.png)
According to feminism, femininity and masculinity are socially constructed performances (what was once called gender), unlike being female or male which is a biological fact.
I personally don't have any problem with women presenting as feminine, masculine or adrogynous, I don't really care, although femininity IS imposed on women, so for me leveling up means decostructing the cage of compulsory femininity, and if that results in performing femininity from a mindset of true liberation, or not performing at all, it's all good. I also understand that sometimes we need to perform it anyway out of survival, so this is not meant as a critique to women who perform femininity per se.
However, I have seen this trend for many months now on FDS where women talk about being a "masculina", which admittedly I don't know exactly what it means, implying that not presenting feminine is synonimous with being a pick me, low value, not being a real woman, having internalized misogyny, NLOG syndrome, not being leveled up, almost with an attitude of "repenting" and renouncing their masculine ways, rather than engaging in self discovery and integrating old and new versions of self. Oddly enough, it reminds me a lot both of conservative new age content and trans/gender questioning content, in that posters are looking for a new box to fit themselves in rather than looking for themselves. I don't see a lot of questioning or pushback in the comments about this (even when this belief is clearly unhelpful to the poster) Infact, I've seen quite the opposite, where many here seem to believe in an innate, mystical notion of masculine and feminine energy, which one must surely embrace to level up and find an HV partner.
So I've been wondering if this set of beliefs has become part of the core FDS principles, signaling a further shift from the influence of radical feminism, or, if women with different sets of beliefs about masculinity and femininity can actually cohexist here, and what is an appropriate course of action when a poster struggling with notions of gender ask for advice or help about this topic, since clearly the replies are likely to interpret the problem differently ("being a masculina" as the problem or "believing in gender" as the problem).
In short I want to understand what degree of disagreement is tolerated on this topic. Personally, I find this worldview of "woman not performing femininity = masculina = bad" very alienating and damaging to women. I get that under patriarchy, women are punished BOTH for not performing femininity or performing it too much, so I see why some women would want to try to reclaim that. But any attempt to reclaim it is empty if it doesn't decostruct the whole gender trap (which is what feminist theory is for). You just go from one brand to internalized misogyny to another.
On the other hand, if this is beneficial to your journey who am I to judge. My problem is that from a lot of posts it doesn't really look like solving gender problems with MORE gender is actually beneficial. From a place like FDS I would expect girls and women to be guided through self reflection rather than affirmation than "not feminine=bad".
Anyway, I've seen this take often enough here to see it's very widespread, so if it's become mainstream FDS I'll just drop it and move on when these posts come up. But I can't help to find very weird that a movement that is so opposed to porn, prostitution and TRAs, can simultaneously promote such an individualistic, totally "choice feminism" approach to gender. It's kind of a contradiction. Either all things that benefit women are personal choices, or we must try to draw some boundaries.
As long as I want to respect personal choices, the fact that some women feel like they need to change their personality because it's "too masculine" is self hate and should be a boundary. We shouldn't be encouraging hate and self hate of masculine women. It might be just one side to misogyny, but it's still misogyny.
My interpretation of “masculina” is an overfunctioning, overcommitted, overworked, exhausted woman. She does not know how to receive, she grasps for control and decision-making over every detail, and is afraid of being seen as lazy, dependent, or weak. I have been working to unlearn these behaviors since I found FDS.
The opposite of a masculina is absolutely not some kind of girly-girl who performs femininity through makeup, skimpy clothes, a little-girl voice, helplessness, or whatever else. Rather, it is a confident, secure woman who knows she has value, she expects a man to care for her and provide various comforts to her, and she understands that sometimes the best way to be strong is to relinquish an ounce of control and action and be able to occasionally simply relax and trust your partner to take responsibility for both of you - through being a financial provider, making social plans, cooking, giving physical affection, etc.
So in short, us ex-masculinas on FDS are only striving to become more balanced, calm, loved, grounded women.
>if that results in performing femininity from a mindset of true liberation
i'm not quite sure i understand this. can you explain this part of your post? how can that be done and what would that be like? can you give examples?
about the rest of the post, i think i understand. and i agree! i do not believe in "feminine/masculine energy". masculine and feminine are related to the sex. the behaviour is just that: behaviour. and i think that many of the FDS values are based on the notion that men must be masculine and women must be feminine because being a woman with masculine energy will attract LVM. IMO, that way of thinking maintains the status quo. it's not challenging the way things are right now - and i think we can all agree things have been working against us for millenia. that means they should change.
unfortunately, the concepts of feminine and masculine ~energy~~ are too solidified in the collective. they are strong archetypes that greatly influence attraction and the dynamics people are used to in relationships. i mean, i am myself very critical of that, but i admit that i don't feel sexually attracted to "feminine man" and i don't know why. men who are too masculine don't appeal to me either because i feel like they are too dangerous. i like a good balance, but the guy has to lean more towards the masculine. so there you go... i don't like those terms, but they are what i use to describe the behaviours. it's quite annoying...
