HomophobiaGC Twitters criticism of Pete & Chasten Buttigiegs Adoption is getting homophobic

submitted by Criticallacitirc from self.LGBDropTheT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]szalinskikidproblematic androphile 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

Wow, your comment kinda opened my eyes and gave me context to a problem I always felt existed in GC/radfem spaces, but I couldn't put my finger on it or saw it spelt out anywhere. I enjoyed GC twitter for a while because it felt like 'winning' for once, if that makes sense. I liked hearing what other gay men who were not enthralled by the gender cult had to say, which is rare enough these days. But after a while, I now noticed the sort of formulaic and affirming behavior which I only ever saw with male TRAs before. The uncompromising attitude when it comes to feminist topics and viewpoints, even though they aren't favorable of gay men or simply just extreme, hypothetical stances. Then there's the self-mortification over things like patriarchy, crime statistics and privilege; which then is indirectly followed by them declaring themselves exemptions from those 'sins'. Which results in them feeling free to attack and ridicule anyone from "the other side". Just like TRAs. I fear self-declared radfem gay men have just as much internalized homophobia as gay male TRAs.

I am gender critical through and through, but I'm distancing myself from radical feminism, or feminism as a whole. Because I'm a man, and no matter which "side" I'm looking at, man + feminist just never feels authentic or healthy. And this isn't meant as an affront to feminism as a whole. Men simply are not part of it and we have our own set of problems and solutions that might clash with feminist ideas, and it's not a question of "right" or "wrong" if I disagree, or agree with feminist stances.

[–]DimDroog 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I am gender critical, and distanced myself from radical feminism too.

I do agree with some of what they say, regarding porn, sex "work", etc, but not everything.

I loath any group telling me what to think and feel.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I wasn't ever really associated with radical feminism, but I certainly curtailed my participation in their conversations after that one time I was accused (because how dare men exist) of being a man for correcting someone's false statements about women's nervous systems and sex. It was quite the episode—downvoted and drummed out of a group for stating facts which apparently should never be stated.

Truly bizarre. And ironic given many of their other stances. They were totally okay with lying to women about their own bodies, in order to enforce their dogma.

[–]reluctant_commenter 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Truly bizarre. And ironic given many of their other stances. They were totally okay with lying to women about their own bodies, in order to enforce their dogma.

I have noticed that many radical feminists employ a "pick-and-chose" mentality when it comes to scientific evidence, similar to religious apologists. For example, radfems are happy to cite science when observing that there are only 2 sexes in humans, but reject science regarding the genetic basis for sexual orientation and instead claim that "being gay is a choice!" It's hypocritical.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't get it. So close to making sense, and then veering off down a rabbit hole they clearly don't want to see coming. Where have we applied that statement before, many, many times? Hmm, let me think a minute.

When power and control are more important than credibility, something is very wrong.

They were sure good at shrieking at people, though. I'll give them that. And I started to understand better the baffled men who think all feminists are like that. Yelling things doesn't make them true. Beating heretics with (technological) sticks doesn't make them wrong.

[–]DimDroog 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Yeah, I don't like that.

I don't like being forced to adhere to strict rules on what to think and believe in.

I was raised in a cult (Soka Gakkai International) and was told to think only in certain ways.

The heck with ANY group telling people how to think

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I was raised in a cult (Soka Gakkai International) and was told to think only in certain ways.

If you don't kind me asking, What was that like? How did you come to be in it?

This is only the second time on this forum I heard of a Buddhist cult organization in North America.

[–]DimDroog 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Hello.

I will answer this more in depth later, but here is a link for you to read if you wish https://culteducation.com/oldserverbackups/www/web/group/940-soka-gakkai/7646-cult-or-buddhism.html

1.What was it like?

Meetings every night, being urged to donate your time and money to "build your fortune and change your karma".

Being told you cannot ever think or say anything bad about other members, it was slanderous,and created bad karma.

2.How did you come to be in it?

My folks were approached one evening while sitting outside.

This was in 1970 ,I was five.

My father immediately saw through it, that is was a cult, my mother is still a fanatic.

The way it has touched every aspect of my life cannot be understated.

It's been over a year since I told them to fuck off, and I still cannot believe I didn't see through them before.

BTW,, in the 70s, they used to tell LGB members to "chant themselves straight".

Bastards.

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I will answer this more in depth later, but here is a link for you to read if you wish https://culteducation.com/oldserverbackups/www/web/group/940-soka-gakkai/7646-cult-or-buddhism.html

Thank you.

Meetings every night, being urged to donate your time and money to "build your fortune and change your karma".

Every night? That's very demanding and unreasonable. Also sounds a lot like Scientology in the heavy investment it demands of followers.

