Reddit response to a post about a trans identified male saying that when wombs become available he'll use them to make white babies. Antifa sub members are surprised and disappointed that trans fascism exists

submitted by Immortallogic from (imgur.com)

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Trajan 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

Identity politics: wamen most affected?

Oh cry me a river. Women are fine so long as they don't go up against somebody higher than them on the progressive stack. You won't get censored for saying whatever you like about white guys. When the BLM circus dies down you might once again be okay to criticise black men. Gay men are definitely still open season for feminists.

It just happens that feminists and their left-wing identitarian friends managed to cook-up an ordering of the progressive stack that allowed men in dresses to climb above them. The problem is that wamen, and I use that to distinguish feminists from women, lost their top spot in the oppression olympics. The trick is not see this as oppression of wamen. It's an offshoot of the identitarianism of which feminism is a part. Ditch the collectivist mentality and you'd find there are many people opposing the transgender fad along with with larger ideology that groups everybody in to groups of oppressors and oppressed.

[–]LeyMio 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Women can get banned for commenting under "r/news" that a man who murdered dozens of women was driven by gender hatred. Women can also get banned from the entire Reddit site for calling out sexism of white males who threaten to physically harm a woman and her family. None of these had anything to do with transgender issues.

Every popular subreddit has been banning women on a regular basis for simply saying something that "hurt men's feelings". Women have always been at the very bottom of the food chain on both political sides. This fact has never changed. You sound very ignorant saying that the victims belong to the oppression group.

Let's be realistic. The generic subreddits are controlled by white liberal men. Even the women-oriented subreddits have been fully controlled by them since forever ago. As a guy, you get censored if they don't like your right-wing political views. Women can get censored for many other reasons, including being "hateful uterus havers" which we have no choice of.

The "liberal feminism" is not even controlled by women themselves, and women never really benefit from their movements. Your problem with them is not caused by feminists, but the male slaveholders that climbed above other men.

[–]Trajan 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Nonsense. Women and men get censored for having the wrong political views. Believe me, I’ve been going through this bullshit for nigh-on a decade now - with feminists leading the denouncements.

Intersectionality arose in feminism. It’s a natural progression from the identity oppressor/oppressed narrative. You’ve been kicked out of the clubhouse your ideology built. I find that hilarious, and I don’t see feminism having anything to contribute towards pushing back against identitarian movements. You’re not needed, so settle in and enjoy the pit.

[–]Immortallogic[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Women get censored (or heavily downvoted) for having any kind of views that question something a male does and that's brings the reality of sex into the mix.

Having the 'wrong' political views is simply another layer.

Intersectionality is a reality for millions of people. Agree or not, if a person is a white male who belongs to the middle class socioeconomic status or higher, his life chances are better than most people. That's simply the world we live in. Is this a reason to be held back by ones sex/race/class? Not at all. But denying the reality of privelege is simply being ignorant, naïve, or dismissive.

The oppressor/oppressed "narrative" is reality. Ask colonialism. Ask victims of forced sex work (which makes up about 80% of the industry), child brides, victims of FGM. And the many other realities people face in a daily basis, because of who they are.

[–]Trajan 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I’m not denying that women get censored. I’m saying that men and women get censored by this identitarian movement. Political views and worldview are why you’re being censored. It’s not always ‘because vagina’, no matter how much the paranoid and narcissistic feminist view would wish it to be.

Yes, intersectionality is real in that traits combine to shape the experience. Where I object is to generalising this to individuals. Not every white male is cruising around in a Bentley. It’s the collectivist mindset that prejudges people (men oppressors, women oppressed).

Women in the West live longer than men, receive lighter sentences for equivalent crimes, earn more in their 20s, achieve degrees at a higher rate, have a government minister devoted to their sex, have campaigns in academia and the corporate world to encourage them, have preferential treatment in STEM, quotas in some political parties, and are less likely to be victims of violent crime. Does that sound like oppression? If you’re in the West then you are highly unlikely to face any of those issues you described. Feminists use brown people problems to vicariously experience the oppression they can’t find in their comfortable lives. If issues in brown people countries bother you, and they should, then do something to help in those countries! Stop claiming their victimhood as your own.

edit: typo

[–]LeyMio 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

You are censored by men above you, not the "feminists". It is hilarious how beta males don't even have the guts to admit it just because being under other men makes them feel ashamed. Women can live longer because they do less shit to themselves and other people. Women are the victims of men's crimes. That is the definition of being oppressed. Men who commit violent crimes are oppressing others. Why playing as victims when you are the cause of all the problems?

