One Good Effect of Lockdowns: Spared Peer Pressure, Young Girls Detransition

Imscared · 2022-09-18T18:36:38+00:00

Lockdown is why thousands of women became/ realized they were gay, check r/latebloomerlesbians

dondon973 · 2022-08-08T12:21:15+00:00

my peak trans was about a french transactivist influencer, aggresivelytrans who complains that gay scene in paris neglict transwomen as creators of gay culture and must be centered-oriented about transwomen because transwomen are source of inspirations ,an ideals of beauty and an pinnacle of seduction for gay men. So i was confused then i was bored with this ideas as constantly blaming gay men for all the problems of transwomen. But now, i'm scared for lgb youth because all french transactivst have huge influence and visibility in french mainstream medias .

Airbus320 · 2021-09-12T21:38:30+00:00

Airbus320 · 2021-03-11T14:09:54+00:00

😮

Airbus320 · 2020-11-22T19:19:39+00:00

😮

Portrynial · 2020-10-07T23:19:43+00:00

I think people unfairly expect women to be perfect, with an unspoken but obvious rule that any flaw or error of a woman can be perceived as an excuse to abuse her (to any varying degree of abuse.) Sometimes making it seem like she "deserves" it.

This is a lot of what I think toxic female gender roles are about. It isn't just femininity either, it's every type of expectation for a woman to be perfect, judged by other women, even masculine women or tomboys.

But no, I don't think it's unequal to associate men with negativity. When our real experience with men has been negative, we are just telling the truth.

It's not equality to silence that truth. Equality would be ending abuse and violence against women. The one way I might agree is, that a lot of women hate other women. Some women abuse other women. I think that also is part of our oppression.

But our lack of perfection or lack of being perfect little angels, shouldn't be an excuse to let toxic men off the hook.

Seahorse · 2020-09-05T07:25:01+00:00

Dunno if anyone else has noticed but Shiloh Jolie Pitt seems to be growing out of her "want to be a boy" phase, like most do.

Longer hair, different style of dress (sporty). You have to search for the articles on ddg however because Google only shows out of date old pics.

bald-janitor · 2020-08-07T20:59:05+00:00

Ccc was a Israeli bot

elizabethstanton · 2020-08-01T23:22:19+00:00

female homoeroticism. or you could just say lesbian...

Wrencer · 2020-07-30T11:50:46+00:00

What happened ??

luckystar · 2020-07-23T02:03:18+00:00

Does not exist in Chinese.

LesbiSilly · 2020-07-20T16:48:16+00:00

I agree!

ccccccc · 2020-07-17T12:25:56+00:00

Do you mean, if a word is "masculin ou féminin"?

Yeah, that's what I mean, English doesn't have it but I hear some other languages do. I ask because of the other poster who said in her language, the word for grammatical gender had recently become used like "gender" is used in English.

Wrencer · 2020-07-17T12:19:23+00:00

Do you mean, if a word is "masculin ou féminin"? Like, in English it's always "the" but in French we have "le" (masculin) and "la" (féminin). Like, it's "the book" ("le livre", masculin) and the door ("la porte", féminin).

There isn't another word, it's "le genre grammatical"

ccccccc · 2020-07-17T12:10:06+00:00

Does French have a third word for grammatical gender?

I found this site for French etymology (I think) but it's difficult for me to understand.

Wrencer · 2020-07-17T11:59:57+00:00

We also use "genre" to say "that kind". "Ce genre de livres"= "that kind of books".

I have no idea tbh. I think it might be older than I think, because I was already taught the difference between the 2 words like 10 years ago (I'm 25 now) but in recent years we've talked about it more and more.

ccccccc · 2020-07-17T11:48:36+00:00

Interesting!

English has "genre" to mean something else, like literary genre of romantic poetry or something. Though I guess it probably isn't pronounced the same.

Used to be said without distinction before tho

Do you know about when it changed so that there is now a distinction? And how there got to be two words?

Wrencer · 2020-07-17T11:44:02+00:00

"Sexe" and "genre". Used to be said without distinction before tho

ccccccc · 2020-07-17T11:39:40+00:00

What is it in French?

Wrencer · 2020-07-17T09:29:53+00:00

Am I the only one torn between wanting to abolish gender because it's a social construct, full of harmful stereotypes, and letting ppl express themselves the way they want ?

btw thanks for creating this more open minded place

Wrencer · 2020-07-17T09:26:35+00:00

In French it's 2 different words too

Wrencer · 2020-07-17T09:25:23+00:00

Yeah, I agree tbh, it's like some women refuse to see that women can be sexist towards other women, too. I've honestly encountered some men who were more feminist than some women.

powpowpowpow · 2020-07-17T00:59:24+00:00

Accountability is very necessary and so is being self consious of our actions and how they can affect others... everyone should practice that imo

ccccccc · 2020-07-17T00:13:15+00:00

I can relate to some degree. I have done some things I am rightfully ashamed of in my life, wrong things. I think it might have helped me to avoid doing them if I'd understood more that women have to be careful to not be bad people too.

cervix · 2020-07-16T17:38:50+00:00

Not really? My language had a word for grammatical gender and a word for sex, but now the meanings have shifted as a result of English influences and people have started using our word for grammatical gender the same way English speakers use the word gender. It sounds incredibly ridiculous.

ccccccc · 2020-07-16T17:05:26+00:00

To add a bit from one English-native-tongue perspective about "gender" and "sex":

I'm not a linguist, but I think maybe what happened in English is that "gender" became a euphemism for "sex" (as in male/female), since it's also the word for the act of sexual intercourse. It can be a little uncomfortable to say, because it sounds like you're talking about, well, having sex, when you just want to talk about whether someone is male or female. "Gender" avoids this problem.

Alternatively, maybe this difference was developed by the radfems who were developing the gender criticism discourse. I don't know whether "gender" was in common use to refer to sex or sex roles before that time. It's possible it was this discourse that helped create the separation, but I don't know. Maybe it was earlier. I don't know much about the history of the words.

Sometimes I think it's interesting where the words for these concepts come from. In English, it looks like "gender" comes through Latin, then French from "birth", and the idea of classifying things by species (like "genre"). It looks like "sex" comes through Latin from "to cut" and the idea of separating things (like "section"). Interestingly it says here that "sex" is only recorded as being used to mean "sexual intercourse" since around 1930, which seems pretty recent to me.

