‘It’s not about heroes and villains’: the triumphant return of long-lost indie I Shot Andy Warhol

Specific_Detective41 · 2026-06-12T12:19:32+00:00

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/jun/10/i-shot-andy-warhol-mary-harron-director-interview-valerie-solanas-lili-taylorThis article reviews an indie biopic...

[–]MelissaMirantileft-wing male advocate 58 points59 points60 points 1 month ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Fluffy_Anything_3559 33 points34 points35 points 1 month ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AnFGhosterleft-wing male advocate 10 points11 points12 points 1 month ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ByronsLastStandleft-wing male advocate 56 points57 points58 points 1 month ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]rammo123[🍰] 25 points26 points27 points 1 month ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnFGhosterleft-wing male advocate 23 points24 points25 points 1 month ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]purpleblossomleft-wing male advocate 28 points29 points30 points 1 month ago (43 children) | Copy Link

[–]AfghanistanIsTaliban 29 points30 points31 points 1 month ago (10 children) | Copy Link

still being taught in women's studies classes to this day.

And de Beauvoir too. This is the very foundation of their ideology and it's what therapists and social workers are trained on. Very chilling

"At about thirteen, boys serve a veritable apprenticeship in violence, developing their aggressiveness, their will for power, and their taste for competition, it is exactly at this moment that the little girl renounces rough games."

"As long as perfect economic equality is not realized in society and as long as customs allow the woman to profit as wife and mistress from the privileges held by certain men, the dream of passive success will be maintained in her and will hold back her own accomplishments. " (complaining about being a bourgeois woman lmao)

"In any case, however deferential and courteous a man might be, the first penetration is always a rape. While she desires caresses on her lips and breasts and perhaps yearns for a familiar and anticipated orgasm, here is a male sex organ tearing the young girl and introducing itself into regions where it was not invited."

And Dworkin expanded on the last quote to say that all penetration is rape and based on man's contempt in her book Intercourse.

I wonder if these parts get quoted in the gender studies lectures. Regardless, this is what they are trained on. This is how they really see men.

[–]one_orange_braincell 18 points19 points20 points 1 month ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnFGhosterleft-wing male advocate 18 points19 points20 points 1 month ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheMostDivineOne 13 points14 points15 points 1 month ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sakura_dropleft-wing male advocate -1 points0 points1 point 1 month ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]one_orange_braincell 3 points4 points5 points 1 month ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]sakura_dropleft-wing male advocate 3 points4 points5 points 1 month ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]one_orange_braincell 2 points3 points4 points 1 month ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ChimpPimp20 2 points3 points4 points 1 month ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AfghanistanIsTaliban 10 points11 points12 points 1 month ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheMostDivineOne 8 points9 points10 points 1 month ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]sakura_dropleft-wing male advocate 22 points23 points24 points 1 month ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]purpleblossomleft-wing male advocate 20 points21 points22 points 1 month ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]sakura_dropleft-wing male advocate 16 points17 points18 points 1 month ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]rammo123[🍰] 14 points15 points16 points 1 month ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnFGhosterleft-wing male advocate 14 points15 points16 points 1 month ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ChimpPimp20 1 point2 points3 points 1 month ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]purpleblossomleft-wing male advocate 0 points1 point2 points 1 month ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Probably because they will say trans women when they mean trans women but most of the time they say trans people when they mean trans men. Consider the ability to transition for trans kids, all of that is aimed at trans boys, not trans girls. The talk about surgery on minors is because trans boys are the only ones getting surgeries that young, and it's just top surgery. But that's enough because it's creating "damaged girls" in their view. Just like how hormone blockers don't allow trans boys' bodies to develop for child bearing. And before you or anyone else tries to claim that's all because of misogyny, all of that is transandrophobia because it's done in a way that invalidates both the manhood and transness of these boys.

Then there is the recent studies showing trans men are harmed physically just a few percentages more than trans women or nonbinary people. Mind you, I'm not saying trans women are not victims here, that they don't get unfairly ran through the mud, but I am saying that when you pay attention to what bigots are actually saying, maybe then you can tell when what they are talking about doesn't apply to trans women but trans men.

