argumentative antithetical dreamgirl

  fundamentally people have been trying to push taylor swift into some kind of britney-esque public meltdown for over a decade and they're angry it hasn't worked. everything she does publicly is evidence that it didn't work. they hate her writing songs about her relationships with the press and the public because they hate that she's expressing those feelings in a work of art that she chooses to release and profit from instead of by breaking down sobbing in a parking lot for the benefit of paparazzi. they hate that she never had to check herself into a psychiatric facility. they hate that she was cold and collected and snarky during her SA trial instead of breaking down crying on the stand. i wanna be clear, here; i'm not blaming britney for what the press (and her family, for that matter) did to her. i'm not saying that taylor is a better person or stronger or smarter for not breaking down in a grocery store, for not breaking down on the stand, for expressing h...

  i'm sure there are many men that aren't counted in abuse and rape statistics bc they don't see what happened to them as abuse or rape. where you lose me is when you imply that the same is not true for many women. the idea of not realizing you've been abused or raped, or being too ashamed to admit it to yourself/others, is not some kind of male-exclusive experience that no woman could ever hope to understand. "men can't be abused/raped" is just one tool out of many in the abuse apologist toolbox, and if it's not applicable to one victim, then another will be used--and yes, many of those tools are exclusive to women.

probably the first proto-humans who were like "hey what if we all lived in a cave together" there was probably some guy who was like "we should hang meat in the cave to spite the bears" and everyone was like "if we do that the bear will come in the cave" and he was like "nuh uh" and then he hung up meat in the cave and kept doing it when nobody was looking so the rest of the proto-humans had to kill him to stop him from putting everyone at risk. a society where we use the law instead of having to kill people to prevent them from ruining society is better tbh.

lowkey it kind of makes no sense that all the black widows in the comics as russian and white? seems more likely that they would find women from countries the soviet union occupied, and/or ethnic minorities. there should be ukrainian widows, there should be jewish widows, there should be romani widows, tatar widows, etc. i don't mean this in a like "the human trafficking organization should be more diverse <3 / more trans suicide bombers" way. i mean that a racist empire, when putting together a program that dehumanizes women, brainwashes them, and turns them into objects for political/military purposes, wouldn't be out here picking exclusively women from the preferred national/ethnic group. they would be drawing primarily from national and ethnic groups that they see as disposable.

  how many more? how many more children, babies, have to be killed to make up for all the "other side's" children who are killed? how long do we do this? how many more generations? how much more blood? when does the scale even out. when does the scale even out, when do we reach a point when we can look at the bloodshed and the lives destroyed and decide the suffering has been appropriately distributed so this can finally STOP? so people can finally go home. so more babies can stop dying. as if blood will go into the cogs, and dry into something so hard that it stops the machine. as if that will happen, when blood is continually spilled. who wins? who wins, in this contest of who can kill the most and who can lose the most and who can suffer the most? who wins? hind rajab didn't win. kfir and ariel bibas did not win. do you know that hind rajab was only a year older than ariel? they could have been friends. they should be playing in the dirt. children. safe. i am tired...