And it looks like etymonline agrees with what I thought about "gender":

As sex (n.) took on erotic qualities in 20c., gender came to be the usual English word for "sex of a human being," in which use it was at first regarded as colloquial or humorous. Later often in feminist writing with reference to social attributes as much as biological qualities; this sense first attested 1963. Gender-bender is from 1977, popularized from 1980, with reference to pop star David Bowie.

tuesday · 2020-07-16T15:04:18+00:00

well if they only hated people who complain, then their insult would not have targeted not only females but a specific subset of females. (white, middle aged)

ccccccc · 2020-07-14T16:01:24+00:00

Hello! Thank you for the interesting submission! However it is not in keeping with the sub rules at the moment. Please make a new submission in keeping with the rules if you would like to share it here, as explained below.

Text posts should include a (potentially very short) explanation of why you want to share the link here and any context you'd like to mention. Including the link alone is not quite enough.

I want to know what women find interesting and relevant when they share links here, especially since links often have their own spin on things that the woman sharing the links might not agree with completely. I think having the reason the links are shared here helps keep the discussion centered in the right place here.

Here's the relevant rule from the sidebar, for reference:

If you want to share a link, share it in the body of a text post along with a (potentially short) introduction explaining why you want to share the link here and any context you'd like to mention.

ccccccc · 2020-07-13T21:21:01+00:00

some opinions that literally only GC spaces are talking about

Yeah that's a good reminder that a lot of stuff is just hard to talk about anywhere else. Does this include stuff besides the trans issue?

For instance-- the "non binary lesbian" who tells detractors to suck his "girldick" lobbying to dismantle protections for women in the NY Democratic party and even taking the space of a "Female Leadership" position of the party. This is NOT "woke" or good, it is blatantly a privileged white male trying to use trans ideology to undo decades of women's rights work. Most left leaning people who hear about this issue will agree that some activists have crossed the line (I tested by telling people around me)

That surprises me actually! I would have thought people would have been on board with it.

I didn't want to link to any websites that are openly "radical feminist" because they WILL dismiss it as "TERF propaganda" out of hand and thus disconnect from the conversation.

Yes, I've had this experience. I didn't understand why people felt so uncomfortable with feministcurrent.

I also find it frustrating when I hear about a very relevant issue displaying the conflict between trans rights and women's rights but there are no "neutral-ish" sources, and I'd be interested in finding a way to deal with this, either by starting a new website that isn't dripping in charged terms like "autogenyphilic predatory TIMs" and "mutilated axe wound penis", but rather talks about these very real issues in a way that won't make left leaning people immediately go "ew, TERF" and promptly reject the information out of hand.

That sounds like a valuable resource. I bet a lot of people would really appreciate less polarizing content on this issue.

I feel, idk, like I understand the political polarization stuff more since covid happened. I feel like I keep repeating myself but whatever. The masks issue. Back in January it was not a political issue. Now it is. The whole thing has become so politicized. We should know much more now about the actual hard facts but with the absolute deluge of information and opinions about it, it's difficult to just find the facts. I feel like a similar thing has happened in may other issues too that have become politicized, trans being one of them. It would be nice to just stick to the facts and figure out something that makes sense and works and is fair to everyone.

ccccccc · 2020-07-12T16:45:28+00:00

Hello, please remember to read the sub rules before commenting, as different subs here on SaidIt have different rules! This is a mod rule 4b sub and is meant only for female participants (which you state you aren't in another comment).

If you'd like to repost your comment or discuss this topic in an appropriate space I might suggest a crosspost in the open-to-all subs /s/feminism or /s/women.

I want to emphasize that it's my intention here to treat all participants with respect, including you. It is also my role here to enforce the rules which are meant to keep this space functioning as intended. The sub policy here is stated in the sidebar:

Content known to be from male people is removed. Accounts that post here and are known to be male will have their ability to post here removed.

This is the rule I will be acting in accordance with now. Please note that this is in no way a condemnation or endorsement of your contribution, and it's not a punishment, it's simply meant to keep the space functioning as it's meant to. And again, remember that you're free to post elsewhere if you like on this topic. The "other discussions" tab can make it easy to find discussions on the same topic in different subs so I'd encourage you to use that (I think posting a link to this post will do it) if you want to make it easy for interested people to find your discussion on this topic too. You should still be able to view the content of your comment on your userpage if you would like to post the text elsewhere.

luckystar · 2020-07-11T21:29:20+00:00

I am okay with some trans women being considered women in some contexts. There are contexts where it will never be appropriate (rape shelters and sports and such) but I don't really care about bathrooms and I am deeply sympathetic to actual trans women who are just suffering with a debilitating mental condition for which the best current treatment available is transition since we don't have a magic pill or therapy to make them accept themselves. Like I won't call Blaire White a "he" because for any practical purposes where I would be interacting with her, she would be a woman in my mind.
My problem is mostly with the predators, trenders, and bullies that make up the noisiest segments of the TRA movement. But maligning them ALL like that hurts people who just got the short end of the stick in terms of mental health and actually ARE just trying to live their lives.
I'm especially sympathetic to post op trans women, especially the ones I know IRL, because that really does a doozy on your sex drive and options for sexual assault so the risk seems relatively low to me, especially since many of them are not attracted to women.

luckystar · 2020-07-11T21:18:54+00:00

I'm not the person you are replying to, but I am a far left progressive woman who agrees with much of GC but just kinda feels like they go too far off the deep end of transphobia (stuff like mocking trans women for looking mannish and ugly for instance, or even disapproving of people like Blaire White and Buck Angel who are imo have a very challenging mental condition that they've managed extremely well and if anything are examples of how people can be trans without necessarily hurting women). For that reason among others I can't say I'm truly GC, just a generic feminist that has some opinions that literally only GC spaces are talking about.

I also find it frustrating when I hear about a very relevant issue displaying the conflict between trans rights and women's rights but there are no "neutral-ish" sources, and I'd be interested in finding a way to deal with this, either by starting a new website that isn't dripping in charged terms like "autogenyphilic predatory TIMs" and "mutilated axe wound penis", but rather talks about these very real issues in a way that won't make left leaning people immediately go "ew, TERF" and promptly reject the information out of hand.

For instance-- the "non binary lesbian" who tells detractors to suck his "girldick" lobbying to dismantle protections for women in the NY Democratic party and even taking the space of a "Female Leadership" position of the party. This is NOT "woke" or good, it is blatantly a privileged white male trying to use trans ideology to undo decades of women's rights work. Most left leaning people who hear about this issue will agree that some activists have crossed the line (I tested by telling people around me). However I didn't want to link to any websites that are openly "radical feminist" because they WILL dismiss it as "TERF propaganda" out of hand and thus disconnect from the conversation. There are NO other sources. A few radfem blogs and places like Lipstick Alley and one New York based LGBT blog post phrasing the situation in a positive tone (something like "dismantling the gender binary and including non binary folxxx in politics"). I know MSM won't touch anything that could be negative towards anything vaguely "trans" related but imo this NEEDS to be addressed somewhere in a way that doesn't malign all trans people, if nothing else because we need to help more people understand what the problem is and potential allies are going to be turned off by "TERF websites" if that makes sense.