femininity is a male invention that serves the patriarchy with the female subjugation. masculinity would not exist without femininity because the latter is exactly what makes the first a thing due to contrast. masculine clothes are just neutral, comfortable clothes. feminine clothes are uncomfortable, marked by specific colors and patterns, they are tight to accentuate the female figure for the male gaze. everything practical, comfortable, cheap and almost effortless is typically masculine: short hair, short nails, not shaving/waxing, comfortable shoes, looking natural, pockets, being allowed to age, etc. everything that makes one's life more troublesome is feminine: long hair (requires more care), purses, high heels, being hairless, applying dozens of cosmetics everyday to stay young and beautiful, wearing make up, etc. femininity is a fabrication that costs us money, time and our mental health. and women who don't practice femininity are accused of wanting to look like men.
if i must be feminine to attract a HVM, he's the one choosing, not me.
Thank you. I feel the concept of "embracing your femininity to attract HVM" is a little overblown/misunderstood sometimes. What I've taken it to mean is that we don't need to chase, pursue and worry about providing, and not feel guilty for receiving, because we've been told that an empowered woman needs to be so empowered that she's practically offended at men doing nice things for her (neat little trick the patriarchy played there). To me it also meant making peace with our bodies and admiring the complexity of the female body. It wasn't about fashion or makeup (but if you want to present feminine in that way, go ahead) or "feminine" hobbies. I am pretty tomboyish but I still see myself as a woman and since radical feminism I am finally at ease with being a woman. So it always irritates me a little when FDS reproduces ideas of "the way to be a high value woman is to perform femininity". I get that there's probably a form of femininity that's more aligned with what women generally want / like (think "female gaze" vs "male gaze") but it's still unnecessary to set this as an arbitrary goal or standard for ourselves, because how we present is not as important as how we feel. Inner confidence radiates outward.
I didn’t read “masculina” as not performing feminity; the posts I saw on it were telling women not to do things that men are supposed to do for you or for themselves (like building a man, paying for a man, going 50/50, doing emotional labor, etc). “Resting in femininity” is more about believing you are worth men’s effort. Understanding that you are the prize, and that your effort should be spent on things that benefit you, not about wearing flowery dresses and acting “dainty”. Those are just affects.
If I remember correctly, the “masculina” was originally defined on Saynad’s posts, where she talked about unlearning her habit of being an overachiever who did too much for men.
My personal view of gender is similar to yours. I think it's real in the way that money is real; as in it's entirely made up.
I think that there is absolutely no difference between men and women aside from the biological. Like genuinely, rethink your entire perspective there is no difference. Gender is just a set of stereotypes that become true because we believe in them.
I recommend a book to you: Delusions of Gender. It's about the flawed science behind a lot of the supposed differences between the sexes.
True liberation is a world without entirely gender.
This topic is a sensitive one for me, because I've been pretty much flip flopping about this ever since discovering FDS through Reddit. Gender critical feminism saved me and really helped me come to terms with the fact that I really am not that good at being traditionally feminine. I wouldn't exactly call myself a super gender-nonconforming masculine type, but I was always comfortably "softly androgynous" both in appearance and behavior. Forcing femininity on me never made me happy, and Lord knows I've tried for so many years.
I used to think that resting into my femininity or whatever I would read online was one of the keys to my inner peace and happiness. Turns out, I was just exhausted of having to wear so many hats to appease my oppressors while living under the patriarchy. I had to be feminine but somehow know, magically, when I had to suddenly switch up to masculinity in order to get shit done, and quickly. If I miss that opportunity, even by just a split second, that's when misogyny would come for my neck. But if I was in masculine mode for just a few seconds too long, also, I would get hunted down for that, too.
I wanted things to be easier for me. I wanted the pain to stop. It was more than just gender roles, though. It was just coming to the painful realization that my female sex would always put me in danger or in struggle mode. And I was sick of it.
Just having to learn through gender critical feminism that me being of the female sex is enough proof that I am a woman through and through, and that I should be at peace with that. I don't need to be 100% feminine to know I have breasts and a womb. I don't know if I'll ever be comfortable or happy having to swing the other way and try to look or be 100% masculine; in the end, I'm just switching one set of issues for another one, and I'll just come across as awkward and inauthentic.
Just be yourself. Wherever that lands on the spectrum should not matter.
In my opinion, all gender needs to be abolished. It makes me cringe to see women talking about "tapping into your feminity" because it doesn't exist, however I see the other user's points in that they are not talking about social roles but referring to (as a wider metaphor) the female body itself.