This website reeks of misogyny. If you love a male villain because you want to fuck him, that’s a perfectly fine and valid reason for doing so. The gremlins on Tungle dot com can tell fairytales within the boundaries of their woke wokey clique, but I can assure you that nobody has ever accomplished anything on a social and political level going after the teenager that wants to smooch Kylo Ren or the grown ass woman that daydreams doing kinky shit with Tom Hiddleston dressed up as Loki. The Revolution of 1917 would have probably gone in a different way if Lenin had spent most of his energy telling women that lusting after Anatole Kuragin is wrong. This is not an opinion but a fact.
Of course, nobody here would ever openly admit that they’re stanning a male villain because they find him sexually attractive, but it’s okay to say it without any shame. “This villain is an evil hot mess and I want to ride his dick into oblivion.” 💦
But yeah the misogyny on here is so disgusting. If a guy said he loved a female villain because he wanted to fuck her, no one would bat an eye.
This is true, but it’s also important to acknowledge that the act of reducing women’s interests down to just being horny is misogynistic in and of itself, and that’s the impetus behind, “They just want to fuck Kylo/Loki/[insert villainous or morally gray character of your choice here]!!” to begin with. It’s literally the exact same thing as some douchebag talking about how boy bands are only popular because because they “make pussies wet”, or the hyper-focus on criticizing pop entertainment targeted towards women as damaging (because, you know, women are too blinded by a hot guy character to think critically about anything they consume): a tactic to dismiss women and the things they like as worthless and shallow.
So, yeah, like your fave villain because they’re hot! Like your OTP because you want to see them make-out! But people saying, idk, “Gross women only like this bad, problematic slash ship because they want to see dicks touch,” isn’t just misogynistic because of the “female sexuality = bad” message it contains; it’s misogynistic because it strips their interests of all complexity and depth as a tactic to invalidate them (and imply their moral impurity, too).
where are you getting your stats? what source of information brought you to this conclusion? none I assume, but I would love for you to prove me wrong.
It’s literally a hyper link to the study
“Chamberlain and his team found that although overall divorce rates of couples with one seriously ill spouse were comparable to the general divorce rate in the US, there was a marked difference depending on which partner had received the diagnosis. In cases where the husband became seriously ill, divorce rates were actually far lower than average at three per cent. However, a staggering 21 per cent of wives who had been diagnosed with serious illness ended up separated or divorced within the same time frame.
In fact, Chamberlain’s study revealed that in ninety per cent of post-diagnosis divorce cases, the wife was the sick party. The researchers suggested that a possible explanation for this striking difference could be that men find it harder to take on a care-giving role.”
WHAT THE FUCK!?!? this is goddamn horrifying.
“Find it harder to take on a care-giving role.”
Bullshit.
They don’t want the burden of a sick wife who won’t be taking care of them. Like good ‘ol “sanctity of marriage” Newt Gingrich divorcing his wife who developed cancer.
I always want to point out that not abandoning your wife is the lowest possible bar, and husbands who don’t do it are unfortunately not necessarily supportive beyond this bare minimum—I once read a blog article by a guy who volunteered at a breast cancer resource centre (he was their first male volunteer, ever) and who wrote, about the boutique where the women tried on wigs:
Many clients came in with female family members or friends. These clients only came in with female family members or friends. During my two years at the center, I never once saw a client go into the boutique with a husband or male relative. I asked the staff about it. One manager said, “Same as the volunteers: guys won’t go near the wigs. Guys are wimps.” Sometimes a woman would come in for a wig… nervous, uncomfortable…and she’d get help from me or the staff, total strangers… and you could see her husband out in the parking lot… sitting in the car, listening to the radio; they couldn’t even come inside.
I’m also reminded of that study on organ donation rates across Europe, that found that among married hetero couples, 36% of women who could donate a kidney to their husband did so, while only 6.5% of clinically suitable men donate a kidney to their wives.
just once I want to see a good post critiquing makeup culture that doesn’t turn out to be made by some janky radfem blog
oh hey!! I’m not a janky radfem I can do it myself!
makeup culture is wack and normalizes a ludicrously high bar as the bare minimum women can do. I saw a “lazy"makeup tutorial the other day that listed 22 separate goddamn products. you’re supposed to buy and know how to use 22 different things on your face just for the privilege of being considered lazy and that’s uuuuuuh what’s the word? bullshit.
Really, five products could work, even 3. Just frame the face, eyes, lips, and you’re done.
0 products also works great
because I’m gonna be real here, the idea that 22 products is a minimum sucks but it’s really upsetting that any amount of makeup is the bare minimum at all
I would really just suggest some powder foundation, concealer, mascara and lipgloss/lipstick, or tbh just mascara works too, but that’s up to you
I’m sorry if I didn’t express this clearly enough in the original post but I’m not really looking for more concise makeup regiments. my intention was to point out how it’s Bad that makeup is considered a bare minimum at all, regardless of individual feelings on the matter
no face should be “required” to have “a minimum” of makeup. makeup has no health benefits and does nothing but fill the pockets of companies that prey on women and our insecurities.
makeup should not be seen as hygiene because it isnt. get that shit out of your head.
this post: makeup culture is ridiculous and 22 products should not be considered a minimum requirement for someones face. no one should have to do that
the notes: so like……. what youre saying is……. we need to make the minimum about 5 or 6 instead… i gotcha
Really the only makeup you need is eyeliner but that’s just my personal opinion
okay
where did we lose you
why are people like this
but like who are you to tell someone to not do what they want tho? if they put make up on because they want to, then thats not your problem? Youre not the one buying those 22 kinds of make up? Seriously op, “minimum” requires a number. Just say you dont like make up and move on 👀
I’m literally not telling anyone what to do except, like, being aware that makeup culture is a misogynistic capitalist structure whether you personally enjoy taking part in it or not
like I don’t care if people individually like wearing makeup, it’s still an industry that is built on convincing women that their natural bodies aren’t sufficient and pushing for increasingly elaborate (and expensive) looks to be the norm for ALL women regardless of whether they enjoy it
wear 22 products or 44 or whatever, but please for the love of god be self aware
every single post that says its ok to not wear makeup has like nine hundred replies saying “actually some girls LIKE the inescapable, crushing demand that they expend their money, time, and energy concealing and altering their natural features to better mimic an artificial and unattainable standard!!! leg contouring is girl power”
Charlie's Blog 