Sorry for hijacking this thread to basically rant lol I've been pretty frustrated lately

luckystar · 2020-07-11T07:48:29+00:00

Maybe an unpopular opinion here but I'm honestly totally fine with "truscum" (people like Blaire White, Buck Angel, Rose of Dawn etc) who are just living with a difficult mental condition the best they can. It's the "tucute" that have co opted the movement -- ironically most of whom are not trans, just boring white people that call themselves "enby" because they think a gender is a personality -- and pushed the craziest bullshit. People with actual gender dysphoria aren't telling lesbians "suck my girldick" or demanding to be allowed into women's changing rooms, the whole point is that they don't like their genitals and most decent people have a basic desire to not make everyone around them deeply uncomfortable. But these crazies are much louder, and as far as I can tell much greater in number (since it's easy to be a creepy man with a fetish or a teen "not like the other girls" girl, and actual transsexualism is a fraction of a percent of society). At this point they ARE the trans movement and their nonsense is infringing on others' rights and doing more harm than good.

freerollerskates · 2020-07-10T13:59:10+00:00

I got banned for saying that abortion is patriarchal oppression and its purpose is to keep women sexually available and to allow men to avoid taking responsibility for the results of their offspring. Abortion doesn't un-rape someone, or un-abuse them. I know too many women traumatised by being forced into abortions by a patriarchal system that says that women who get pregnant must bear all responsibility and must erase their shame. There will be reasons why in certain situations abortion (especially early medical abortion) is the most compassionate option, but I don't think it's something that we should promote or normalise.

AliceofX · 2020-07-10T05:12:44+00:00

I've seen people calling women Karen for simply complaining about something

Okay, but does that mean they hate women or they hate complainers?

ccccccc · 2020-07-10T04:18:38+00:00

I didn't mean to insult them, I just genuinily thought the ideas that I mentioned clowny or stupid but I can see how that is not ok for the rules, so I will edit the post accordingly :)

Ah, ok, that makes sense.

i will repost it tomorrow following the rules better!

That will work!

Thanks for being understanding, and for explaining. I want to do a good job as a mod but I don't have much experience with it yet.

quilii · 2020-07-10T04:10:41+00:00

Its all good! Don't be too hard on yourself when it comes to it, regardless i will repost it tomorrow following the rules better!

I didn't mean to insult them, I just genuinily thought the ideas that I mentioned clowny or stupid but I can see how that is not ok for the rules, so I will edit the post accordingly :)

ccccccc · 2020-07-10T03:29:21+00:00

If you mean it as an observation (not an insult), then that's ok, yes. That would not be breaking the rules of the sub.

eta: Sorry if I misunderstood what you meant. I'm trying to do my best as a moderator but as a fallible human I misunderstand things sometimes.

quilii · 2020-07-10T03:20:06+00:00

Oh, sorry! That wasn't my intent. Can i still say in the post that i believe their behavior and speech pattern was similar to incels?

ccccccc · 2020-07-10T03:10:42+00:00

Hey, remember that this is a place for all women to participate, even women from very different backgrounds. I submitted a post announcing this sub to both /s/PinkPillFeminism and /s/BiblicalSubmission, that's pretty different! But despite our differences I think we can all learn from and help each other. And perhaps what is most valuable, offer women readers a chance to see all these different perspectives without a moderator deciding for them.

However, to help keep a good atmosphere, I decided that the rules for moderating all content, no matter what viewpoint, would be as follows (copied from the sidebar):

[Content not known to be from men that is not off-topic] is moderated according to SaidIt's pyramid of debate. Content containing anything from the bottom 4 levels is removed, even if it also contains content from higher levels. Replies that drag the discussion down to "contradiction" from a higher level comment/submission are removed.

I would consider "clownery" and "imbecile" to be a form of name-calling. Remember that there may be readers from /s/PinkPillFeminism here! It's fine to disagree but here try to do it in a way that's respectful of everyone. And follow the pyramid of debate guideline I'm using to attempt to moderate the sub in a neutral way.

I'm going to remove this post since it doesn't fit the rules right now (because of "clownery" and "imbecile"), but please feel free to edit it to fit the rules and resubmit it! If the rules are not clear you can also reply to this message and I will try to explain. But please be polite if you do want to ask about moderation (that's part of the rules too), moderation can be difficult. It's supposed to keep the sub fair for everyone so just keep that in mind. Again, please feel welcome to resubmit with edits or to reply to ask about the moderation rules if they're not clear.

quilii · 2020-07-10T02:56:26+00:00

That's very interesting! A very progressive tribal tradition when you compare it to other traditions that have a more barbaric flair to women.

I think its not a good one because the women could get pregnant from a partner she might not choose or a STD, and yes, polygamy makes males more prone to sexual agressive behavior.

quilii · 2020-07-10T02:53:43+00:00

Imo it is a bit sexist but not overall, I've seen people calling women Karen for simply complaining about something, you know?

quilii · 2020-07-10T02:50:45+00:00

Maybe it was bc you used the term gender too, they have quelms with it i think

quilii · 2020-07-10T02:16:46+00:00

I wish women weren't pressured into working just like men are, when women get pregnant etc they are forced to work on their first weeks which are crucial for the pregnancy, as in the first trimester its where most of miscarrigies take place, specially due to emotional or physical stress.

Women do not have the time to be mothers as they are only given a few months to be away with their child, they can't enjoy their pregnancy as they need to work during it.

We are not the same as men and we should be integrated in the work force differently as such.

Also, its scary to see how women are gradually being more silenced, to casual ways and accepted ways into society such as the popularization of the meme of the "Karen" or due to TRA's.

So yeah, I think we are going through a rocky place right now and all I hope is that ours earned rights remain victorious in protecting us and ensuring our safety

ccccccc · 2020-07-09T23:45:34+00:00

It was my understanding that the pyramid of debate applied to just that - debate. So, not the original post but the replies.

Imo there is some ambiguity about the rule as it's written for SaidIt. Other people seem to administer it differently, for example magnora7 seems to not remove stuff if it contains anything from higher in the pyramid, even if it also contains stuff lower on the pyramid too. It's my opinion that it's fairer to remove stuff if it contains anything from lower in the pyramid. I tried to explain the way I would be moderating according to the pyramid in the sidebar.

