Feminism

Society often tells women that visibility is value. That after a certain age, if you are no longer seen, you no longer matter.

But what if invisibility is not an ending, but a quiet return to the self?

This piece reflects on what happens when a woman no longer performs, no longer adjusts for the gaze of others. She becomes unreadable. And that unreadability is freedom.

It’s not about vanishing. It’s about shedding what never truly belonged.

It seems you can’t look anywhere without hearing about the growth and profitability of women’s sports. The refrain has gone from “no one watches women’s sports” to “everyone watches women’s sports” in a matter of just a few years. For longtime fans of women’s basketball, women’s soccer and women’s hockey, the meteoric growth of leagues like the Women’s National Basketball Association (WNBA), National Women’s Soccer League (NWSL) and Professional Women’s Hockey League (PWHL) can feel exciting. But with all this growth comes more complicated feelings too.

The argument for investing in women’s sports often falls along capitalist lines such as “there’s money to be made here, and it would be unwise to pass it up.” A new report from Deloitte estimates that global revenue generated by elite women’s sports will exceed £1.8 billion (approximately $3.3 billion in Canadian dollars) in 2025. With investment opportunities increasing exponentially, women’s pro sports leagues are signing sponsorship deals with major companies left and right. However, which brands these leagues are choosing to partner with now that there is money available is increasingly at odds with the presumably progressive values these leagues have been perceived to have by long-time fans.

The WNBA players, in particular, have made a name for themselves with their commitment to racial justice activism and social justice advocacy cause that they dedicate each season to (there is even a documentary about their activism, called Power of the Dream). In women’s soccer, the U.S. Women’s National Team’s fight for equal pay often transfers to perceptions of the NWSL because many of the same players are represented. Even though those values and actions come from the players themselves, the public perception often applies those views to the leagues as a whole. In the public sphere, the distinction between the league (a corporation with its own interests in mind) and the players (individual workers with their own views) is often flattened.

But why would a league that is being heralded as “a beacon of social and political activism” think that partnering with Amazon would align with its values? Amazon is well known to be a company that, among other things, exploits workers, puts them in unsafe working conditions, helps fund ICE, has a terrible environmental record and is single-handedly responsible for killing bookstores. Perhaps for the same reason they thought their new partnership with Alex Cooper’s Unwell Hydration drink was a good idea? Cooper, the host of the popular Call Her Daddy podcast, is a former employee of Barstool Sports and has done little to distance herself or her brand from Barstool’s toxic and offensive content in the years since she left the company. Not only that, her Unwell Hydration beverage is a Nestlé product, which is currently the subject of multiple boycotts for reasons that include political, environmental and human rights concerns. In Canada, the company faces boycotts from the Council of Canadians and the indigenous rights organization Lakota People’s Law Project for extracting water from watersheds that have recently seen droughts. All of the leagues have at least one official partnership with a company that is on the Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) list.

“White nationalist and identitarian movements have strategically used women in their public-facing campaigns to make their ideas seem less dangerous and more legitimate,” Julia Ebner, author of Going Mainstream: How Extremists Are Taking Over, told me.

She continues: “Fascist ideologies – in the past and today – tend to paint an idealised vision of the human body and women's bodies in particular are seen as vessels for producing the next generation of ‘pure’ and strong children. With the rise of far-right movements, we also see a return of narrow-minded beauty ideals and body shaming.”

For far-right women, there is no such thing as body positivity or body neutrality. Thinness is a moral imperative; it shows dominance over the body and aligns oneself with European beauty standards.

Santiago’s use of the word ‘supremacy’ cuts to the heart of this: the far-right places all bodies into a series of hierarchies – some supreme over others. White bodies over Black and Brown bodies. Cis bodies over trans bodies. Able bodies over disabled bodies. And thin bodies over fat bodies.

Manga review: Akumetsu

https://mangaispolitical.noblogs.org/post/2025/04/30/review-akumetsu/

@feminism

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/29144500

There are a lot of words you could use to describe Donald Trump’s leadership style, or what he and Elon Musk have in common. That’s why it’s odd that the phrase chosen by Axios in February 2025 was “masculine maximalism.”

“Trump and Musk view masculinity quite similarly,” authors Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen wrote, defining it in terms of “tough-guy language” and “macho actions.” This definition is puzzling for a few reasons, chief among them the fact that “tough-guy,” “macho” and “masculine” are all synonyms for each other. Elsewhere, we’re told that Trump and Musk want to “let men be men,” another phrase that pointedly begs the question.