[–]Ravenblade727 8 points9 points10 points 1 month ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[+]Golurkcanfly -7 points-6 points-5 points 1 month ago (5 children) | Copy Link

The average "TERF" (as the amount of them who are actually radfems is very, very low) doesn't actually hate men. Most are older married straight women. There are a few holdouts who do hate men, but on average, they just really hate trans women and gladly call on men to serve as enforcers for their hatred.

They hate trans women, specifically, because they think that trans women existing impedes on them as cis women. They are incredibly insecure in their status, and quite literally echo fears of somehow being replaced by trans women. It's reactionary paranoia. There is also an element of seeing trans women as acceptable victims of violence and hatred because they are lower on the social ladder, but for the most part, they don't necessarily see any given trans woman as a man, but as a freak.

Part of what makes the conversation awkward is that "trans woman" isn't actually a single demographic. Any randomly sampled trans woman could be seen as a man, seen as a woman, seen as neither, or seen as both simultaneously. While, Lily Tino and Jamie Clayton share a label, they aren't part of the same "gendered class" since they are perceived so wildly differently.

[–]Ravenblade727 9 points10 points11 points 1 month ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[+]Golurkcanfly -6 points-5 points-4 points 1 month ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

We can generally tell that they don't hate men simply based on how they treat men differently than trans women. Again, these are mostly straight, mildly conservative married women who may distrust some men, but they certainly don't hate them as a class. Uou can especially see the difference in hatred in how they treat transfeminine people who don't claim womanhood and their overall opposition to medical transition in either direction as a concept.

However, at least textually, part of it is just seeing trans women, conceptually, even if not individually, as men, such as how Janice Raymond accuses trans women of being men who commit "spiritual rape" by transitioning. What's important to note is that you can't necessarily trust what people say about their own prejudices, and you have to infer it based on their actions.

Speaking from experience, there are a few classes of trans people, both trans men and trans women, who occupy a space that is not consistently considered man nor woman. For these classes I'm going to mostly work with a binary framework since that's how most people see the world.

One class is the trans person who is almost always seen as their transitioned gender except when they "act out" and have that gender nominally stripped away from them as a form of social punishment. This is generally what happens with any passing trans person who isn't fully stealth. This is mostly what I talked about above, where it's "you're a woman, but I'll textually invalidate that when it's convenient even if it seems ridiculous in practice." Basically the only protection from this is to go stealth and have the fact that you are trans be a complete secret. These people are typically only given "freak" status by a small minority of people because it takes active effort/malice to see them as such by most.

A second is a class of trans person who is generally seen as their transitioned gender, but is visibly trans. They experience much of the same as the first class, but don't necessarily have to "act out" as much to be punished, as simply being visibly trans is enough to count as "acting out." Generally, unless these people are shielded by another form of privilege (often pretty privilege), they can easily be assigned "freak" status if they "act out" enough.

A third is a class of trans person who is largely seen as their assigned gender, but has enough signaling (intentional or not) that they're not fully that gender. These can be given the "freak" status if they are seen as threatening, or the "child" status if they are not.

There are more and talking about how trans people are treated is very difficult because there is such a wide variety in different experiences. Also, and this isn't an exaggeration, so much of it (particularly for trans women) is dictated by pretty privilege, in part because anti-trans prejudice is just working backwards to justify a conclusion from finding clocky trans people visually off-putting.

[–]ChimpPimp20 2 points3 points4 points 1 month ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Golurkcanfly -1 points0 points1 point 1 month ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Specific_Detective41left-wing male advocate[S] 4 points5 points6 points 1 month ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Golurkcanfly -8 points-7 points-6 points 1 month ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]purpleblossomleft-wing male advocate 10 points11 points12 points 1 month ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[+]Golurkcanfly -7 points-6 points-5 points 1 month ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]purpleblossomleft-wing male advocate 4 points5 points6 points 1 month ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Golurkcanfly -5 points-4 points-3 points 1 month ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]purpleblossomleft-wing male advocate 4 points5 points6 points 1 month ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Golurkcanfly -1 points0 points1 point 1 month ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

You asserted that about radical feminism but didn't actually say why.