I think it's fairer to moderate submissions as well as replies according to the same rules, even though a submission isn't a reply to anyone. It doesn't seem fair to me to allow women to say low-pyramid stuff in submissions if women who reply wouldn't be allowed to reply in kind in comments.

I agree that "woke" is largely used in a positive sense in the communities that originated the term.

the moment they realize they have to write every post as though it was an academic thesis they will turn right back around.

I would consider this an example of not treating moderators politely and with respect. Stating a disagreement about sub rules can be done without ridicule or exaggeration.

I could be lenient (and it doesn't appear it will impact you much anyhow). But as I said, I don't think "being lenient" helps anyone. And I don't think it's fair to not enforce the rules for one person, if I'd be enforcing them later for another.

This could have been stated politely, and I'm not crazy to think it wasn't. I don't like doing this, and maybe there should be better rules, but I think this is what I meant the rules to mean:

Moderators expect to be treated politely and with respect by anyone addressing them as moderators. Communication to moderators that does not meet this basic criteria results in a removal of the ability of the sender to submit content to the sub or to communicate with sub moderators.

Talking to moderators is supposed to be the way to appeal things, but if someone's already treating moderators without respect in that channel... well. I don't want to put moderators in that position. I don't like banning people forever but I don't like making work for moderators either. This isn't a perfect system but it's what I've got right now, and I think this is how I'll handle these kinds of things here for now.

cybitch · 2020-07-07T20:16:11+00:00

It was my understanding that the pyramid of debate applied to just that - debate. So, not the original post but the replies. My post isn't a reply to anyone so while it may or may not have terms that some people might consider to be offensive, the context is that of an OP, not a response to someone else's post. I don't really see who exactly I'm calling a name, I haven't spoken of any specific individuals in my post, only made generalizations.

Woke is a rather common term in the US, so I'm surprised you haven't heard of it in a non-offensive context. While my attitude towards this subculture may seem negative, the term in and of itself is not considered a slur as far as I'm aware. As far as wokespeak is concerned, I think it's a perfect term to sum up common phrases that are parroted in the modern liberal feminism community. I indeed don't consider those viewpoints to be legitimate.

Overall, I would question whether the kind of women that would be put off by the word woke and the fact that not every feminist thinks men in skirts are women even exist on this website. Seems like they're more than comfortable on reddit, even if they do have to walk on eggshells around the mtfs there. Either way, even if they do make their way over here, the moment they realize they have to write every post as though it was an academic thesis they will turn right back around.

ccccccc · 2020-07-07T19:04:18+00:00

More content that was censored on GC: PIV SEX/INTERCOURSE IS BAD FOR WOMEN

The post contained several links in OP before it was removed, including some links talking about less-known biological aspects of PIV sexual intercourse in humans and other creatures, and some links arguing that all PIV sex is rape.

ccccccc · 2020-07-07T18:49:55+00:00

Unfortunately (as this is an interesting and relevant topic), I think this post is not in keeping with the moderation policy. It's a bit in the gray area, but I don't think I'm doing anyone any favors by not trying to moderate according to the publicly stated rules. Especially if I would moderate another woman who tried responding in a similar way. If you would like to, please resubmit the post after editing to bring it in line with the moderation policy. More details below.

Specifically this rule, under "What content is removed?":

Other content is moderated according to SaidIt's pyramid of debate. Content containing anything from the bottom 4 levels is removed, even if it also contains content from higher levels.

I would consider these things to be light name-calling:

an unusually big amount of these "ladies"

This seems like it was probably meant in an insulting way, but it's hard to be sure, and "ladies" is accurate if one believes these people are not really female ladies. But if you're going to resubmit, please choose a word here that is less likely to be interpreted or misinterpreted as a mild insult.

I'd be willing to bet a lot less men believe in this whole "women have penises" "war is peace" style modern wokespeak

I would consider "wokespeak" here to be a sort of name-calling. It seems to carry negative connotations, delegitimizing these viewpoints, in addition to being descriptive.

And now it seems those woke women have decided to hand the movement over to men in skirts.

I would consider "woke" here to be a mild form of name-calling. I would also consider "men in skirts" to be a mild form of name-calling, though if that were the only thing I would probably leave it alone as it also works as a descriptor.

As this is an interesting topic, I hope you consider resubmitting. Sorry to have to moderate, but keep in mind that the rules are meant to keep this a productive place for discussions between women from very different backgrounds, and hopefully all moderation helps keep things in line with that positive intent. Though I will be removing the post, the content should still be available in your personal account to copy, edit, and resubmit fairly easily as desired.

tuesday · 2020-07-07T01:32:15+00:00

eh. that woman in your link is against free speech, she thinks it's okay to de-platform and censor people as long as she doesnt like what they're saying. While at the same complaining that she was de-platformed and censored.

/not impressed with hypocrites

ccccccc · 2020-07-07T01:28:34+00:00

I suppose she's complaining about the same thing being done to her that she wants to do to others. I still think it's interesting that her content was censored. I wouldn't have expected it; she's clearly not an American right-winger man or whatever one might expect to be censored on GC (unless she's/he's lying about who she/he really is).

ccccccc · 2020-07-06T17:02:20+00:00

It would be nice to have an acknowledgement that they are participating in the same sort of censorship-without-disclosure-and-with-slander behavior.

I just want them to follow their own stated rules (or make the rules accurately disclose what's censored), like they wanted reddit to follow their own stated rules.

Also: Reminder: everyone likes and encourages censorship...

cybitch · 2020-07-06T16:05:25+00:00

I don't believe this whole "men are the same as women, gender is a social construct" thing actually helps women in the workplace. For one, women are naturally less aggressive than men and the competitive environment is not for most of us. Also, when women try the negotiating tactics that are successful for men, we get a negative reaction as people subconsciously judge someone's behavior differently depending on their gender. Women's threshold for being considered aggressive as opposed to assertive is lower. On the other hand, when women engage in behavior that's more natural to us, we will get overlooked in favor of the men who can speak up without being perceived as an overbearing bitch. Only being attractive can help women get attention, but not all women can have that advantage.

I feel that if people acknowledged that our evolution has led us to have a different temperament, our positive qualities would be acknowledged - being careful, less impulsive, more empathetic and patient, more inclined to compromise instead of trying to dominate a group etc. I remember applying for a job in a medicine plant where the employer told me they only wanted women for that role as men kept injuring themselves with the chemicals and boiling oil. It was a job many would've considered more suitable for a male but in practice it turns out women were more inclined to do it safely and without dangerous mistakes caused by a lack of caution and overestimating one's abilities.

