonizing👏attraction👏to👏men👏 its not cute.
I wouldn't be against the meme if the reason was bcs that particular man is toxic or other reasons but op emphasizes its "literally a guy" which implies hes bad simply because hes a guy, and thats fcked up. How do u think a guy would feel if they saw that meme? Be kind. /srs /nm
This case is just an example of sexist posts ive seen on this platform, other examples are sayings like "men suck" or "boys suck". Listen, not that i disagree with it (💀) but dont say that?? Its generalizing and just mean. I am totally against 'not all men'. All men are dangerous, all men are responsible for the oppression and danger women and non binary people in, all men have to actively protect women and non binary people, but CONTEXT MATTERS. "All men" doesn't apply to the context "k*ll all men", neither does it apply to "men suck".
If you think im defending the oppressor, honey, u have no idea how patriarchy, sexism, and misogyny make my blood boil. As someone who is incorrectly precieved as a woman, sexism and patriarchy are my favorite forms of bigotry (/s) as it affects my daily life significantly. I educate myself and others a lot abt feminism but u know what? Its not my job to talk abt it since i am part of the marginalized group! Its mens job to speak up abt misogyny and sexism women and non binary ppl experience, and its my job to talk abt misandry since i am not a man. Misandry is real but patriarchy, misogyny and sexism that women experience are a much bigger problem. Also, feminism is for everyone regardless of their gender, sex, sexuality, race, etc. its for men too
This doesn't only apply to sexism, btw. The marginalized group hating on the privileged group, generalizing that all of them are their oppressor, all of them are bad, when not all of them are. Ive seen so many gays trashing on straights and for fvcks sake S T O P. Realize how harmful it is not only for allies but also the LGBTQ+ Community. I wouldn't mind if you're hating on some q*eerphobe or trashing on cisheteronormative culture but some of you have gone too far and shame all cishets just for being cis and hetero. I have a whole other essay abt this but..
Ultimately why dont we just be kind? Think abt how people of various groups would feel before we say anything. We dont know what people have been through, so be kind. Like, ok, men have hurt us, allocishets have hurt us, white people have hurts us but are you really gonna hate on every privileged group of people on the internet as revenge? Privileged doesn't mean they're oppressing, it means they're responsible for the oppression you're experiencing. Bullying privileged people wont change anything, it wont end the oppression, it worsens it.
Omg, just stfu and be kind please, i cant take it anymore.
Thanks for reading till the end, share your thoughts in the comments because this opinion of mine is so controversial and very few people talk abt this, i wanna know your thoughts, respectfully.
1 note · View note
(don’t rb) cw: references to gendered violence and specific recent instances of it (US, UK & Turkey) and weird extreme ends of the current Misandry Discourse
Being gender essentialist is stupid and being shitty to men for being men (including cishet men) sucks, undeniably, and I’m glad people are pointing that out more now.
However I don’t think faulting non-men (including queer not-men) for being wary of random men they don’t know and equating that to like, gender separatism and outright hatred of men is... fair...
Just. Men aren’t ~inherently more violent~ but like... that doesn’t mean threats and harassment and stuff don’t exist.
Like I SHOULDN’T have to be paranoid about strangers but I also don’t think it’s inherently ~misandrist to clock that bad shit goes on in the world around you and respond accordingly. And especially in the midst of a number of global protests and movements regarding a rise in gendered violence it’s maybe not a fantastic idea to accuse random people (generally women) of h a t i n g m e n if they’re “stereotyping” about people by like walking home alone at night or some shit. It’s kind of nasty.
I don’t actively avoid men, but as a woman (and a lesbian) yeah, I am wary. I’ve been burned a lot by sexism and homophobia, and I don’t generalize about like, my classmates or things like that, but I also don’t think that it’s like, an act of bigotry to find yourself somewhat nervous in certain contexts due to being aware that someone might see you as a target, because the “might” is enough to be concerning.