Being told you cannot ever think or say anything bad about other members, it was slanderous,and created bad karma.

Probably to build an illusion of harmony and the cover of silence to cover up wrongdoings.

My folks were approached one evening while sitting outside.

This was in 1970 ,I was five.

My father immediately saw through it, that is was a cult, my mother is still a fanatic.

The way it has touched every aspect of my life cannot be understated.

Some people are more susceptible to indoctrination like this due their personality. I'm sorry to hear about your mother, and how much it has affected your life.

It's been over a year since I told them to fuck off, and I still cannot believe I didn't see through them before.

BTW,, in the 70s, they used to tell LGB members to "chant themselves straight".

Bastards.

It sounds horrible; Glad to hear you're out of it and told them off.

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

Thank you so much.

If anyone ever invites you to a Buddhist meeting, that's probably Soka Gakkai.

Run!

[–]reluctant_commenter 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I am gender critical through and through, but I'm distancing myself from radical feminism, or feminism as a whole.

Do you mind if I ask, do you define "gender critical" (GC) to be something distinct from radical feminism? I ask because I am against radical feminism, and also very strongly against gender identity ideology, but I never describe myself as gender critical because I have heard many (but not all!) radical feminists say "GC is just another term for radical feminist" and I do not want to suggest that I support radical feminism.

[–]szalinskikidproblematic androphile 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I'm not an expert but even though "being critical of gender" is definitely part of radical feminism, there's more to it than just that and both aren't synonymous in my opinion. Rad fems believe women are a dominated/oppressed group in a patriarchal society; they claim women's bodies are being objectified by the existence of porn/sex work and surrogacy which need to be abolished; and like jiljol showcased, they have some very radical theses on societal structures and even people's sexualities. And of course since it is feminism, they logically focus on the women part of a problem (which differentiates them from liberal feminism which is kinda about... everything and everyone, and it doesn't make sense). Just to name a few things that are RF, but not GC.

Being critical of gender (roles or identities) first and foremost is not a movement, it's just a belief (as the Maya Forstater case made clear). The fact that we have to band together like that in order to make ourselves heard has kinda turned it into a movement I guess. Radfems share those beliefs but what I can also witness is that their personal spin on this differs from non-radfem GCs. For example, I hear a lot of radfems describing gender ideology as a male problem first and foremost and I don't even fully disagree here. But then they say things like "transmen/trans identified females) are just victims of the patriarchy, and while transwomen are oppressing perverts, transmen are misguided women whose trans identity is a response to the trauma of living in the patriarchy". I, a gay gender-critical non-radfem man, certainly don't feel like the abuse-hurling, yaoi-obsessed, gay-sauna-invading women are victims of the world I am supposed to be responsible for according to radfems. To put it simply.

I think that sums it up. There's overlap between radical feminism and gender criticism but that's it. Just because I don't believe that long hair and a dress makes you a woman, that doesn't mean I think that male homosexuality is a form of misogyny.

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

I'm not an expert but even though "being critical of gender" is definitely part of radical feminism, there's more to it than just that

Yup, totally. These differences I am familiar with.

But then they say things like "transmen/trans identified females) are just victims of the patriarchy, and while transwomen are oppressing perverts, transmen are misguided women whose trans identity is a response to the trauma of living in the patriarchy". I, a gay gender-critical non-radfem man, certainly don't feel like the abuse-hurling, yaoi-obsessed, gay-sauna-invading women are victims of the world I am supposed to be responsible for according to radfems. To put it simply.

Totally agree.

Interesting to hear your take on GC. Thanks for responding. It sounds like we have very similar views. But I sometimes hear radfems say, "GC means you are basically a radical feminist" so that's why I don't call myself GC, lol. I am not on board with all the other radfem ideas, e.g. those you described.

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

Do you mind if I ask, do you define "gender critical" (GC) to be something distinct from radical feminism?

Another user here, but will answer too. It used to be said in the old debate sub on reddit that all radfems are GC but not all GC people are radfems. I don't consider myself a radical feminist, the main reason I call myself GC is that is what people tend to call those with my position, i.e I don't believe in universal innate gender identities, I don't believe sex can be changed, I don't think it's transphobic to be truthful about males being male and females being female, nor do I see it as transphobic of monosexuals to not be attracted to trans people of the wrong biological sex.

I found GC through an online search when lesbians started getting called transphobic for not being into males, I wanted to know if there were others who saw how homophobic this was. I think it’s quite common for GC lesbians to have found GC like me, simply being concerned about the new woke homophobia, and not through being involved in radical feminism. My impression is that most GC people who are radfems these days found out about GC first and then become radfems as I know many who almost didn’t know what radical feminism was about before they found GC. I also think there are conservatives who find GC and call themselves GC, but I think as GC stands for Gender Critical then being pro gender in a conservative way is not really being gender critical. Anyway I think if someone made a post in a GC space about Julie Bindel propagating political lesbianism then Julia Bindel would be criticized for that, as denying sexual orientation is not a GC position. I have never posted on ovarit though or in any of the GC subs except for the debating ones, as I don’t believe everything GC says, I have my own views.