AliceofX · 2020-07-06T16:04:30+00:00

It's kind of hilarious that being censored by Reddit didn't teach them anything. The moral of the story - people don't dislike the stick, they dislike not being the one wielding it.

ccccccc · 2020-07-06T15:33:46+00:00

I checked, and I can see your removed comments here for now. I saw some of those comments and it's interesting to know they removed that.

ccccccc · 2020-07-06T15:30:24+00:00

on GC?? Isn't that their main viewpoint? was it the "social construct" bit?

AliceofX · 2020-07-06T14:54:48+00:00

Yes, Kevin is different but it's still a pejorative term that's mostly associated with one gender. Now that I think about it, dick would probably be a better example. But my point is that someone saying, "All women are entitled Karens," would be sexist since they're talking about the whole sex. If you're only saying that some women are entitled then how is that sexist? Or is the Karen meme bad because we can no longer acknowledge differences among men and women?

SavvyDiogenes · 2020-07-06T14:04:54+00:00

"Kevin" is a nickname for guys that are just dumb, not necessarily assholes - Karens encompasses asshole women, not dumb women per se. Which is why "Kevin" wouldn't work in this situation.

And if, in a parallel world, people would call guys Kenny everywhere in the same way Karen is used you could argue that it's misandry, if women wouldn't also get the same treatment. So yes, reverse the situation and the outcome is the same.

AliceofX · 2020-07-06T07:34:22+00:00

What about Kevin? And if it wasn't Karen but, let's say, Kenny that was called entitled would it still be sexist or is it simply being a woman that makes stereotypes sexist?

SavvyDiogenes · 2020-07-05T23:06:45+00:00

If Karen wasn't sexist, there would be a male version of Karen. There are plenty of male assholes, as many as there are "Karens", but we don't have a generalised name for them, do we?

The way I see it- when we'll have Male Karen, then Karen will no longer be sexist. Until then, it's sexist simply because it's a double standard, nothing more nothing less.

ccccccc · 2020-07-05T22:39:25+00:00

lol you can communicate how you like. I just wasn't sure where you were trying to take the conversation, I suppose.

The announcement was more like a stream of consciousness than anything, so it was a bit hard to follow. But I'm thinking this is the meat of it?

Hm. Well I'm not always as clear a writer as I'd like.

So I was thinking maybe this was a sub for people who were critical of gender roles, but who were not full blown Marxists. But... not I'm thinking maybe that's not it. Maybe you want to debate?

I want women who are critical of gender roles and who are not full blown marxists to feel welcome here. (And it's my impression they would be on GC too, btw. I don't think they're all 100% full-blown marxists, especially because they tend to criticize the expectation that women put everyone else's needs before women's needs in activism.)

I don't mean it to be specifically for that though. I want it to be a place that welcomes all women, regardless of ideology or life situation or whatever. I suppose the sidebar is a bit long, but that's where I really tried to spell out what the sub is meant for. And maybe "debate" is kinda close but I mean it to be for discussion more than debate. I'd rather just share perspectives and learn from each other without feeling any need to correct each other or whatever. Sometimes I think it's easier to learn in a less confrontational way anyway.

Yayme · 2020-07-05T22:26:43+00:00

Sorry, my kid tells me I'm terrible at texting because I always sound mad. I did upvote all your comments to try to show I was engaging in good faith discourse. Maybe I should use more emojis? :-D

Like I said, I don't really fit in with Radical Feminism, because I'm a Christian, and I own my own business, and we have a big house, and a cleaning lady, and all that stuff. And they're all Marxists. So I was thinking maybe this was a sub for people who were critical of gender roles, but who were not full blown Marxists. But... not I'm thinking maybe that's not it. Maybe you want to debate?

The announcement was more like a stream of consciousness than anything, so it was a bit hard to follow. But I'm thinking this is the meat of it?

This just sounds like the debate sub. It sounds like I just want the debate sub to exist. Hmm.

Anyway, I subscribed when I first found the place. And I'm not going to unsubscribe. I'll go ahead and engage with topics that interest me. But I'm probably not interested in debating my beliefs anymore. I'm old. Aint nobody got time for that :-D

ccccccc · 2020-07-05T22:06:20+00:00

I can try to explain more if you'd like, but I'm having a bit of a hard time reading your tone here.

I'm not here to fight with anyone, to convince, or to be convinced, or whatever. I want this to be a place where we can work together positively without feeling like we're imposing on each other or being imposed on. I want this to be a place where everyone can state their perspective openly and can take from the conversations whatever they each find useful.

If biological sex has no influence on social behaviors, then I want to believe that. If it has some influence, then I want to understand that, whatever it is. I don't like feeling like I have to take any dogmatic position, and I want this to be an environment where other women don't have to either. I want us all to be free to think for ourselves and to discuss openly but without pressure here. That's all I'm saying.

Yayme · 2020-07-05T21:43:10+00:00

I have to admit, I'm curious to know what drew you to GC in the first place. Because the quote below is not all that dissimilar from "I want to wear a dress and makeup, therefore I am a woman."

Kind of one of the most basic principals of Gender Critical is to be Critical of Gender Roles. So believing that ALL women would ever be better at X or Y is the belief in a Gender Role. Whether X or Y is raising babies and cooking dinner, or writing code and running businesses. You are saying that you believe Gender Roles are real, and innate.

And I'm not a brain surgeon, so I'm not going to act like I know what anyone's brain looks like. I know Gina Rippon is a professor of cognitive neuroimaging, and she said gendered brains are junk science.

I have a wide range of interests and skills and hobbies. And I didn't develop them because of my vulva. And honestly, I would be surprised if you are interested in whatever it is you're interested in just because you have an inny instead of an outie between your legs.

"What if we find women are usually gifted at X or Y mental activity in a surprising and unexpected way? "

ccccccc · 2020-07-05T21:10:01+00:00

I'm surprised to hear it sounds like a "red pill women's" forum to you. And that's fine if you don't want to engage, I would encourage everybody to keep their time and energy focused where it is most beneficial for them. I would sincerely hate to find out I'd helped a woman waste her time here. :(

I made the sub because of topics that were censored on r/GC, that I was unhappy to see censored. Some of those topics seemed like they were intentionally participating in suppressing information not at all related to GC or radical feminism or anything. Some because I just don't personally think they're true at this moment and would like to be able to have open discussion about them, without feeling like I need to take an ideological line.

Personally I hadn't intended to make any post arguing that women should be "helpmeets" to a male "captain". I'm more trying to free myself from what I view as a dogmatic position that GC has held. What if we find women are usually gifted at X or Y mental activity in a surprising and unexpected way? What if we find out women's abilities are way more plastic and the result of life experience than thought? I mean sure, we might find out women are all super dumb and should try to act dumber than they are, idk. But we can't even discuss these things on GC because of what I view as a dogmatic stance. And I don't like that. I want to be able to actually discuss these things openly.