Acting like men are all, inherently, incapable of love/emotion/sympathy, that they’re inherently violent and predatory, all of that is bullshit; it’s awful and it makes people feel awful about themselves. It’s essentialist, it’s factually wrong, and it excuses abusers whose actions are very much choices, not some sort of biological drive, and who could very much do better.
But. Acting like the fact that a) men have gender-based privilege (and cishet men have privilege based on that) and b) some men use their privilege to violent ends against people of other genders is somehow not worth discussing or it leads to emotional harm to all men to mention it?? BAD.
Like this week of all weeks, in the aftermath of, among other things, a mass murder in the US that was racial/gendered violence; protests over the murder of a woman in England met by violent crackdowns by police who couldn’t stand to see women calling for their own safety in the street (after having gone door to door telling them not to go outside alone); and protests in Turkey over rejecting an international resolution to fight violence against women... maybe RIGHT NOW is not the time to imply that women in particular (but non-men in general) are being paranoid or ~mean~ being nervous about violence.
4 notes · View notes
I feel old.
At the risk of confirming that I have finally shriveled up into a moldy crouton who represents an impediment to progress: It’s absolutely freaking me out to realize I’m going to have to navigate a version of the LGBTQIA community and discourse where there are people involved who are young enough to have completely missed a lot of the things that inform my positions about transgender issues. (Context here if you want it.)
I privately rolled my eyes at Natalie Wynn (of ContraPoints) for saying on Twitter that she sympathized more with “old school transsexuals” than trans women younger than herself, because she felt excluded when people were explicitly asking for pronouns instead of attempting to gender her correctly without asking. That was, I thought, ridiculous - gendering somebody correctly at a glance is a minefield, especially once you start to factor in nonbinary people; and accommodating people who couldn’t fit under that paradigm was, I thought (and still think), worth giving up a little hit of personal gender euphoria and vanity-stroking.
But... fuck. She’s only five years older than me. I am older now than I was when I started this blog by a wider margin. I’m a whole-ass decade older than some of the people dipping their feet into The Discourse on this site.
And today, I finally learned what Wynn meant on a more visceral and complete level, and I’ve felt it. I have stared into the void, and the void has stared back.
And I hate myself for it, because I know that it means I am now a Problem.
There are trans kids alive today whose first exposure to the idea of transgender people wasn’t through crass jokes. This is a good thing.
There are trans kids alive today who didn’t have to watch (or hear about) trans women getting dragged out onto Jerry Springer, to be publicly humiliated and sometimes even embroiled into physical fights. This is a good thing.
There are trans kids alive today who grew up with a more holistic and inclusive version of the internet, who have had access to information about transgender-related topics without having to go to dodgy websites. This is a good thing.
There are trans kids today for whom positive transgender role models have been present on television since they were pre-teens. This is a good thing.
There are trans kids alive today who had immediately supportive parents and who even may have begun transition before puberty. This is a good thing!
I am none of those things. That makes me sad, but I never thought of any of those things as alienating me from younger people. Today I finally found the one that I think does, and I don’t know how to deal:
There are trans kids alive today who have had access to online trans communities since they were old enough to go on the internet, and have thus been subjected to the griping of older trans women and transfem people about the ways public opinion and the media used to vilify trans women and transfem people specifically (before trans men were even on the media’s radar, really), but who missed the entire cultural backdrop from which that griping was born in the first place. This is... I don’t know, just a thing that has happened.
On one hand, the trauma that older trans people have had to live through is absolutely real. Past events are absolutely real, and there are things that younger people can and should learn from history. I know my understanding of queer culture has been deeply enriched by learning about the history of the movement. If I have things to say about my lived experiences, why shouldn’t I?
On the other... how long are communities really obligated to support backwards compatibility? At what point are older queer people like me just making our trauma into the next generation’s problem? I can’t even begin to count the number of times I thought to myself about an older queer person, “please just move on and accept that things are different now, that this is the cost of progress”. I thought that about people as young as Natalie Wynn. I’ve thought that about a lot of people I’ve run into on this site. Was I wrong to think that about them, or are younger people right to think that about me?