I was very clear in the two contradictory definitions because one is a very clear counterpart to transmisogyny that outlines the catch-22 of being treated as either man or woman, whichever is worse at a given time, to be bad. Meanwhile, the other way people use the term is to complain that they're not seen as women when it becomes socially convenient.

These two ideas are competing because they in fact want the opposite. One is about how it's bad to see trans men as "women pretending to be men" and the other is how we should see trans men as actually just spicy women and that seeing them as men is the bad part.

Part of this is that two distinct groups that share similar labels have tried to craft this term through online discourse rather than having been coined by a single individual who assigned it a specific definition.

[–]purpleblossomleft-wing male advocate 4 points5 points6 points 1 month ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Transandrophobia is the trans masc version of transmisogyny, and any other definition or use is itself transandrophobic. The second definition you gave isn't a definition at all but a biased interpretation of transandrophobia that itself is transandrophobic, often coming from those who have a history of transandrophobia.

I'm pretty sure you will argue with anything I say for how radical feminism is bio essentialist, but I will say that the beliefs of TERFs is based on the original writings of radical feminists, women who didn't want to eliminate gender roles for anyone but women and be the ones who created new ones for men based solely on outdated definitions of sex. Hell, this post is about one of them. Because my point still stands that anything based on radical feminism is going to bigoted in some way, shape, or form, be that bio essentialist or racist or misandric or, yes, even misogynistic.

[–]Nobleone11 3 points4 points5 points 1 month ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Golurkcanfly -3 points-2 points-1 points 1 month ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I'm speaking as a trans woman who is very familiar with the history of both exclusive and inclusive radical feminism. Radical feminism isn't "feminism that's extreme" but feminism that seeks to dismantle patriarchy from the roots (radix). It's to remove the very structures of patriarchy and render the various victories of liberal feminism that are basically just carveouts obsolete.

One of the most commonly proposed methods to do this was separatism, to deny patriarchy simply by establishing a community outside of it. Like other separatist communities of other kinds, this rarely works out either due to hierarchical infighting or due to external interference. Some of these separatist societies were trans inclusive and some were trans exclusive.

Another method was transhumanist feminism, which proposes to eliminate patriarchy by instead rendering the differences between the sexes themselves obsolete via technological advancement. This kind is not only inherently trans-inclusive, it's actually vehemently pro-trans, as medical transition is one of the methods of technological advancement in question.

Most people who call themselves radical feminists today (and even back then) are, in fact, just extreme liberal feminists or even conservative feminists who have zero plans to actually dismantle patriarchy and instead just want additional carveouts and protections under the current system.

[–]Nobleone11 9 points10 points11 points 1 month ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[+]Golurkcanfly -6 points-5 points-4 points 1 month ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nobleone11 8 points9 points10 points 1 month ago (4 children) | Copy Link

sexism levied at women is worse than that levied at men, and that men hold the vast majority of positions of political and structural power even in the places where it is weakest.

See here, everyone? See it right here?

A perfect example of the kind of apathetic dismissal of a serious issue I just pointed out in a previous post that remains prevalent and in serious need of remedying.

And feminism once again proves it doesn't give a single shit about it.

I repeat, straight from the horse's mouth:

sexism levied at women is worse than that levied at men, and that men hold the vast majority of positions of political and structural power even in the places where it is weakest.

Your movement is pox! A POX!

Go ahead and tell your claim to every crying boy suffering mental (and yes physical) wounds from girls who get their "girlboss" freak on against him.

Every single male victim and survivor of female perpetrated abuse (in ANY FORM) as well. They would so love to hear how their plight doesn't compare.

You disgust me.

[–]Golurkcanfly -3 points-2 points-1 points 1 month ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Traditional sexism is the keyword here. It's a specific phenomenon with a specific definition.

You must be genuinely blind if you think that "women are inferior to men" isn't a more prevalent phenomenon than "men are inferior to women." This is not necessarily a matter of severity, but a matter of frequency. I'm not saying that men and boys who are victimized have it easier than women and girls who are victimized.