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

Yup, no problem, and I should have specified, I'm curious to hear answers on this question from a variety of people, so thanks for sharing.

My views are similar to yours but I tend to not identify myself as GC and don't plan on doing so, even though my views are "gender critical" in the literal sense. I tend to think of this set of views as closer to those of the general population.

I think it’s quite common for GC lesbians to have found GC like me, simply being concerned about the new woke homophobia, and not through being involved in radical feminism.

I hope so. I have only met one person IRL, ever, who is a radfem sympathizer; I've never met a lesbian (actually homosexual, not "political lesbian") radfem IRL.

I also think there are conservatives who find GC and call themselves GC, but I think as GC stands for Gender Critical then being pro gender in a conservative way is not really being gender critical.

Agreed.

Anyway I think if someone made a post in a GC space about Julie Bindel propagating political lesbianism then Julia Bindel would be criticized for that, as denying sexual orientation is not a GC position.

Perhaps it is not a GC position as you have defined GC, but it is a radfem position, and often times the line between "GC" and "radfem" gets blurred in GC spaces. I have seen several threads on this sub, months ago, get swarmed with people from the GC sub/Ovarit getting all mad at people here for suggesting that radical feminists are often homophobic. I haven't seen that quite as much recently, though, so that's good.

[–]strictly 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

My views are similar to yours but I tend to not identify myself as GC and don't plan on doing so, even though my views are "gender critical" in the literal sense.

Because of my views I would be seen as GC even if I didn’t consider myself one, and in the literal sense I am gender critical. I have participated in the debate subs so it would be clunky denying being gender critical despite my views in the debate roughly aligning with the GC side. It’s like how those who think trans people should be called the opposite sex have to put up with being seen as part of the QT side regardless if they are truscum or tucute.

I tend to think of this set of views as closer to those of the general population.

Yeah, I think many of those who are called TERF find out what terf is by googling what they have been called, because as you say, the view that is seen as “terfy” is just the common view of the general population. A lesbian doesn’t need to be a radical feminist for not being attracted to males but she will get called the acronym of trans exclusionary radical feminist because of it anyway.

I've never met a lesbian (actually homosexual, not "political lesbian") radfem IRL.

I’ve never met a lesbian radfem irl, but I’ve met those who would be considered terfs by others for their homosexuality, it’s an ironic situation when homosexual women are seen as following the movement supporting political lesbianism for meeting the actual definition of lesbian.

Perhaps it is not a GC position as you have defined GC, but it is a radfem position, and often times the line between "GC" and "radfem" gets blurred in GC spaces.

I think old school radfems were the first ones on the left who were vocal about males not being women. Then when males started insisting they were literally women they started calling people on the left TERF for not agreeing despite that most of these people never had been part of radical feminism. Those who were called TERF didn’t agree with the often inaccurate TERF label and decided to call their position gender critical. I remember seeing in the old GC sub on reddit people scolding GC for not following old school radical feminists ideas as a bible and getting downvoted and told GC is their own movement, i.e GC had no moral obligation to support some idea just because some homophobic/genderist oldschool radfem supported it. But as most old school radfems are gender critical in some way lines get blurred as you say, and radical feminism has received an upswing due to GC as some GC people do become radfems. People being banned from reddit and other platforms for not believing in sex change probably increases the radicalization.

I have seen several threads on this sub, months ago, get swarmed with people from the GC sub/Ovarit getting all mad at people here for suggesting that radical feminists are often homophobic

My guess is that the people swarming these threads are radfems themselves so they swarm these threads not because they are critical of gender but because they feel targeted as radfems.

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

it’s an ironic situation when homosexual women are seen as following the movement supporting political lesbianism for meeting the actual definition of lesbian.

Exactly this.

But as most old school radfems are gender critical in some way lines get blurred as you say, and radical feminism has received an upswing due to GC as some GC people do become radfems. People being banned from reddit and other platforms for not believing in sex change probably increases the radicalization.

Yup, that makes a lot of sense. Another ironic result of Reddit's (and other platforms') decision to ban people who hold different beliefs than them, rather than retain them on the platform and moderate them.

My guess is that the people swarming these threads are radfems themselves so they swarm these threads not because they are critical of gender but because they feel targeted as radfems.

That is my guess as well. Though I am skeptical as to the threat that a small 2k sub poses as opposed to the entire TQ+ movement...