Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for Женская власть ☠️☠️☠️

Channel

Женская власть ☠️☠️☠️

@vlast_Zh

On this record: Topic · Previous handles · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Posts edited after publishing · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cross-platform identity · Cite this entry

13,037subscribers

-414 since we began measuring on 5 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001054481184
TypeChannel
Username@vlast_Zh
Created8 June 2016 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel)
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live7 November 2026
Measurements held63
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 7 November 2026
On Telegramt.me/vlast_Zh

Topic

Politics & activism — a classification, not a measurement. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.

Previous handles

Recorded in 2019 as “Женская власть” — the title held for this same channel (matched by Telegram id, not by handle) in the Pushshift Telegram Dataset, a third-party archive captured in 2019-2020, years before this register made its own first observation. CC BY 4.0, Baumgartner, Zannettou, Squire & Blackburn (2020), Zenodo. A third party’s dated snapshot, not a measurement this register made itself.

Growth

13,03713,45113,2445 August 20267 November 2026
63 measurements spanning 93 days, net -414. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 12,975–13,513 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 63
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
7 Nov 2026, 08:3513,037-2
6 Nov 2026, 07:0713,039-2
5 Nov 2026, 07:5013,041-13
4 Nov 2026, 04:4013,054-8
3 Nov 2026, 04:1013,062-3
2 Nov 2026, 03:3513,065+2
1 Nov 2026, 02:5613,063+2
31 Oct 2026, 01:3013,061-9
30 Oct 2026, 00:3413,070-8
29 Oct 2026, 01:5013,078-5
27 Oct 2026, 21:2713,083-7
26 Oct 2026, 19:0713,090-3
25 Oct 2026, 15:4913,093-4
24 Oct 2026, 17:1613,097-12
23 Oct 2026, 17:5713,109-7
22 Oct 2026, 20:1713,116-4
21 Oct 2026, 19:2713,120-9
20 Oct 2026, 12:3613,129-5
19 Oct 2026, 09:1913,134-6
18 Oct 2026, 10:0013,140first reading

Engagement

124 posts held, back to 30 July 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 59 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
17.2%
avg views ÷ 13,037 subscribers
Avg views / post
2,240
32 posts measured
Reaction rate
4.30%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
32
of 124 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views — note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 November 2026
Posts held124 (30 July 2026 – 6 November 2026)
Views total71,701
Reactions total3,084
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken7 Nov 2026, 06:55 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

What this channel posts

Video runtime
13m 40s
Average length
1m 22s

Measured directly from 10 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.

Reaction mix

11,719 reactions across 122 posts, in 57 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 25.6% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
💯3,00325.6%
❤2,56421.9%
😢8837.53%
😁8807.51%
💔6815.81%
🔥6365.43%
🤣4213.59%
❤‍🔥3322.83%
🥰2672.28%
😭2331.99%
🤬1881.60%
🎃1801.54%
👍1681.43%
💊1481.26%
🙏1421.21%
😎940.802%
😡940.802%
⚡930.794%
🙈800.683%
😨730.623%
37 further kinds5594.77%

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 122 of the 124 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 11,719 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 124 most recent posts we hold, published 30 July 2026 to 6 November 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
2
across the posts below
Posts paid on
2
of 122 we hold a reading for · 2%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @vlast_Zh. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.

Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.

This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.

Counted over the 124 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 30 July 2026 to 6 November 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.

Recent posts

Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 20 of 32 posts held from the last 30 days (62.5%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).

6 Nov 2026, 23:46 UTC551 views47 reactionsread 7 November 2026
Photo

Но многие не готовы к этому разговору

💯28🥰9❤5😁5

5 Nov 2026, 18:21 UTC≈1,150 views88 reactionsread 7 November 2026

Интересно узнать как живут эти люди, которые мне угрожали избить трубой в беременный живот. Наверное уже родили детей…

💔71😡15🕊2

5 Nov 2026, 16:21 UTC≈1,340 views143 reactionsread 7 November 2026

Просто очевидно же, что человек не хотел ничего узнавать, а хотел меня просто весело вместе со всеми травить. Это же так смешно видимо. Что я как дура пыталась что-то объяснять. Никто не извинился, никто. Из тех кто травил меня. И из тех кто угрожал меня убить — тоже. Но сейчас они многие якобы такие все борцы с домашним насилием 🌚 Кстати это 20-й год — я только родила тогда. И молоко через пару месяцев от стресс…

😢96💔40😡5🕊2

5 Nov 2026, 16:07 UTC≈1,330 views140 reactionsread 7 November 2026
Photo

Жалею я только о том, что зачем-то вежливо отвечала и упорно давала ссылки и пруфы. А надо было сразу написать ПОШЕЛ-КА ТЫ НАХУЙ, родной. Вместе с твоим двачем! Но это понимание приходит уже после 10 лет активизма, где я просвещала людей, которых забанили в Гугле. Или у них бан мозга. Я хз. Я тогда из-за этой его хуйни двое суток не спала, меня его читатели МУЖЧИНЫ (так называемые) травили насмерть. То есть это не…

😢75💔34❤9🤬8😎7👍4🔥2👏1

5 Nov 2026, 14:44 UTC≈1,250 views98 reactionsread 7 November 2026

Сейчас все это вспоминаю за какой сюр меня травили и ору. Только сейчас стала осознавать в каком аду я жила. Травить человека за то, что он сообщил ФАКТ. Из онкоцентра! Как будто я написала «мужики мусор»! И отдельно еще была песня, как всех разрывало из-за за сухой статистики по домашнему насилию. А теперь все такие «ну база»🌚. Хуяза!!

