Most Of The Worlds Exploited Labor Comes From Women. Women Work In The Sweatshops And The Giant Factories.

“Most of the world’s exploited labor comes from women. Women work in the sweatshops and the giant factories. Women sow and tend and harvest the world’s crops. Women carry and birth and raise children. Women wash and clean and shop and cook. Women care for the sick and the elderly. All of this - layer upon layer of labor - is what makes human society possible. Ripping it off is what makes capitalism possible.”

— Exodus and Reconstruction: Working-Class Women at the Heart of Globalization (via amodernmanifesto)

and this is why effective feminism has to be anti capitalist

(via genderheretic)

With all this Laurel Hubbard shit, it's worth mentioning that Hubbard's daddy is a millionaire ex-mayor and Kunini 'Nini' Manumua who lost a spot at the Olympics to Hubbard, used to fund her chaperone's travel to competitions via GoFundMe. As a minor she needed an adult to come with her but her working-class immigrant family couldn't afford it. Competing in the Olympics could have brought about needed sponsorships, media deals, and attention to Nini but a rich misogynist took that away

yep. so far, three known transwomen are entering the tokyo olympics, that's three women's spots taken away. add in world championships and literally dozens, if not over a hundred girls and women have lost competitions, prize money, scholarships, sponsorship, medals, and ranking due to biological males.

What should every woman have?

An unshakable sense of self-worth

An abundance mindset

A mind of her own

Emotional maturity

Good personal finance habits

Membership at her local library

Hurray now it’s gonna be harder for women to win awards

“There are far more intended parents waiting to be matched with a surrogate than there are women available to carry these pregnancies, yet surrogates are taught to view themselves as disposable laborers. A doctor at a clinic in India adds that “for the surrogates it’s mostly the character of the womb that we are interested in. We make sure the surrogates know that they are not genetically related to the baby, they are just the wombs.” … The doctor superimposes a single body part (the womb) over the personhood of the surrogate as a whole being, effectively eliding her subjectivity. 

The surrogates that Pande interviewed referenced their own contributions to the pregnancy, contrasting the level of effort that they were putting into the pregnancies to that of the intended mother, who contributed “only an egg.” The surrogates were thus justified in making kinship claims to the future child … When one surrogate was told that she would have to “reduce” her pregnancy from triplets to twins, she insisted that she would keep the third baby if the intended parents did not want it because it was her blood, if not her genes … While blood does not circulate between the pregnant woman and fetus, the placenta is built from both maternal and fetal blood cells that can migrate between the two, lingering in various organs of the body and potentially impacting a variety of future conditions for the child, such as cancer risk and immune disorders.

This biological connection, however, is often downplayed because it is not genetic. In the Assisted Reproductive Technology industry, genetics are privileged over gestation, and thus the role of the surrogate is cast as that of an incubator who will not affect the appearance, intelligence, or personality of the child. This strict compartmentalization assures intended parents that their choice of surrogate will not impact the quality of their carefully selected genetic material, thus legitimizing cross-racial, cross-class, transnational surrogacy arrangements in ways that benefit the consumers of reproductive technologies. […]

Daisy Deomampo found that the intended parents she interviewed became very attached to the Indian “origin story” of their children, regardless of whether the child was conceived using Indian gametes. Parents returned from Indian with emblems of the country, “flattening out” the specificity of India and its historical and political contexts. [She] argues that parents “conflated the geographic space of India – and the attendant orientalist discourses that construct “Indian-ness” as exotically opposite to Western sensibilities – with the embodiment of the child’s identity through its gestation by an Indian surrogate mother in India” … Simultaneously Other[ing] Indian women’s bodies while incorporating romanticized and potentially colonializing notions of Indian identity or origins for surrogate-born children. 

The idea that reproductive tourists can tap in to the natural resource of Indian’s fertility is also raised … [Despite] India’s birth rate or “fertility surplus” [being] deemed a demographic problem, [it is implied] that the purported “excessive” population, bodies, and fertility of India are always an available commodity for the foreign tourist … An estimated 8-10% of Indian women suffer from infertility and most surrogate mothers have been permanently sterilized … [But] rather than addressing the health care needs of Indian citizens, foreign economic pressure and state intervention have aimed at limiting the fertility of the poor at the same time that the image of fertile Indian surrogates is used to draw in reproductive tourists.”

—Laura Harrison, Brown Bodies, White Babies: The Politics of Cross-Racial Surrogacy

so can we start hunting down white liberals now or what