To be fair, the association of Trump with masculinity is ubiquitous: He “prizes masculinity above everything,” according to Vince Mancini at GQ. He will help America view masculinity more “positively,” according to his male supporters, as quoted by the New York Times. One especially depressing poll from Fairleigh Dickinson University, published in October 2024, found that 41 percent of all voters described Trump as “completely masculine” and 84 percent of that group planned to vote for him; moreover, among voters who do not view Trump as masculine, “his support plummets, even among Republicans.”

Meanwhile, Trump’s critics on the left try to tear him down by saying that he’s not masculine enough: “The least masculine man ever to hold the modern presidency,” according to at least one Atlantic column. He’s taunted for getting “emotional,” for wearing makeup, for showing affection to or (gasp) kissing other men, even if that last thing only happens in people’s imaginations. Liberal mockery of Elon Musk, similarly, often rests on the idea that he behaves like a woman. (“Elonia,” anyone?) Disturbingly, neither side questions the idea that “masculinity” should be a requirement in a leader, or that men who are “unmasculine” are unworthy of respect.

Yet it is true that Trumpism is a kind of gender performance—it’s about shoring up a traditional, misogynistic, dominance-obsessed ideal of “masculinity” against social progress, about restoring straight cis white men to their traditional place at the head of the family and the top of the world. Attacks on trans people, who supposedly threaten “masculinity” by existing, are very much a part of that effort.

Whether or not we as queer people believe in that kind of “masculinity,” or aspire to it, it’s gunning for us. In the hopes of understanding the enemy—and restoring some kind of nuance to a conversation that desperately lacks it—I set out to talk to transfeminists about what they think “masculinity” is and what it could become.

Overall 62 percent of these so-called climate voters are women, compared to 37 percent of men. The gender gap is largest among young people, Black and Indigenous voters.

Blue Origin’s “first all-female spaceflight” was framed as a bold step forward, a headline-grabbing moment for women in STEM (science, technology, engineering and math). Positioned as progress meant to encourage girls to pursue STEM and inspire the next generation of explorers, the mission missed a critical opportunity: to celebrate not just the six women aboard, but the thousands of others already leading innovation in science and technology. Instead, it became less about honoring their achievements and more about promoting a glossy, marketable image of what female success should look like.

The focus shifted from substance to spectacle. Rather than celebrating these six accomplished women for their courage or contributions, the spotlight fixated on appearance and celebrity. The message? Women and girls can reach for the stars, but only if they look good doing it.

Trying to understand why I had these opinions, I recalled how much different being a man felt at 18 versus 28. I had no money which I presumed meant I had no value to the opposite sex. I wanted the company of women and girls, but I also resented them because I lacked experience in dating and my few experiences were rocky. A lot of magazines and headlines focused on the shortcomings of men and boys in the early 2010s, and it was easy for me to get negatively polarized into thinking it was a personal attack. Academic feminism did and does a much better job explaining patriarchy better than blogs and news sites which boiled down systems of sexism to individual behaviors.

My experience as a resentful teen boy wasn’t unique. It’s the same experience that millions of boys are going through, which they’d ordinarily grow out of by the time they hit their twenties. In my case, it was happening during a period of social revolution on gender and during an evolution in mass communications. Many of these early communities on Atheism, which captured me for their sensibility and anti-orthodoxy, evolved into anti-progressivism and eventually evolved into the Redpill and Manosphere which is how millions of young boys today engage with their gender. At least my period in this mindset was short lived: about two years. By the time 2016 rolled around, I had clearly lost interest in online gender wars as tyranny seemed a greater threat. I was now 24 and actively attending college; I had plenty of friendships and dating experiences with women, and that teenage resentment was forgotten.

The big crisis we’re dealing with today is that the resentment is not only not expiring when men get into their twenties, but it’s being weaponized globally by parties against men’s material interests. What young boys like me didn’t realize when we were being lectured about patriarchy and the problems of men, is that being a man is an extremely privileged position over women, we’re just not old enough to benefit from it yet. This presents a problem on how we teach oppression and discrimination to young people who have little autonomy of their own and feel bad when you imply your immutable characteristics harm people you seek validation from.

Play a game with yourselves. Imagine the silliest reason to ban hatpins, see if you got it right.

A groundbreaking Ms. series, Front & Center first began as first-person accounts of Black mothers living in Jackson, Miss., receiving a guaranteed income from Springboard to Opportunities’ Magnolia Mother’s Trust (MMT). Moving into the fourth year and next phase of this series, the aim is to expand our focus beyond a single policy intervention to include a broader examination of systemic issues impacting Black women experiencing poverty. This means diving deeper into the interconnected challenges they face—including navigating the existing safety net; healthcare, childcare and elder care; and the importance of mental, physical and spiritual well-being.

