12-Year Reddit veteran, sadly acknowledging the site won't return to the way it was 7+ years ago

submitted by neovulcan from self.Introductions

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

My complaint about GC is GC's complaint about reddit: stuff that followed the rules was silently removed anyway.

/s/Gender_Critical/comments/550p/what_were_your_opinions_on_radfeminism_that_got/

And aside from silently removing rule-following content and hiding that from participants, GC is more like a Christian sub. GC's canon and ideas as they are derived from radical feminist thinkers are more loosely defined than the Christian bible, but it's for a group with specific dogmatic beliefs, not a group that wants to discuss a particular topic in depth. It's more like "Eowyn is best forum" than "serious Tolkien discussion only please." If it were not dogmatic it would have been named "gender criticism" or "gender discussion" or "international women's protection league" or something. There is a LOT of room for discussion of what's going on with gender roles, and with transgender activism and it's effects on women, but GC does not allow a lot of that discussion.

And aside from that, GC very much emphatically is a place for "newbies" to post. There's a whole thread entirely dedicated to people who have "hit peak trans" (perhaps the equivalent of "discovered how great Tolkein is for the first time"). Newbies posted all the time -- "I don't agree with everything but I'm having this issue" "Looking for advice on this topic even though I haven't learned everything about radfem yet" "Only been here a few weeks but I have to say they're wrong about what they say about you," etc. Many women seem to think "gender criticism" refers to the current transgender stuff with a bunch of different gender options, not gender as a whole. It's not uncommon to see that sentiment.

I wish GC would be more honest about what it is.

[–]GConly 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

GC's canon and ideas as they are derived from radical feminist thinkers

Anything that didn't follow radfem canon was excised ASAP on Reddit.

Any dissent with the (minimal and shoddy) science they posted was crushed.

Sorry GC, but the overwhelming majority of scientists researching the human brain will tell you sex differences do exist, they do matter, and they aren't from socialisation. You can see them in neonates.

Just because you've found about four authors who say otherwise and you post them repeatedly in a cycle does not make them correct.

We've known how how induce male aggression, play patterns and sexual behaviour in females via extra androgens in the fetal stage since the fifties. You look ridiculous insisting that all the differences are down to socialisation. Fine and Joel are laughing stocks and their work is widely criticized. For a start multiple people have pointed out Joel's work demonstrates male and female brain can reliably be identified even with the limited criteria she used. Fine just omits huge chunks of data about testosterone and prenatal exposure because it disproves her.

Don't worry we ladies, the latest research debunks the wrong brain sex BS pretty thoroughly, but it does so while accepting brain sex differences exist, and proving homosexuality is hard wired into the brain at the same time.

It means that radfems don't get taken seriously when professionals get involved, which is a terrible thing because it's the paediatricians and scientists pulling this apart the who will eventually sort all this out. If GC keeps contradicting them and undermining them, it's just going to prolong a bad situation.

We need to move on from GC being a radical feminist sub, and make it over into an activist base for women's rights with a coherent policy that's based in good science. Not junk science.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

an activist base for women's rights with a coherent policy

I might be able to get behind something like this. maybe it should be a new space though and women from GC can join if they want. & GC's contributions to womens rights should be credited if things do go in a different direction.

I wonder now though, if this is really inconsistent with GC. And brain differences can also be due to non-genetic factors and epigenetic factors and all that. "man" and "woman" are not static things, we're always in the process of evolving. GC doesn't claim all men and all women are the same, but says these differences are due to individual personality.

They do seem to be pretty against any biological origin origin of behavioral differences though, which does seem probably not right to me, and I wish we could talk about it.

A bit off-topic, but what does the latest research say about homosexuality/sexuality?

We've known how how induce male aggression, play patterns and sexual behaviour in females via extra androgens in the fetal stage since the fifties.

did people actually... do this?? this is a bit disturbing.

It means that radfems don't get taken seriously when professionals get involved, which is a terrible thing because it's the paediatricians and scientists pulling this apart the who will eventually sort all this out. If GC keeps contradicting them and undermining them, it's just going to prolong a bad situation.

How do you think this interaction could work better?

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

And brain differences can also be due to non-genetic factors and epigenetic factors and all that.

Except there ARE differences. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXUS0MRcFWM

Click Cc for English subs.