I can't wait until our new site is up. The wait is torture! 😩😩😩

submitted by Gigababejfl from self.TruFemcels

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Node 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

Yes, 'Femcel' is a concept that's new and interesting to me. Kind of extremist and misandristic in that reply I received from one. Probably more of an edge case though. Generally though, as in your case, kind of nice to have around.

an alt right, misogynistic Hotspot

I dunno. The "alt right" thing is odd, and seen as a sort of 'wanna be' characterization by people actually on the right. Not to dwell on the who's and why's of that, but misogyny isn't a value found on the actual right.

As for the front page, it's pretty mild in my experience. I kind of like the mix of males and females, 'commies' and 'nazis', and political and non-political content. Plus the no downvoting forces you to see comments and opinions you might rather not. lol

I certainly have my own opinions about how things should be, but it's good to be exposed to disagreement when there's willingness to debate.

You might like our movement.

Honestly don't know exactly what it's about, but I get the sense that it's not really the desired state of affairs for those in it. I suppose that could be applied to the incels too, but their name seems to say what that's all about.

[–]Gigababejfl[S] 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

Plus the no downvoting forces you to see comments and opinions you might rather not. lol

We aren't interested. That's why men were banned. Men have a terrible habit of thinking all of our life experiences are up for debate. They also tend to see life from a male centric POV which is markedly different than our own and therefore useless. We opened a sister sub that allowed men under specific rules and it was pretty active. There, women who want outside opinions and male interaction can opt in by going to the sister sub and get those insights you mentioned. Not forced.

By virtue of being female on the internet we are already forced to endure every sexist male hot take known to man. Sometimes we need a break. That sub was truly an escape. We miss it and will be glad to have something like it back.

As for SaidIt, I'm sure at least some of us will probably stick around to engage

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Men have a terrible habit of thinking all of our life experiences are up for debate.

I suppose I'm doing it right now... But technically, existence itself is up for debate. That's just how it works for animal species on this planet. Same goes for plant species. There's competition for surface space, resources, and the ability to even exist.

They also tend to see life from a male centric POV which is markedly different than our own and therefore useless.

I can see how you might now be inclined to discount my opinion, which I find pretty interesting. Would you say the same should apply to females? Are the ideas, opinions, and perspectives of females useless? You do appear to be validating the perspective of that misogynistic male subset (probably incels) who claim women are more like a utility.

Sometimes we need a break.

At least here, one option is to make a sub private, so entry requires whitelisting. Adding that roadblock would filter out a percentage of the women you'd want, though. An option to just keep a post off the front page might be a nice compromise. However, that may be too much of a male centric idea?

What kind of response do you get from women who aren't femcels? Do you identify with them?

[–]Doll 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Imagine making an ontological analogy completely irrelevant to the topic to justify debating opinions with people in a space that is not designed for debate. This is not a personal matter.

A constraint is not a restraint, and while you are free under your given biology to assert and express your ideas and opinions into a space not made for that purpose, you will deal with the consequences of having your content removed for it's lack of utility in so far as it does not optimize the discussion, nor does it optimize the well-being of participants. The freedom of speech argument is completely dubious insofar as freedom of speech does not entail lack of consequences or inaction to what is said; once you have said it you have already exercised your right to express, but if you are disallowed from participating you are not having your freedom of speech "removed" or "restricted" on the basis of you being male or a 'female with opposing opinions', but instead because these topics, opinions, and "ideas" are have no relevancy to the sub or website on the basis of it's intended purpose.

Just like 'boy scouts' and 'girl scouts' are not inherently restrictive nor misandric/misogynistic - nor speak to the overall utility of the individual or the merit they can supply if they participated. Utility to the sub is gauged by optimization of the content; anything that does not optimize damages the quality of discussion and content, and distresses the members and user distress, and what determines it, is irrelevant to whatever personal opinions of the opposing people are clearly making to encourage debate, it is considered counterproductive, not counterintuitive as you are attempting to make it seem.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

So many people seem to be getting their Ph D in femcelism. I honestly don't see what's so fascinating about women who struggle with finding love.

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

they've never seen a woman who struggles with dating (because by definition ugly women don't exist) in real life, so either they are fascinated with something impossible, or want to give as advice because obviously we must be doing something really stupid that could be fixed easily.

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

a space that is not designed for debate.

a space not made for that purpose

These claims are both unsupported and without merit. The entire point of creating the ability to reply to typed expressions of thoughts and opinions on a 'page' on the internet is to extend, support, or rebut said thoughts and opinions.

[–]Doll 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Not only are the "sources" for my claims on this very thread and asserted by the creator herself (and myself - a mod); but what you find meaningful (i.e. having merit) is irrelevant to what is actually the case, which is the "sub" not being intended for debate purposes that diminish the quality of the website and distract from it's goal.

You appear lost, my friend. Your bizarre Dunning–Krugerian display is not even relevant to the discussion itself, because not only did you not apprehend or analyze my post, because if you did you would would've known I already covered this very comment in detail, but claiming that an owned webpage must accommodate and support content irrelevant to the sites intended purpose at the expense of quality and optimization for it's members is not only insane, but servers as an active demonstration as to why the site will operate as it will.

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

You prefer resolution in real life, and we're heading in that direction. Enjoy.