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

Men who commit violent crimes are oppressing others.

I knew we was kings and shit

[–]Trajan 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Focussing on gender says a lot about how you ascribe agency. It's not dissimilar to how a racist sees skin colour as being salient when somebody mistreats them. Notice that I do not blame women. I blame feminists, and most women are not feminists. For the sake of treating people fairly I'd suggest you focus on the necessary rather than the incidental. I'll elaborate a little on this to get you started.

Is it necessary for Jack Dorsey or George Bridges (Evergreen State College) to be men in order to be censorious? Is it necessary for Ellen Pao or Susan Wojcicki to be women in order to be censorious? No, what unites these people is their hewing to an authoritarian leftist worldview driven by treating people differently based on identity. Is it necessary for Kathleen Kennedy to be a woman in order to horrifically mismanage Star Wars through arrogance and feminism? No, it's not necessary any more than Chris Chibnall (Doctor Who) and Alex Kurtzman (Star Trek) needed to be male in order to ruin their respective franchises. Again, it comes down to worldview.

Censorship is being driven by political views. I'd certainly be interested in hearing examples where you have been censored simply for being a woman and when expressing views entirely unconnected by politics. Do you have any?

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

The topic is not about any issue that both women and men are facing, but the hatred specifically targeted at women. Liberal feminists are politicians' puppets, and they exist for the purpose of serving men. Radical feminists are advocating for women's basic human rights and have always been excluded from the mainstream. The society is divided based on people race and gender. All political parties should be made accountable for the disaster. No one is arguing about whether men could face negative consequences from the political war. However, it does not change the fact that women's situation is much worse. As a guy, you can choose to be on either political side and receive different benefits from it. Women are politically homeless with no real "choice".

From what I have seen, people claim to be against "feminists" just for the sake of bullying the easiest targets. Like many other unpopular males, you are trying to get a sense of social acceptance by joining the witch-hunting crowd.

[–]Immortallogic[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I agree in that in this instance political views are being censored left right and centre. But it's weird times we're living in specifically right now, with this health crisis, this race resurgence, the orange clown and other right wing authoritarians in office and the erosion of democracy and free speech, all exacerbated by social media which is amplifying everything.

It seems that you think I'm coming from a victim mentality "I'm a woman, the world is against me". I'm not. Reducing someone to their sex or their race or whatever else is as bad as being racist or misogynistic, and it's also weak as fuck. I'm simply pointing out reality, and the reality is that the world is still whit for many women. Granted, a huge part of this is biological. As women we've been dealt a shit card, between pregnancy and the average woman being weaker than the average man. If those two things were taken out, they playing field would be level imo. That's the reason I'll never ever have children. But many women (specifically western ones) are all too happy to submit to the subservient housewife trope.

Let em have it. My feminism is about the women around the world that are denied basic human rights for being women. Having no legal age, resulting in child brides. The fact that in some places grown ass women can't go outside unless accompanied by a male, even if that male is a kid. And tens of other examples. That's not 'claiming victimhood'. It's empathy. Not everything is based on one own narcissistic interests. I am from the west and personally, I take the best of both worlds of feminity and masculinity and use them to my advantage. So I'm not shouting "oppressed" here. This has nothing to do with me personally. I'm talking systemic.

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

I agree in that in this instance political views are being censored left right and centre. But it's weird times we're living in specifically right now, with this health crisis, this race resurgence, the orange clown and other right wing authoritarians in office and the erosion of democracy and free speech, all exacerbated by social media which is amplifying everything.