This post brought to you by the word “transandrophobia”.
I initially rolled my eyes at hearing that coinage: “‘Transmisogyny’ exists to describe the intersection of misogyny and transphobia,” I thought to myself. “The term ‘transandrophobia’ posits the idea of misandry as a dominant cultural force,” I thought to myself. (”They even missed the opportunity to just call it ‘transmisandry’,” I thought to myself.)
“‘Transmisogyny’ exists because trans women and transfem people have unique problems to deal with, and those problems just aren’t applicable to trans men and transmasc people and don’t even really have counterparts,” I thought to myself, not accounting for the possibility that the situation could have changed, that those problems that were breathtakingly obvious to me might mostly be footnotes today (I’m still not convinced that that’s the case, but I at least owed it to other people to stop and consider the possibility), and that new problems might have developed that need to be talked about, which means sometimes new language is needed.
So I learned something today. I’m not sure if I like what it says about me, and it makes me feel closer than ever to irrelevance and the dustbin of history, but I have to suck that up and deal with it like the adult that I am. I owe humility to future generations. I’ll be damned if I turn into the old coot who spends too much time scolding people who are mercifully young enough not to have felt the same wounds I did, let alone to the point of inflicting them myself.
5 notes · View notes
Women being allowed to make misandry and all men suck jokes because being a woman is tiring sometimes and the idea that gender essentialist rhetoric is a dangerous slippery slope that can easily slide into terf territory and or negatively impact trans men/trans masc individuals and you should always be aware of that when shitting on men ‘just for being men’ are two concepts that can exist at the same time I think
61 notes · View notes
what is your opinion on the pansy parkinson discourse
Y'know, I had to go back to my anti pansy parkinson tag to refresh my memory, because I kinda forgot she existed until I read your ask. I'm going to put most of this under the cut, since I do not wish to pollute my friends' dashes with Pansy discourse.
Now, before I talk about the idiotic takes I've seen, let me just say that I understand where Pansy fans are coming from. There's no use in denying that Pansy is a one-dimensional character. She's just a nasty person who has.... zero redeeming qualities. Before you come at me with your rebuttals, no, I do not think it's problematic for a minor character to be a minor character. I mean, no one says that Cormac McLaggen not hooking up with Romilda, nor getting an extensive character arc is a sign of J.K Rowling's misandry. However, it's still a fact that Draco Malfoy (for example) may be a little shit, but he still feels human and real, as opposed to Pansy who is cartoonishly evil.
It's really worth noting that unlikeable and morally grey women are not given the narrative space and complexity their male counterparts are given. It's not just Harry Potter... literature in general has a shortage of women who have done both amazing and evil stuff. Redemption arcs are usually written for male characters, while female redemptive arcs are quite rare (but I'm not going to elaborate on that. I'm a cynical biatch who thinks that redemption is a boring trope which needs to die, and I'm very good at rejecting redemptive narratives.) Anyways, we have so many morally grey/unlikeable men in the Potterverse. Snape, Dumbledore, Regulus, Slughorn, Cornelius, Draco etc. How many women do we have? Not a lot. I suppose you could count Petunia or Narcissa (maybe she's a darker shade of grey?), but they're not proportional to the dudes.
I'd argue that the books are in Harry's POV, and usually, people do not write their bullies as complex people. Like, if I were to write a character who is based on my bully, they'd seem one-dimensional too because they were only bullies to me, therefore it doesn't make sense for me to make them sympathetic. I could also point out that the world wasn't ready for morally dubious women. But alright! If your point is, "We deserve fleshed out morally grey, unlikeable female characters, and Pansy could've been one of those ladies" then fine. You're valid. Go for it. I personally would go for Marietta Edgecombe if I wanted to write a female character who fucks up big time, but is still interesting and has a purpose, but hey. To each their own. I encourage everyone to be creative with their fanfics. Criticise Rowling all you want for not making Severus Snape... Serena Snape. Or giving us Albus Dumbledore instead of Alberta Dumbledore.
