Godet | Schiaparelli perfume bottles
i know the term has sketchy origins but "oppression olympics" is such a real thing.
you see it in basically every group. ppl love creating hierarchies of who is Most Oppressed that leave 0 room for nuance, usually to justify their own personal claim to the status that theoretically affords them the least amount of privilege.
this asinine discourse ultimately does nothing to help dismantle actual oppressive systems. it's all just for, like, in group clout points.
everyone should read There Is No Hierarchy of Oppressions by Audrey Lorde and also La Guera by Cherrie Moraga & specifically this paragraph:
In this country, lesbianism is a poverty-as is being brown, as is being a woman, as is being just plain poor. The danger lies in ranking the oppressions. The danger lies in failing to acknowledge the specificity of the oppression. The danger lies in attempting to deal with oppression purely from a theoretical base. Without an emotional, heartfelt grappling with the source of our own oppression, without naming the enemy within ourselves and outside of us, no authentic, non-hierarchical connection among oppressed groups can take place.
Peen in mind
YETIDE BADAKI AS NEERA KETOUL IN
STAR TREK: STRANGE NEW WORLDS - 2.02 - AD ASTRA PER ASPERA
#
Hathor, goddess of eternal birth and creation, and a good party.
#girls night
THE NEW ADVENTURES OF WINNIE THE POOH (1988)
111. Gone with the Wind
“From the beginning of the gay marriage fight, NOM warned that redefining marriage as LGBT radicals demanded would have profound consequences on our culture and our families,” the group’s website says. “The sexual radicals demanding ‘gay marriage’ prevailed by convincing many people, including activist judges, that compassion for same-sex couples should trump the constitution and that rejecting the redefinition of marriage was ‘anti-gay.’”
“This was a lie. Millions of Americans are left shaking their heads at the cultural carnage that now surrounds us.”
The site says that the only reason marriage equality happened is because of “bullying and cancel culture” that kept “Americans of goodwill and traditional conservative values” from speaking out against LGBTQ+ people, an ahistorical statement that is particularly bizarre coming from NOM, one of the best-funded anti-LGBTQ+ organizations that has fought LGBTQ+ equality since 2007.
The site says that NOM is trying to raise $1 million for their campaign and that they have already raised over $50,000. An email to supporters published by gay blogger Joe Jervis says that they estimate the cost of a billboard in a city like Jackson, Mississippi to be $3,000 a month and will be viewed by 150,000 vehicles, meaning it costs two cents per vehicle to get their message out there in this medium.
They are also saying they have donors who will match people’s donations.
The NOT Campaign is also asking people to boycott Disney and Burger King. Disney has long been targeted by anti-LGBTQ+ activists and NOM is particularly mad about how they are “pushing gender ideology in [their] movies,” without specifying which movie they are referring to. They are angry at Burger King for donating to the LGBTQ+ organization HRC and for competing against the more Christian Chick-fil-A.
ALTI do wish that “oppositional sexism” was a more commonly known term. It was coined as part of transmisogyny theory, and is defined as the belief that men and women, are distinct, non-overlapping categories that do not share any traits. If gender was a venn diagram, people who believe in oppositional sexism think that “men” and “women” are separate circles that never touch.
The reason I think that it’s a useful term is that it helps a lot with articulating exactly why a lot of transphobic people will call a cis man a girl for wearing nail polish, then turn around and call a trans woman a man. Both of those are enforcement of man and woman as non-overlapping social categories. It’s also a huge part of homophobia, with many homophobes considering gay people to no longer really belong to their gender because they aren’t performing it to their satisfaction.
It’s a large part of the reason behind arguments that men and women can’t understand each other or be friends, and/or that either men or women are monoliths. If men and women have nothing in common at all, it would be difficult for them to understand each other, and if all men are alike or all women are alike, then it makes sense to treat them all the same. Enforcing this rift is particularly miserable for women and men in close relationships with each other, but is often continued on the basis that “If I’m not a real man/woman, they won’t love me anymore.”
One common “progressive” form of oppositional sexism is an idea often put as the “divine feminine”, that women are special in a way that men will never understand. It’s meant to uplift women, but does so in ways that reinforce the idea that men and women are fundamentally different in ways that can never be reconciled or transcended. There’s a reason this rhetoric is hugely popular among both tradwifes and radical feminists. It argues that there is something about women that men will never have or know, which is appealing when you are trying to define womanhood in a way that means no man is or ever has been a part of it.
You’ll notice that nonbinary people are sharply excluded from the definition. This doesn’t mean it doesn’t apply to them, it means that oppositional sexism doesn’t believe nonbinary people of any kind exist. It’s especially rough on multigender people who are both men and women, because the whole idea of it is that men and women are two circles that don’t overlap. The idea of them overlapping in one person is fundamentally rejected.
I think it’s a very useful term for talking about a lot of the problems that a lot of queer people face when it comes to trying to carve out a place for ourselves in a society that views any deviation from rigid, binary categories as a failure to perform them correctly.
If I can add, oppositional sexism is a cornerstone of evangelicalism and honestly a whole bunch of other forms of Christianity. The idea women and men exist for different tasks is deeply religious but specifically in the US and I assume for the majority of tradwives evangelical/conservative christian dogma. So even when ppl who proport to be somewhere feminist start up divine feminine shit they’re regurgitating the same talking points the religious right started doing.
Yep. I believe they refer to it as “Complimentarianism”.
I wouldn't need pronouns if bitches weren't talking about me behind my back
found the full track by the video maker!
OH MY GAWD
(adding it in the body of the post cuz I like watching this way)
Thank you titimylove!
Oh my god i would dance SO HARD to this you don't understand