Honestly, I would watch the left more. The actions of authoritarians and identitarians on the left are what is feeding a right-wing reaction. This ideology has infested government, the media, academia, and the corporate world. Trump is a symptom of the disenchantment with elitist lefties. If you think he's a clown then congratulations, you've been played. Orange man is going to get another term in part because people become deranged out of hatred for him and do stupid things that only aid him. Free speech and the erosion of democracy is coming through a perverse marriage of corporate interests and left-wing identitarianism. It's not not Trump trying to change the system of voting, by making mail-in voting a general rather than rare exception or trying to undo the Electoral College. It's not the right censoring on social media and search engines. It's not the right cutting people off from payment processors (e.g. PayPal, Patreon, Stripe, Mastercard). It's not the right requiring political orthodoxy in academia and science, cancelling people for failing to toe the line on identitarian fads. Don't get me wrong, I don't see Trump as a champion of free speech. I think he's taking these stands because it suits him to do so. I'm open to changing my mind on this and would be happy to see authoritarian right examples that approach the scale of these things I mentioned. I don't like authoritarianism of either stripe and will probably agree if you have examples.

It seems that you think I'm coming from a victim mentality "I'm a woman, the world is against me". I'm not. Reducing someone to their sex or their race or whatever else is as bad as being racist or misogynistic, and it's also weak as fuck. I'm simply pointing out reality, and the reality is that the world is still whit for many women. Granted, a huge part of this is biological. As women we've been dealt a shit card, between pregnancy and the average woman being weaker than the average man. If those two things were taken out, they playing field would be level imo. That's the reason I'll never ever have children. But many women (specifically western ones) are all too happy to submit to the subservient housewife trope.

Women in the West live longer than men, receive lighter sentences for equivalent crimes, earn more in their 20s, achieve degrees at a higher rate, have a government minister devoted to their sex, have campaigns in academia and the corporate world to encourage them, have preferential treatment in STEM, quotas in some political parties, and are less likely to be victims of violent crime.

Most women who marry are happy to marry. It's interesting that you see it as an act of subservience. That's a view very much on the fringes of what most men and women think in the West.

Let em have it. My feminism is about the women around the world that are denied basic human rights for being women. Having no legal age, resulting in child brides. The fact that in some places grown ass women can't go outside unless accompanied by a male, even if that male is a kid. And tens of other examples. That's not 'claiming victimhood'. It's empathy. Not everything is based on one own narcissistic interests. I am from the west and personally, I take the best of both worlds of feminity and masculinity and use them to my advantage. So I'm not shouting "oppressed" here. This has nothing to do with me personally. I'm talking systemic.

Great. There are serious systemic inequalities across most of the world and we should be challenging them. Western societies are as free as it has ever been. However, that shit hole countries are bigoted doesn't really have a bearing on the earlier poster complaining that she gets downvoted because vagina and no other reason. It is interesting that in most discussions like this, beginning with complaints of rampant oppression in Western contexts, it invariably drifts towards examples drawn from non-Western cultures.

[–]Immortallogic[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't think it's fair to blame the left for the actions of the right. Perhaps it pushes them to be more extreme in their ideology, because things such as the one we began discussing on this posts are becoming more pervasive, but much of the right that has gained traction in the last five/ten years or so - their platforms have been fueled by racism and anti-inmigrant rhetoric, and scapegoating tactics. This is true for trump, the afd and other right wing parties in Europe, and now we see this trend in other places like India, with modi targeting muslims, and, well... bolsonaro just being an overall total fucking idiot.

But you're right in that trump is simply a manifestation of a long lying problem... However he has wrecked havoc in the few years he's been in power. His stance of unilateralism and America first is appealing I think especially to low class, rural white americans whove seen many changes and find it easy to blame the browns and other immigrants so to speak. But really, they should be blaming the corporations that decided to ship jobs out for ever cheaper labor for a race to the bottom, and trumps tit for tat sanctions that ultimately affect the citizens most. He simply lacks any sort of empathy or EI needed to be a leader, when it boils down to it. The world, to an extent, with America being a great example, is showing how globalization and this amoral version of capitalism with no boundaries can be damaging, and idk, I think it's too far gone to salvage, but let's see. The Inequality chasm is becoming more and more wide in developed countries, and the trend is going to continue. But I hope that at least in November americans will be smart enough to vote out trump and at least stop being the laughing stock of the world. Heres a good article about america and it's fall, so to speak, in the context of covid, since it's rise after the CW. It's long but quite interesting. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/covid-19-end-of-american-era-wade-davis-1038206/

With regards to women, as mentioned, I wasn't really referring to western women. Although, some points about the things you mentioned. Firstly, yes women do attend school at higher rates and are in more STEM jobs etc, but the falloff rate is actually higher than before. As in, there are fewer women who go on to become professors and have higher tenure than about 50 years ago, and still disproportionately less women at the top as CEO's etc. A huge part of this is related to kids, which is a way that women have been fucked by biology. But also, because when men become father's they're seen as more trustworthy/reliable by their employers, but women are seen as the opposite.