With that out of the way, let's move on to the irritating tantrums by Pansy fans which I'll be dissecting in my essay. Fair warning: some of them are extremely stupid that those who write that meta should be ashamed of themselves. Idk about you, but I will simply ignore the fool who says shit like, "Slytherin girls don't have representation! 😭 Don't hate Pansy, she's our representation 😭", and I think that's very sexy of me. Clownery doesn't deserve to be acknowledged.
There are more interesting temper tantrums that I've come across, and here's a summary of one I had the misfortune to read:
"Jkr is sexist for telling us we should hate Pansy! She said that Pansy didn't marry Draco! Pansy is probably a bitter unmarried and lonely loser because JKR HATES HER! Why? Hawww, I bet it's because she's a girly girl! JKR hates girly girls and wants us to be like that awful Hermione because Hermione is not feminine! Pitting women against each other!"
Okay, clown. I'm gonna stop you right there.
First of all, Rowling never said that nobody wants to marry Pansy because she sucks, and she is doomed to a life of misery and pain. All she said was that she didn't marry Draco... which is not a death sentence. I mean, he's not exactly a prize so idk why y'all are complaining. You can imagine that Pansy got her shit together and became a house elves activist. You can see her endgame as a beloved song-writer who stole everyone's hearts with her words. Whatever you like.
If you asked Rowling what Pansy got up to or told her how much you want her to be an actual character, she'd be shocked because she only expected you to hate Pansy. Pansy is written to be loathed. She's not written to be understood or liked. She is written for Rowling to get revenge on her bullies from her childhood. Petty? Yes! but not sexist. If you asked her about the lack of unlikeable women in her books compared to the unlikeable men, perhaps she'd be like, "Hm, you might be on to something," but she would never regret writing Pansy the way she did. In fact, she'd ask you to like Hermione, and judge you for your Pansy obsession the way she judges Draco fangirls. Again... NOT sexism. Policing people's interests, yes. Hurting fangirls' feelings, but not sexism.
Secondly, this feminine vs masculine narrative doesn't make any sense to me. Like, Narcissa is not a good person and she's a mother. Merope Gaunt is a mother. Walburga Black is a mother. Petunia Dursley is a mother. McGonagall isn't a mother (I think.) So, no, I don't think the author wants you to see motherhood as the epitome of femininity, or how only mothers are the "right women." Therefore, Pansy not being revealed to have 2.5 kids with her husband is not J.K Rowling being sexist with Pansy.
I don't think the narrative wants you to hate girly girls or the colour pink or women who don't do sports. Like... they all wear the goddamn school uniform? Even Hermione and Ginny wear dresses when it's time to party? Hermione wears dresses with pink-ish colours, Ginny owns a purple pygmy puff, Luna wears pink glasses. Molly Weasley and Fleur Delacour perform traditional femininity and they're portrayed as interesting, complex and flawed women with their own personalities. Giggling? Hermione does that too. Liking boys? Hermione cries for days because her man left her and then punches him when he returns.
I understand we have a problem with stories (by men) where women who carry swords or fight with their fists are seen as superior compared to the feminine, girly girls whose hobbies are make-up and fashion, but this is Harry Potter. Everyone carries a wand and that's their main weapon. Girly girls are not seen as inferior because we see Parvati and Lavender fighting in the battle of Hogwarts too. And please, who gets to decide what is feminine and what isn't? Who the hell are you to decide that sports or books are masculine hobbies? If you say that you are feminine, if you say you're a girl, then that's all that matters. Case closed.
Do I think it's fucked up that Lavender and Parvati were mostly treated as the love interests to grab from the love interest shelf and then cast aside? Do I hate what happened to Tonks? Do I dislike the "Y is a taste-tester for the dude to realize he loves X"? Oh, you bet I do. If I were Rowling, I would've treated Lavender with some respect and even if the relationship was bound to fail, I would've made it meaningful at least, instead of a pointless snog-fest to make the readers feel bad for Hermione.