What I am bringing in now with my job helps pay my car note, plus my car recently needed repairs. Working helps with food and daycare expenses. I am grateful to have recently moved into a new subsidized housing apartment. I applied when I was pregnant and was called three months after I had my baby, which was a relief because before that we were living with my mom, and I wanted my own place for me and my kids.

I’m part of the Magnolia Mother’s Trust this year, so that money will help me offset the lost income of going back to school part time. It was a revelation to be able to cover multiple things in one day that I would’ve had to space out for weeks before. I bought diapers, paid my car note and the light bill. That feeling of being able to take care of things has relieved a lot of stress. Before, it was so hard. I would cry in the shower so my kids wouldn’t hear me.

In the short term, I’m trying to celebrate the wins where I can. I just got a promotion to lead decorator at work, and my car will be paid off next month. And I found out I got back into school. So there’s a lot of good, joyful things happening in my life right now.

Last year, researchers at Dublin City University released a report on a disturbing phenomenon: a surge of male supremacy videos in young men's social media feeds. It's the kind of report that should sound an alarm for parents, teachers and administrators. But as the gender divide widens and young men increasingly lean conservative amid Trump-era authoritarianism, it feels less like a future warning and more like a current diagnosis.

In the report, researchers created sock-puppet accounts — fake accounts registered as teenage boys — to determine how quickly misogynistic videos show up in users' TikTok and YouTube feeds. Alongside a control group, one group used male-coded search terms, such as "gaming" or "gym tips," while another searched for more extreme anti-feminist, male-supremacist content. The "manosphere," as it is often referred to, includes videos by Andrew and Tristan Tate, influencers who profit off the insecurities of young men. (The Tate brothers are embroiled in criminal and civil cases in Romania, Britain and the United States. They deny the allegations against them.)

It took under nine minutes for TikTok to offer troubling content to their fake 16-year-old boys, which later included explicitly anti-feminist and anti-L.G.B.T.Q. videos. Much of the content blamed women and trans people for the standing they believe men have lost in the world. More extreme content appeared within 23 minutes. Male supremacy videos intersected with reactionary right-wing punditry within two or three hours.

By the final phase of the experiment, accounts that showed even slight interest in the manosphere — for instance, accounts that watched a video all the way through — resulted in their For You feeds offering more than 78 percent alpha-male and anti-feminist content. Messages included: Feminism has gone too far, men are losing out on jobs to women and women prefer to stay at home rather than work.

Women’s sports bars, which somehow didn’t exist in the U.S. until before 2022, are on the rise, with a new report from NBC News estimating that their number will quadruple by the end of 2025.

Currently, there are six women’s sports bars open in the U.S., three of which opened this past week, just in time for March Madness: 1972 Women’s Sports Pub in Austin, Texas, Title 9 Sports Grill in Phoenix, Arizona, and Set the Bar in Omaha, Nebraska. By the end of the year, there are projected to be roughly 24 women’s sports bars in total in the U.S., per NBC News. As the three bars that opened this past week prove, those establishments won’t just be limited to big cities on the coasts (although, yes, there are two bars expected to open in New York this year and two in San Francisco). They also include Columbus, Ohio, where Raise the Bar is set to open this fall; Kansas City, Missouri, where The Dub will open at some point this year; and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, where another bar named Title 9 is slated to open.

You might say that the [Republican] party has already succumbed to a culture of misogyny and sexual predation. And in many ways, this is true. Donald Trump, an adjudicated rapist, is the leader of the party. His cabinet is lined with officials accused of the same or similar conduct.

But it’s important to stress the potential for a much darker generational shift in how the party approaches women’s issues. This requires focusing on the young men already in the party and those who will age into politics over the next decade, looking at their views and the media ecosystems in which they operate.

The popularity of Trump with Gen Z men and the success of influencers like Tate suggest a dark and ugly future for the American right. I have argued before that the increasing popularity of Trump and MAGA with young men is indicative of a shift in our politics. It’s one that moves Trumpism from an outlier to the normalized mainstream. It’s an idea that runs counter to the liberal common sense about what should work in a modern, plural society. But it is integral to the nature of authoritarian, anti-liberal politics and the reaction against contemporary progressivism.

There is no law of gravity that dictates a generation must be more open-minded and civilized than those that came before it. Young voters have been enthralled with extremism before. Many young Germans, for example, saw the Nazis as a forward-looking and exciting party. As Rampell notes, there’s real cause for concern that figures like Trump and Tate can harness the anomie and sense of dislocation among young men to press them with ways of building community around noxious but potent ideas of masculine virtue.

This site was inspired by Rose. Rose is an astronomer and aerospace engineer who shared in Feb 2025 that her bio had been erased by NASA. This erasure was part of an insidious effort to suppress not just her story, but the stories of all women in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. We will not let them.