With regards to violent crime, sure... Women suffer less from being victims of violent crime, but when they do, it's overwhelmingly at the hands of men. Men suffer more violent crime, at the hands of who? Other men. See the difference? Women are two times more likely to be killed by their male partners, suffer overwhelmingly at the hands of male partners for domestic violence (I don't need to tell you that along with the health epidemic, there has also been a steep increase in Violence against women since everyone is staying home since covid started), and homicide by a woman's partner is still the leading cause of pregnancy-associated death. So violence is a pretty shitty example to use as to how women are 'more priveleged' than men.

In terms of the west, I'd say one of main ones that persists is harrassment/sexual violence against women. Guaranteed every single woman who's walked alone (or even not alone) at some point, anywhere in the world, has has to put up with some form of it. And that's just the most innocuous type of harrassment I'm talking about.

With regards to the discussion turning to places that are not the west, it came up because oppression exists there. I believe that we should speak up about inequality everywhere, not only in our small bubbles of the world where if a problem doesn't exist in our own lives, it doesn't exist at all. That lack of empathy, narcissism and selfishness is the reason for 90% of our problems as a species. But yes, western societies are by and large incredibly tolerant for "minorities" (crazy that half the population is still considered that though).

With regards to marriage/reproduction, I'm aware it's a fringe perspective, especially in the west. Although, there are movements in places like South Korea and Japan for example, where women are rejecting these things (sex, dating, kids). I think we've all been socialized to "want" these things, especially as women... We're fed the trope from girlhood that having a family/husband/kids is the ultimate goal and success. For some women it is, and more power to them. But I personally think it's very limiting, especially because for women, inevitably it usually turns out being that as a woman after having a kid the default and defining role becomes first, mother. For men they still maintain more of their autonomy after being fathers. The motherhood penalty, the double shift, are still real for women everywhere, including the west. Kids are also just a huge drain in resources, time and energy and I'd rather spread myself further and spend that time/energy/money on my family and wider community.... And having free time lol.

The other side of that is the world we live in. I truly don't think this is the type of world any child should be bought into, I don't think it's getting better. Between the climate crisis thats going to continue, the growing inequality, overpopulation as a globe (I know birth rates are declining in certain places, but they're very much still high in others), the continued infiltration of technology into all parts of our lives resulting in increased shallowness and vapidness of society, the materialism and consumerism that has plagued most places, and what I see as the steady increase of corruption and greed around the world.... among many more reasons, I don't see any reason. Maybe adopt or foster kids, but not biological kids.

Edit: I know I'm coming off as very doom and gloom... The world does have its good points and there are great experiences to have, people to meet, beautiful nature etc, and having a good life is definitely possible, but I think on a 'humanity' level, we aren't doing well... And if we were going to do well we would already have by now... we have the resources, Knowledge, and technology. But we're not.

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

Sorry, had to trim the quotes because I hit the character limit on Said it.

I don't think it's fair to blame the left for the actions of the right...

I blame the left because they've been setting the tone for more than a decade. The media in the US is overwhelmingly left-leaning as is the corporate world. The rise of anti-migrant sentiment, not entirely unexpectedly, arose from a sharp rise in migration. The UK is a great example of this, where Tony Blair massively increased rates of immigration as part of his a multicultural dream that has never worked. Indeed social scientists have been struggling for decades to find ways to make it work or perhaps make it less bad. People questioning this narrative get denounced as racists, even if simply asking why we should want to substantially change the demographics of the country. The UK, to use it again as an example, has seen a massive shift in demographics in the past 30 years, and people notice this. It also doesn't exactly help contain the far right when certain types of migrants have a habit of showing up in particularly unpleasant crimes that governments and media seem to be reluctant to address. There has been a concerted effort to paper over these problems, and nobody would listen to the concerns. Well, the far right is more than happy to discuss the situation, so we can't be surprised if that's where the conversation goes. I don't think either of us wants a far right response. Trump is not far-right, and I'm hoping he can drag America back closer to the centre and forestall the need for something extreme.