I do want women who believe that "helpmeet" to "captain" stuff to be able to speak freely here, because I think they are unable to in lots of women's spaces... and they're women, for goodness sakes! I also want women who strongly disagree with that to be able to speak here. I want to be able to talk to each other. To share opinions. I want there to be a space for women where all these opinions are present, so that a woman can read and decide for herself what she thinks makes sense, instead of it being decided by a moderator. Not to fight with each other, but to have a place where these opinions can all be voiced, where we can find common ground. Maybe where we can work for all women while allowing all women a voice and supporting each other where it makes sense, without imposing ideology on anyone, or having to compromise our own to participate.

Again, thanks for replying. It's nice to know if this space doesn't work for you (and presumably other women like you), and why.

Yayme · 2020-07-05T20:42:43+00:00

Well, with a sub this small, obviously it will fall mostly on you to provide content to build the sub. And it looks a lot like the red pill women’s sub right now. And that’s not something I’ll engage with.

I mean, you be you... if that’s what makes you happy then have at it. I’m just never going to subscribe to the belief that women are born to be “second mates” while men are born to “captain.”

And I think living your life expecting a man to provide for you socially and financially is always going to be a lopsided relationship, that puts women on the losing end. I think it’s short sighted to believe that millions of women marched and fought for the right to live a life free of those types of expectations and relationships for no reason.

It’s funny that traditionally conservative women and Marxists have so much in common - disdain for porn and overt displays of female sexuality... but also have so many differences - namely who should be “in charge” of a woman.

ccccccc · 2020-07-05T20:05:15+00:00

Interesting, thanks for voicing your perspective.

But I’m also not sure how well I’ll fit here.

I'm not so much hoping this will be a place to "fit in" as a place women can work together if desired. That's kindof what I'm getting at with "intercommunity." More like an international conference than a club. We don't all need to believe the same things to offer perspectives that will be valuable to other women, or to work together on shared interests.

Yayme · 2020-07-05T19:47:43+00:00

I prefer women only. I do think when you allow men, you either get a bunch of MRAs who want to have the same debate over and over, or you get a bunch of “white knights” with their benevolent sexism who think we need them to defend us. Or even worse, you get pick me chicks sucking up to the men.

I don’t know how active I’ll be though. I don’t fit in rad feminism- I’m a capitalist, I also let my daughter wear makeup, and shave, and I’m Catholic. But I’m also not sure how well I’ll fit here.

Edit to add: Yah, I won’t fit in here. I looked through your ideology list, and while I am Catholic, I’m not in to biblical submissiveness.

I feel like, even as a business owner I’ll have more in common with those Marxist’s, than I will with women who follow Jordan “women are swamp creatures” Peterson.

Yayme · 2020-07-05T19:19:42+00:00

I wish there were more incentives in place to encourage big businesses to use women-owned small businesses.

Right now the wosb certification is just a racket. You have to pay a ton of money to a third party to get certified, and the support they provide is a complete joke. They have mixers you can go to where big companies have their supply chain people there, but no one gets any real business from those events. The big companies only do it to pay lip service to supplier diversity without actually having a diverse supply chain.

I’d like to see actual tax incentives for using all diverse suppliers, not just the tiny segment in place now.

ccccccc · 2020-07-05T19:19:09+00:00

Is anyone else here happy with this being a women-only sub? Only a few people have commented so far.

I suppose I could just post stuff on /s/feminism or /s/women instead if that's what most people really seem to prefer.

ccccccc · 2020-07-05T19:13:31+00:00

Hm.

Yeah, I've had this instinct that women are "safer" than men somehow when... that often is not the case. Women can be abusive. Women can be pedophiles. I don't think it does women any favor to be let off the hook for this, either.

what's the point? Like not in theory, in reality.

Welllll. I guess "in reality" we'll have to see. I just really would rather hear women's opinions. We can't dismiss them as "oh that's just a man's opinion on this, he's just trying to keep women down because of his own interests". I mean, yes, men can influence women who come speak here too. But I think there's something meaningful about just hearing the perspectives of other women.

There are a lot of things I really like about GC. The female atmosphere was one of them, but I know it left out a lot of the voices of a lot of women because it was feminist and radical feminist about that. I want to hear from those women.

And I also don't want to hear from /s/testing_sub3, y'know? Or if I do, I want it to be because a woman went there and believes it... I want to know what she gets out of it, why she thinks it, etc.

That's my thinking, anyway. I also don't want to participate in helping a man turn GC away from a focus on women, if that's what the person who gave me this sub was attempting to do.

Tea · 2020-07-05T18:56:45+00:00

It's a tempting, natural reaction to want this place to be just for women but, what's the point? Like not in theory, in reality. What has it ever accomplished? Sure there's personal stories and sensitive topics that are best shared with a trusted group, but IME the women have been just as vitriolic as the men.

ccccccc · 2020-07-05T18:52:38+00:00

I'm removing this post now that I've decided that the sub should be female-only, since OP is male. However I have copied the content here in the interest of anti-censorship.

ccccccc · 2020-07-05T17:46:25+00:00

You as a woman would prefer this not be a space for women only?

I just feel I'd be turning my back on GC somehow. While I'm grateful to have the sub, I don't know what the motivations of the person who gave it to me were. It feels wrong to open it to men somehow.

There's also /s/feminism and /s/women which are open to everyone.

But I don't know everyone's perspective on this. So I do like to hear from women who have different preferences about this.

Tea · 2020-07-05T16:51:19+00:00

I think restricting the sub to women is going to bring about major growth issues. There's a lot of progressive men on this site who are dying to get away from the alt-right spaces and talk sense. By locking them out, you're locking out good content.

Sun_bear · 2020-07-05T15:46:13+00:00

I got banned for saying gender is a social construct used to oppress women.

quilii · 2020-07-05T15:45:50+00:00

Ooh i see, thank you for clarifying!

ccccccc · 2020-07-05T15:43:32+00:00

Hmm.

Well first to clarify, /s/Gender_Critical is NOT meant to be a radical feminist sub. (Yes, I realize gender criticism in this context is a radical feminist concept. The sub name isn't ideal. I tried to explain above how I arrived at this decision anyway.) It's not even meant to be a feminist sub. It's meant to be a sub for women from any background to discuss these topics.

It seems better to keep it female-only. And I can't do that and also put it on /s/all. So that's why I decided to take it off of /s/all.