😢52💯25💔16🌚4⚡1

5 Nov 2026, 13:56 UTC≈1,420 views109 reactionsread 7 November 2026

Представляете, еще в 20 году (не так давно) Варламов обозвал меня лгуньей за что бы вы думали? За то что я просто привела официальную статистику онкоцентров - что в большинстве случаев мужья бросают заболевших жен. Это абсолютный факт. Он писал, что я просто ВРУ И ОЧЕРНЯЮ мужчин 🙂 И меня его хомяки травили еще недели после этого. Казалось бы? Вот за что? Но да. А еще меня травили за статистику по домашнему насилию (…

🤬54❤37😢12😡5👨‍💻1

4 Nov 2026, 15:00 UTC≈1,550 views110 reactionsread 7 November 2026

И еще. Никого нет страшнее, чем равнодушные люди. Вот эти спокойные и «какбе» вежливые парни. Которые не видят ничего плохого и страшного в гомофобии и говорят «ну подумаешь». Именно вот такими равнодушными мистерами «ну подумаешь» и творится все зло в мире. Ненавижу таких «как бы хороших» парней. О них есть целое произведение «Банальность зла»

💯88❤11💘7❤‍🔥4

4 Nov 2026, 14:57 UTC≈1,530 views129 reactionsread 7 November 2026

Приходишь в России в полицию пожаловаться на маньяков и насильников, а там тоже маньяки и насильники. Вот что бывает, когда у власти конченые безмозглые традиционалисты. Ненавижу.

💯108❤‍🔥10😢6🔥2🗿2❤1

4 Nov 2026, 14:34 UTC≈1,440 views132 reactionsread 7 November 2026

Сколько я борюсь с гомофобией, так и не поняла откуда вообще в голову человеку приходит эта искрометная идея вдруг топить против гомосексуальности. Ну типа, вот ты живешь свою лучшую жизнь. Традиционную. Как тебе вообще мешает, что где-то живут геи? И воспитывают детей? Они приходят по ночам ебать тебя лопатой или что? Как вообще тебя их жизнь касается? Вообще ведь никак не касается. За что можно их ненавидеть? Что…

💯107❤18⚡3✍3🥰1

4 Nov 2026, 14:28 UTC≈1,410 views146 reactionsread 7 November 2026

А когда мы начнем принудительно делать психиатрическую экспертизу гомофобам? Я считаю, что это им нельзя заводить и воспитывать детей. Потому что тогда вырастут еще тупые злобные гомофобы. Вообще они могли бы свою тупизну не выпячивать, но выпячивают

💯118🔥12🤬11⚡2❤1🕊1🥰1

4 Nov 2026, 14:25 UTC≈1,360 views72 reactionsread 7 November 2026

Приходишь как-то спастись от гомофоба, который запрещает геям иметь детей, а тебе и говорят «подождите, мы спросим у психолога можно ли геям воспитывать детей» 🙂🙂🙂🙂 Кайф?

🤨38😡24🫡6🙈3💅1

4 Nov 2026, 14:22 UTC≈1,380 views102 reactionsread 7 November 2026

Пока у счастливых людей в консервативных штатах побеждают демократы, у меня тут происходят в жизни такие страшные анекдоты: Один открытый гомофоб заявил, что «геям нельзя усыновлять детей, потому что слепым не дают же водить машину». А когда на него пожаловались в этический комитет — представитель этического комитета ответил «ну вообще ЛГБТ-люди физически здоровы, но могут ли они воспитывать детей это надо уточнить у…

😨71😡15🤬8🤨5❤1❤‍🔥1🤩1

Showing the 12 most recent of 124 posts we hold for @vlast_Zh. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Posts edited after publishing

@vlast_Zh edited 5 posts after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.

An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.

First edit seen
23 August 2026
Most recent edit
5 November 2026

Forward network

Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.

Mentions

Named by 8 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.

A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.

Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels

The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.

Феминистка инвестирует
@feminvestingtelegram · 20,565
Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 82 here — alongside 81 others — read 26 September 2026
Коса — медиа для женщин
@kosa_media · 21,311
Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 24 September 2026
Это нормально
@vintovkina_arina · 68,064
Telegram ranks this channel #61 of 82 here — alongside 81 others — read 20 August 2026
Moneyhack
@moneyhack · 19,265
Telegram ranks this channel #62 of 94 here — alongside 93 others — read 2 October 2026

This channel appears in 4 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.

Cross-platform identity — Wikidata

A Wikidata item names this Telegram handle as belonging to the entity it describes. This is Wikidata’s claim, not a verification made by this register — nobody here confirmed that the account is genuinely operated by the entity named. Wikidata content is CC0; every fact below is dated to when it was read from Wikidata, not to when the association was first made there.

Q107031377 on Wikidata, read 1 November 2026
LabelZalina Marshenkulova
DescriptionRussian feminist
X / Twitter@veritas_z
YouTubeUC7WtaiX4yXVuIt2n0v0PqoQ

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 7 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Женская власть ☠️☠️☠️” (@vlast_Zh), 13,037 subscribers as measured 7 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/vlast_Zh.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.