Should we deal with the issues surrounding the female characters by saying shit like, "Hermione is the eviliest of all evils while Pansy did nothing wrong except be mistreated by the meanie author?" No, you imbeciles. Rowling favoured Hermione in the books, and there's a double standard where Hermione's questionable actions are glossed over. Criticise that all you want but pretending that she's a worse person than Pansy is an extra level of stupid. Like holy crap, I'm used to Draco fans bashing Ron but Pansy fans doing it to Hermione is just painful. Give me a fucking break. I'm going to start stanning Hermione now. Yes, this is now a Hermione appreciation blog. We stan one bitch who did nothing wrong in her life ever, and I'm so glad she eats Pansy Parkinsons for breakfast.
The point is: the narration does not punish Pansy for being a girl. People don't dislike Pansy because she giggled and wore pink once. People dislike her for this:
Ooh, sticking up for Longbottom? ...Never thought you'd like fat little crybabies, Parvati."
"She's really ugly," says Pansy Parkinson, a pretty and vivacious fourth-year student, "but she'd be well up to making a Love Potion, she's quite brainy. I think that's how she's doing it."
Hey, Johnson, what's with that hairstyle, anyway? Why would anyone want to look like they've got worms coming out of their head?
That's not sexism.
Is it sexist that the author chose to show a girl being just... the worst?
Not really. Pansy is an example of all the racist, misogynistic white women who have made it their life's ambition to bring other women down. If Pansy were real, she'd hate all of her fans. Guys, come on. Women can be shitty too. It's not "pitting women against each other" to show that women can be awful to other women. Women can be sexist, racist, abusive, etc. Women don't always get along. Women can feel jealousy, anger, hatred towards other women. The writing **would** have been sexist if Pansy being horrible to Angelina and Hermione was the only f/f interaction we got, but we also have positive interactions between Ginny and Hermione, Luna and Ginny, Parvati and Lavender, Gabrielle and Fleur, Hermione and McGonagall. I would argue that Molly Weasley's complicated but nuanced relationship with other women, and Petunia and Lily's relationship also counts because they have both positive and negative elements. It's about patterns, not isolated events.
For example, take Dany and Sansa from GoT. If you're writing a world where zombies could take over, and you choose to waste time by making your main ladies hate each other because X is prettier (????), when it would make more sense for them to have conflict over understandable reasons (or just be allies), then you are sexist.
Back to Harry Potter. What IS sexist is that we get more plot-driven, developed relationships between men (Ron/Harry, Dumbledore/Harry, Harry/Voldemort, Fred/George, etc), compared to the female friendships which are not explored, and mostly reduced to one-liners + background moments. That's quite unnerving. Our protagonist is a dude so it's not surprising, however, I do feel like Rowling could've done more. That's a valid criticism but it has nothing to do with Pansy. Funny how none of the Pansy criticisms have anything to do with her. It's almost like Pansy fans don't really care about feminism, they only care about their favourite racist.
In conclusion, there is a lot of food for thought when it comes to Pansy discourse (especially regarding how authors are more likely to give nuance and complexity to their bad guys, and it really explains why a lot of people can only accept female characters as the bitches or the saints.) Pansy fans see something in her that I don't see. I've never cared for her. We have an array of pleasant female characters, so you won't find me resenting Rowling for not fleshing her out. I'd much rather give my love and attention to Lavender Brown and Nymphadora Tonks who were given the short end of the stick. I don't give a shit about the Badass Snarky Lesbian interpretation of her character (although it does bother me that the OC Pansy has taken over to the point that Pansy stans have to be reminded that she's an actual racist in the books.) However, just because I don't see something in her doesn't mean everyone else has to be the same. If you want to give her a story, then you can. Just don't force me to join your "JKR is the WORST for not giving us the Pansy we want" club. I have better things to criticize Rowling for than her treatment of a minor antagonist. Don't accuse the author or the fandom of being sexist if they don't want anything to do with her.
12 notes · View notes