But you're right in that trump is simply a manifestation of a long lying problem...

What Trump has done is to give a voice to people already disenfranchised by leftists and corporate politics. It's easy, if a bit elitist, to dismiss this supporters as a bunch of hick racists. That's part of the problem! He's appealing to a lot of normal people, not racist bumpkins, and leftists and elitists seem to be a condescending denial about this. Can you point to specific damage done by sanctions he imposed, providing data that explicitly links those sanctions to a net loss? Are there any things he's done that you'd support?

With regards to violent crime...

It's actually a good example. Yes, men commit the majority of violent crimes. Domestic violence is more contentious, as both women and men are equally capable instigators of abuse. There is data on this, and I've witnessed it myself. The joy of alcohol... It just happens that men can do more damage, physically, and also women are more likely than men to report abuse. Returning to the general question of violence, are you suggesting that men are privileged, even when physically attacked, because they belong to a gender that has won the violence contest? This is the problem with the collectivist mentality. A victim is a victim, regardless of gender. Statistically women are less likely to be victims of violent crime, plain and simple, and that's what's relevant. That the attackers tend to belong to a specific gender has no bearing on this.

Incidentally, the rate of pregnancy-associated deaths is incredibly low, and I suspect you're referring to the Maryland study. This was a study in a single state that came out higher than the CDCs national figures, yet was still only a double-digit in 100,000 live births. Even in the most at-risk age group (1-19), homicide is the fourth most common cause at 7.7% of deaths, but this itself is tiny when you consider that it's a percentage of the women who die in that age group.

In terms of the west..

Sexual violence is rare, and that's a good thing. It can also be rather vague, so I'm basing this on defined crimes as recorded by arrests and also from victim survey data. Harassment is very subjective. I've no doubt it happens, there are arseholes in this world. I've experienced aggressive behaviours, harassment, and violence. Fortunately not very often. Unfortunately some people generalise rare bad behaviour, perhaps combined with some neurosis, and decide there is a systemic issue that must be addressed. No, we call this life. Some people are good, some are bad - that runs across both genders, albeit expressed in different ways.

With regards to the discussion...

Agreed. Oppression does exist, mostly outside of the West, and based on gender, ethnicity, religion, wealth, and many other things. I don't think problems on the other side of the planet should be brought in to a discussion about Western issues any more than the condition of roads in Kazakhstan has a bearing on discussing driving in Germany.

With regards to marriage/reproduction...

It's not really a trope. It's a biological drive. People, particularly women, want to have kids. It's kind of how the species survived. It's not for everybody, and I'm glad people get to choose. There is a penalty to motherhood, and fatherhood. Having kids is a serious undertaking that places heavy demands on both parents. It's not like the typical mother is at home with the kids while dad is out doing whatever he wants. I know plenty of parents, and I try to be considerate of the demands parenthood places upon them. If anything women have been placed under greater pressure to have careers and eschew the traditional idea of being a mother, and that's not going so well. The political lesbian movement of the UK (1970s I think) was particularly hilarious. Some feminists, and pretty mainstream ones, were viewing heterosexuality as traitorous. Dworkin comes to mind. Turns out you can't choose to be lesbian regardless of your political views. On the shift away from family, indicators of satisfaction with life and depression appear to be heading in the wrong direction for women. I think either direction for men and women is fine. People shouldn't feel pressured for political reasons to go one way or the other.

The other side of that is the world we live in...

I can understand that. News is excessively focussed on negative happenings. Politics is a complete bloody mess and becoming more a team sport than an attempt to build good societies. People killing others over a TV or a pair of shoes. I can see how it could be a downer. The thing is, this remains one of the best times in human history to be alive. Worldwide absolute poverty on a global level continues to decline. Even poor people in the West have opportunities and resources available to them that a 19th century king could dream of. I prefer a more optimistic but realistic view, and that's why I think Trump has to win. He's not the ideal candidate, but I'd take him over the street rabble and those in politics and the media who encourage them. The adoption idea is nice. If it'd make you happy, there's nothing greater than to offer a child a chance of a good family and a home.