And no it does not bother me to hear comments like this, it's interesting to hear what women want from a discussion space that they have perhaps found lacking thus far.

quilii · 2020-07-05T15:38:35+00:00

I think transexualism is enough to peak anyone, due to how it is seen in the mainstream

It is definetly a mental disorder and instead of encouraging therapy or any other form of treatment they go straight ahead to changing their whole body and fucking it up with cirguries

Imagine a world where we encouraged bulimic/anorexic people to achieve the body they really want... it's what is happening with trans people, just people feeding into their delusion

ccccccc · 2020-07-05T15:36:36+00:00

I see some truth in this. It seems like a movement that calls people "truscum" may not have the best of intentions in mind, or be particularly grounded in serious medical and scientific thinking.

And I do think these sorts of movements can attract people who are looking for a place they can belong or have a favored position. I mentioned this blog before, but there is a blog The Dirt from Dirt which argues that a similar thing has happened regarding female homoeroticism: that there is a rare biological condition only a few people have, which a lot of people have tried to glom onto for various reasons. It also seems like this kind of hostility is not uncommon among female homoerotics, and I'm not very familiar with that scene, but it seems like there's a parallel.

However, I think there are problems with any male who wants to identify as female, whether he has a female-typical brain (to the extent that's a real thing), an atypical male brain, or whatever. He's still not a woman, and not recognizing the differences where they matter still creates a problem for women.

quilii · 2020-07-05T15:35:22+00:00

I think it would be better to put this sub on s/all, to not only be more noticesable on this site but to also allow those who are interested in radical feminism but have their doubts or questions about it to participate, but I understand if you wouldn't like to focus this sub around explaining rad feminism as that could end up consuming the sub, considering that the majority of people in this site are alt right men

I hope my suggestions didn't bother you, either way, this sub is a nice breath of fresh air as you can speak freely about what you think about GC

AliceofX · 2020-07-05T09:53:30+00:00

Disagreed with their, "The Karen meme is sexist," logic. Apparently, women can never be portrayed in a negative way and must be shielded from all bad words. It seems we are slowly crawling back into patriarchy.

jet199 · 2020-07-04T14:03:19+00:00

Nah

The trouble is it's the old school hsts transsexuals who are often the most pro hormones and surgery for children. That's an issue which peaks a lot of people.

quilii · 2020-07-03T00:44:32+00:00

I'm glad! If you ever want to talk about any other subject with me feel free to inbox me :)

ccccccc · 2020-07-02T23:02:21+00:00

Yeah, for me too. Thank you too :)

quilii · 2020-07-02T22:49:49+00:00

It really is, which was why I frustrated myself so much trying to get them to understand :P

Thank you for talking to me, it was very productive to discuss this subjects with you :))

quilii · 2020-07-02T22:44:09+00:00

Wow, i didn't imagine they would deny such thing, that's really astonishing

ccccccc · 2020-07-02T22:42:10+00:00

That sounds like an interesting book! And that explanation of why makeup is important makes sense, that you can use it have more personal control of how people perceive you. It seems pretty straightforward when you put it that way. It'd be like saying you can't use anything but the default website theme or something, lol! It seems so... obvious now, of course it's a good thing to have that control.

i believe it could have been connected to pervesity but it doesn't mean it still reflects such past

Yeah, that makes some sense to me, certainly for some people.

And yeah, it is refreshing to be able to just share ideas openly.

quilii · 2020-07-02T22:28:23+00:00

Yeah, you can say it about anyone I feel. "how dare you attack me/my group with that accusation!" And it can be used insidiously, and Jewish people as a group or groups probably have some nontrivial amount of influence, so it's important that women can criticize women who go around condemning "anti-semitism".

Yes, I agree with you a lot, nobody should be shielded when it comes to valid criticism or debates, imo

I had no idea having makeup correlated with women having more rights.

Yes, i learned this from the book Face Paint by Lisa Eldrigde, in this book she writes about the history of makeup and its affect on culture, she uses the example of Italy, where prostitutes were allowed to wear makeup and they could own businesses, a better example without sex work involved would also be antient egypit which was the best antient society for women to be at and they could wear as much makeup as they wish My logic behind this is that make up gives you the power to change your appearence and thus control how you will be seen, if this control is taken away from you, other rights can be taken as well Im sorry ur culture is like that with makeup, makeup has helped me a lot on my angsty teen years haha

About homosexuality, i believe it could have been connected to pervesity but it doesn't mean it still reflects such past, because I know and am friends with gay guys, I can see that their sexuality is genuine and doesn't come from or is connected with perverted ideas. And I agree that the movement could be related to cultural subversion, but I would argue it is more so because marxism infiltrated the discourse, heterosexuality is the norm, afterall, as a species, we need to procreate lmao And totally, its refreshing seeing a place where you can comfortably share opinions that are different from what is acceptable I wish people could handle being offended better, so instead of silencing others for not handling different ideas they would just express their thoughts Afterall, if you know your argument, you shouldn't be afraid to have it questioned or to change your thoughts if someone else made more sense than you So yeah, sorry for the long reply haha

jet199 · 2020-07-02T21:41:43+00:00

I'm not sure but I think I got banned on nametheproblem for pointing out Pakistani rape gangs are a thing in the UK when of course everyone knows rich, western, white men are the most evil, misogynistic and rapey people in the world and of course the rate of violence is exactly the same in men all over the the world in every culture and saying otherwise is racist.

ccccccc · 2020-07-02T20:39:38+00:00

you can say that about any minority group bc that is a common way to deflect criticism.

Yeah, you can say it about anyone I feel. "how dare you attack me/my group with that accusation!" And it can be used insidiously, and Jewish people as a group or groups probably have some nontrivial amount of influence, so it's important that women can criticize women who go around condemning "anti-semitism".

Your thoughts about makeup are pretty interesting. The culture I grew up in discouraged me from using it and I never really got into it or good at it. I felt betrayed when I found makeup in my mom's bathroom drawer lol! I had no idea having makeup correlated with women having more rights. And guys have had lots of fancy appearance stuff historically too, come to think of it, especially well-to-do men. Hmm.

I'm sad and angry that I didn't get to read your thoughts about makeup when I was reading GC.

Could you elaborate on your thoughts about homosexuality?

This got long, hope it's interesting. If it's more than you wanted feel free not to read.

tl;dr: homosexual rights activists hid parts of LGBT history including its connection to pederasty, and I don't know how much of what the LGBT dogma says is a lie. however maybe some of it is true, and I have a very incomplete knowledge of the history. I wish people could just talk about it openly.

It's a bit complicated, and I'm rethinking some things since I remembered about Dirt from Dirt's blog. She makes a strong case that there's something called biological homosexuality and that a huge number of people who do not have this trait are getting involved in homosexuality anyway, causing problems. She's not very nice lol. But it's interesting.