I'm also not saying that traditional sexism levied at men doesn't exist. I'm not saying misandry doesn't exist. Both very clearly do.

However, men (after the victories of liberal feminism) have much more oppositional sexism levied at them. Oppositional sexism is the idea that individuals are punished for deviating from the assigned sex/gender role. Men are afforded a much narrower role and are often, but not always, punished more harshly for deviation from that role. Part of this is because women have been afforded a broader role thanks to the victories of liberal feminism, and part of it is that "benevolent misogyny" means often dealing lighter punishments to "deviant women" than "deviant men." In the extremes, it's the difference between being murdered for deviation vs being subjected to corrective rape.

If you want to hold a conversation then hold a conversation rather than half-listening and hallucinating words I didn't say so you can have a punching bag.

[–]Nobleone11 5 points6 points7 points 1 month ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Traditional sexism is the keyword here.

It isn't anything of the sort at all!

What I'm talking about is a result of instilling in girls that they can get away with abuse and harm so long as we call it empowerment.

Your fucking traditional sexism charge is a goddamn insult and frankly another perfect example of the utter blindspot you have when it comes to equality.

For fucking decades, you fucking dared to blame men as a whole like you're doing right here:

Part of this is because women have been afforded a broader role thanks to the victories of liberal feminism, and part of it is that "benevolent misogyny"

Benevolent misogyny. You have some fucking goddamn nerve to call it that when its girls doing the fucking damage of their own fucking accord.

So benevolent misogyny is responsible for what the girls are doing to the fucking boys?!

I'm done. You are insane.

Not to mention an abuse enabler. Yeah, that's right. I'm calling you and your ilk for what you are: abuse enabler.

YOU are responsible for what girls and women are doing to innocent boys and men. And you're not going to "Benevolent Misogyny" your way out of this one.

I, as a survivor of such abuse, am tired of your BULLSHIT! For fostering a world that's hostile to my trauma.

PS: I never said that it was more prevalent than your example. Another case of putting words in my mouth and very typical. Anything seen as a serious issue for boys and men means it's a threat to women's issues.

[–]Golurkcanfly -1 points0 points1 point 1 month ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Please actually read what I'm saying. You're going completely off of the rails at individual sentences rather than actually bothering to engage with the totality of the material. If you fly into a tirade at a hair-trigger then there cannot be a productive conversation.

Do you know what "benevolent misogyny" is? Do you think it's what happens when girls torment boys?

It's not. Part of "Benevolent Misogyny" is when women and girls are unfairly given the benefit of the doubt because they're seen as harmless based on an underlying belief that women and girls are less capable. This isn't "men are doing this to women" because women absolutely reinforce and engage in it, often moreso than men. Part of liberal feminism has actually been embracing and reinforcing benevolent misogyny, and this criticism of it is absolutely warranted. While some aspects of it have declined along with oppositional sexism levied at women (ex: chivalric benevolent sexism), others, such as the Women Are Wonderful effect (believing that women are inherently morally better and cannot be oppressors/abusers) have become more prevalent.

Misogyny isn't something men and only men do to women. It is the belief that women and cultural associations with women are inferior to or less capable than men and cultural associations with men. I want to be very, very clear that the system that is colloquially called patriarchy is something that women (and many feminists) also reinforce, both intentionally and unintentionally.

The fact that women and girls can get away with abuse in ways that men and boys cannot, by which I mean asserting victim status, is one of the failures of liberal feminism, as it has both maintained and enabled this kind of power.

[–]Gayfunguy 19 points20 points21 points 1 month ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Enzi42 6 points7 points8 points 1 month ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point2 points 1 month agolocked comment (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	‘It’s not about heroes and villains’: the triumphant return of long-lost indie I Shot Andy Warhol
Author	Specific_Detective41
Upvotes	90
Comments	51
Date	June 12, 2026 12:19 PM UTC (1 month ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/1u3toeo/its_not_about_heroes_and_villains_the_triumphant/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/its-not-about-heroes-and-villains-the-triumphant.1582639 https://theredarchive.com/post/1582639

Comments