all 19 comments

[–]MarkTwainiac 25 insightful - 1 fun25 insightful - 0 fun26 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

That Twitter thread begins with

I didn't read all of JK Rowling's extremely long essay because I got tired

I've noticed that this is now a frequently used excuse on social media, including here in response to my own comments, which some posters have dismissed out of hand as not worth reading coz too long.

It now seems to be a badge of pride amongst some people to claim that they don't have the stamina, attention span or "spoons" to bother trying to comprehend any written material that would take them longer than nanoseconds to read. And such people seem to think that saying "TL;DR" is an effective tactic in discourse and debating.

[–]PassionateIntensity 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

tl;dr used to be a joke. If it's a badge of honor to you, you're admitting to being lazy and ignorant.

[–]Rationalmind 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Tl;dr may have been a joke, but it’s the functional equivalent of the word “thesis.”

[–]soundsituation 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I see this a lot too. I think it's meant to convey dismissiveness.

[–]MarkTwainiac 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

On another thread here, I disagreed with a supposed feminist who said patriarchy arose coz in her view all males in prehistoric times were super-strong "guardians" and "protectors" who spent most of their time fighting off ferocious beasts and big-game hunting, which she suggested provided the bulk of/nearly all calories prior to agriculture - whilst in her view, all females back then (and now) were/are utterly useless, totally weak and incapable of any physical tasks beyond caring for children and cooking due to having "fragile pregnancies."

I refuted her points, giving a more complex, nuanced explanation for the origins of patriarchy. I also pointed out that most pregnant women are actually quite hardy, and that giving birth is about the most muscular, strenuous feat humans can pull off - it requires enormous physical and emotional strength and fortitude - and that deriding women for our ability to gestate and bring new life into the world the way she does is misogyny.

Again and again, her responses to my posts were that she couldn't be bothered to address my arguments coz I had explained and evidenced them in too much detail at too much length.

Her last post to me:

Buddy, if you can't explain your social theory in a couple phrases, it means your theory is bullshit.

But sure, I have the attention span of a gnat. Oh, I hate reading so much I think I better stop reading what you write! See? You totally won. I'm not paying attention to you anymore and this CLEARLY means I have no arguments to make and you schooled me! P.S. I'm also a huge mysoginist, that's why I've been banned from Reddit and why I love hanging in this website instead.

Happy now? Good. Now shoo, kiddo.

This is the new ethos: Any ideas that can't be boiled down to bumper stickers or expressed in simplistic slogans like "TWAW," "trans rights are human rights" and "orange man bad" are bullshit.

Can you imagine if people completely discounted and dismissed all the ideas in all ancient texts - as well as the works of such people as Homer, Chaucer, Shakespeare, Spencer, Thomas More, Martin Luther, John Stewart Mill, Mary Wollstonecraft, Thomas Jefferson, Adam Smith, Karl Marx, Frederick Engels, Lenin, Nietszche, Thomas Chesterson, Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, Virginia Wolff, Simone de Beauvoir, JP Sarte, Mahatma Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Dr Spock, Bruno Bettleheim, Germaine Greer, Gloria Steinem, Andrea Dorkin, Nelson Mandela and a zillion others - coz such ideas can't be expressed in "a couple of phrases"?

https://saidit.net/s/GenderCritical/comments/70sg/are_rome_and_europe_the_root_of_patriarchy_in_the/

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

In the latest post on that thread, the supposed feminist I was debating with has called me "crazy" and told me to "fuck off."

[–]Shesstealthy 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I wonder if she'd say that to the famously pithy and concise Judith Butler.

[–]Rationalmind 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yep, sadly a commonplace a behavior. Then the problem is made worse when you look at the comments from the people replying to this person’s Twitter nonsense as if the person is speaking facts. Those people will likely go on to further repeat false information that continues down the chain. It’s the embodiment of the childhood game of telephone. It’s really a shame.

I will say the IB program is great at forcing kids to read and analyze primary documents. For those students exposed, it requires them to learn how to seek and evaluate the original source rather than to repeat tertiary commentary. However, not enough children are exposed to this approach to critical thought.

[–]anxietyaccount8[S] 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

I don't completely know JK Rowling's motivations. But there's a pattern where people assume radfems are "insecure" about our womanhood or gender identity. And I feel that for many of us, this is not the case whatsoever. I mean, there are radfems who are "de"-transmen, but it's not the majority.

[–]PassionateIntensity 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

there's a pattern where people assume radfems are "insecure" about our womanhood or gender identity.

That to me, is a comical batshit crazy projection. I find it hard to believe there's a woman alive who feels "inferior" in the face of a transwoman's "femininity." lol This is them projecting their own issues onto us.

[–]anxietyaccount8[S] 14 insightful - 2 fun14 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

It's not even necessarily that we're jealous of transwomen, they just think that we're closeted "non-binary" or trans men. When our entire point is that we criticize certain gendered labels (calling yourself "non-binary" is completely subjective, unlike calling yourself gay).

Somebody in the thread literally said this:

Speaking as an old person, I think a LOT, and possibly the vast majority, of 2ndwave feminists are nonbinary AFAB&AMAB people

[–]MarkTwainiac 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yup, speaking as an old person myself, I can confirm that the vast majority of 2nd wave feminists were and are female people of all sexual orientations who rejected and still reject regressive, restricting sex stereotypes - which is all that "gender" and "gender identity" amount to.

[–]Shesstealthy 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

So in other words they're ordinary everyday people who never needed a special label.

[–]MarkTwainiac 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

One of the reasons we didn't need special labels was coz there was no social media or any other platform on which to announce to the world and show off "identity" labels.

[–]Shesstealthy 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Good point

[–]Shesstealthy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This remains really interesting to me. This person believes anyone who pushes against the gender norms of their time is queer. And that does huge injustice to actual gay/lesbian/bisexual/pan/vaguely not straight enough for it to matter people.

Many years ago I was reading some feminist theory and I came across an article where a lesbian was defined as a woman who did not have any emotkonally dependent relationships with men, something like that. Whatever the definition was I thought gosh, as a single woman I too count as a lesbian. I mentioned it to someone on the same course and she very kindly pointed out that it was a no. It was long ago and I can't remember the language she used but I came away feeling like yeah unless you fall in love sexually with women this is not the name to use for yourself and sexuality and oppression for it are not theoretical.

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think a LOT, and possibly the vast majority, of 2ndwave feminists are nonbinary AFAB&AMAB people

Well, then, they can no longer just dismiss us out of hand, right? Cuz we're The Sacred TwanzTM ourselves! And therefore know whereof we speak!

[–]Rationalmind 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sounds like projection to me.

[–]fuckupaddams 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But there's a pattern where people assume radfems are "insecure" about our womanhood or gender identity.

How can that possibly be true when we're the only ones, no matter what bullshit comes our way or happens to us, who aren't bugging out every hour wondering wtf our gender is or if we're actually women? We seem to be the only ones who have the strength to just know and accept what we are and not find loopholes out of it.