Previously, I think I still believe this, that a lot of stuff has been intentionally hidden about LGBT history. I think it started out in these communities where people were calling themselves "greek" (and "lesbian," as lesbos is a greek island, to go with it) after the pederasty tradition that existed in ancient greece. A guy who went by the pen name "Erastes Pill" (an "erastes" was the older male sexual role in ancient greek pederasty) and his friend wrote some guidelines about how to normalize homosexual stuff, you can look it up. Yes, a lot of the stuff is Christian ... when I was wondering about how to vote with the whole Gay Marriage thing, it looked like the only arguments against it only applied to people who were sure the Bible was right about everything, and it wasn't enough to convince me ... but the stuff they dig up is usable by anyone. And I think this stuff really has been hidden, and was hidden from me when I was deciding how to vote, probably intentionally just like they try to censor viewpoints about trans stuff now.

Anyway I think that stuff happened. And I am/was angry about it because it was intentionally deceptive, especially all the censorship of opposing views.

But what was going on in that scene? I don't know. Was it just some sort of weird sexually depraved cult thing? Was it a pedophile grooming club that kinda grew? Was it nice, and sweet, kind, and caring, and just a thing for people with very unusual biology? Was it kinda like the BDSM scene is today? Was it just social, and there wasn't much sex going on at all? I don't know. Maybe if someone else knows they can clear this up.

Anyway before I read Dirt's stuff again I was pretty convinced it was just a thing people like doing, like liking a certain flavor of ice cream or enjoying a certain sport or whatever. And I was angry about how profoundly the connection to procreation has been taken out of "sexuality" as a result of all this discourse. The word the LGBT scene people chose for people who weren't part of what they were doing was "straight" -- why "straight"? "Straight" implies a lot of things besides that. Anyway it seems like maybe there was some sort of deep cultural subversion going on there. Trying to get people not to breed, not to understand that it's important, not to be connected to ... well, anything other than a feeling of being sexually into someone. I also resent what I consider the appropriation of stuff built for procreative families. The word "sex" comes from the root word for "cut," "sexual intercourse" is "intercourse" between the two separated kinds. I resent that there now isn't a word for that special thing that happens that creates new human life. And the relationships and institutions built around it. Again, the only arguments I heard against it a while ago were Christian and I wasn't ... but those aren't the only arguments and considerations available. There was a lot of handwaving away of things I believe are important and I don't like it. I also don't like how it became specifically about LG relationships, and not about family structure and reproduction more generally, but that's kindof a separate issue.

The thing that bothered me most was that you couldn't just talk about this stuff, it was considered hateful. And I don't like that, I don't think it's fair to say you have to have a dogmatic belief about it. There's lots of interesting conversation to be had, just like any other topic, it just became politicized. Stupid politicization they're supposed to be fixing the country not making us angry at each other. Anyway, those are some of my thoughts, I don't feel like I have a complete understanding. Dirt has a very different perspective from me so if this topic interests you, you might enjoy her blog thedirtfromdirt.com, thedirtfromdirt.wordpress.com, dirtywhiteboi67.blogspot.com. Someone also shared this with me a while back, which I found pretty interesting, but it may fit with Dirt's impression that most people involved in LGBT are not biologically homosexual: mygenes.co.nz provides scientific information that these things are not biologically determined (this one also discusses transgenderism and biology).

Idk. Like I know there's influence from all sorts of groups that have these super strong opinions about it and go around trying to convert people, but it also seems like people are hiding things, and it's a topic free discussion is so suppressed on. And it's important, people are going around trying to force the entire planet to have one view about it! And it seems hard to find someone who will just talk to me about it.

quilii · 2020-07-02T20:01:27+00:00

I feel u

quilii · 2020-07-02T20:01:19+00:00

Could you elaborate on your thoughts about homosexuality? I'm interested to understand more of what you mean by it being fake. Also I agree with you on how jewish people can shield themselves using the anti semitism card, but you can say that about any minority group bc that is a common way to deflect criticism.

My thoughts on make up that got my comments either downvoted or deleted were that women that wear makeup are not brainwashed idiots and that historically women being allowed access to makeup correlated to them having more rights and liberties, and that got them mad bc make up bad so yeah I also said that women don't wear makeup for men or male validation only and that I usually would put make up on to feel a bit better about myself if I was feeling down but yeah

Also i dont think bdsm as a whole is the devil

Yamyam · 2020-07-02T18:51:22+00:00

I'm not banned but I really like reading different opinions. I've lurked in trp, incels, braincels, pussypassdenied etc.

ech · 2020-07-02T15:07:54+00:00

Well what counts as "feminist"? Do you have to buy into the whole "woke" stack? That's kindof part of the problem imo.

Definitely not. If you've read my other posts you know I am extremely antiwoke, lol. I suppose I meant: not antifeminist or totally off topic.

ccccccc · 2020-07-02T14:59:49+00:00

Well what counts as "feminist"? Do you have to buy into the whole "woke" stack? That's kindof part of the problem imo.

r/GC had one rule I thought was very clear: we remove content advocating against the right to abort. I liked it; I knew on GC I would only hear one side of the story, not because no women believed differently for whatever reason well-considered or not, but because the space was setting that rule.

The others were more vague -- what counts as bigotry? And some content was removed that I didn't think went against any stated rule.

ech · 2020-07-02T14:52:36+00:00

Yeah if they are moderating good faith, substantive feminist content for partisan reasons that's disappointing

ccccccc · 2020-07-02T14:51:44+00:00

Thank you for the post, were you hoping for something in particular to happen with the sub when you offered it to me? I was just going to do what I wanted to with it.

ccccccc · 2020-07-02T14:49:30+00:00

Women often paint it as "oh we just need to remove male people who come here to stir trouble" and I definitely do see a lot of that. But my criticism wasn't that, it was with censoring female participants who were following the listed rules. There was a lot of that going on as well.

I just want them to be transparent about it: be clear about what's being removed, or stop removing the stuff you're not being open about removing. See this post someone just made about other content getting removed.

ech · 2020-07-02T14:41:48+00:00

I am not aggressive about censoring or banning, but I understand why someone would want to vigilantly moderate a feminist subreddit on a mostly alt right site. To prevent it from filling up with shitposts, basically. That's what I was saying in the other thread.

ccccccc · 2020-07-02T14:38:15+00:00

/u/ech too

I don't think they're that aggressive. But they do censor more than I believe is appropriate, and most importantly in a way I believe is not transparent to the users (as many subs on reddit did/do). /u/MarquisBoniface made this sub and offered it to me in that thread, and I haven't quite decided what I want to do with it yet, thus nothing's really here yet. I have some ideas though.