GC Participants: Do you consider yourself a radfem?

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-06-20T10:42:11+00:00

There are a lot of ideas out there. Many people call themselves radfems. There is not an organized gospel or anything like that. So the terms are all up to interpretation.

I completely agree. I also think this is the case for every movement or ideology out there (at least the ones that don't act like cults). There are some core values and principles that most people who are part of that movement share, but there are also a lot of divergent opinions, especially when it comes to issues that are not the primary target of that particular movement.

From my personal observations, most radical feminists seem to be critical of political lesbianism, and it's also not a subject that is very often discussed in radical feminist circles, so it makes me think it's definitely more of a fringe opinion (like other comments have mentioned).

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-04-08T10:39:19+00:00

You make a really good point about the virtual vs physical life.

I found out about "the impostor syndrome" a few years ago, and it definitely affects me. Thankfully, it's not so bad that it incapacitates me, but it can become quite frustrating. I like to remind myself that it can serve a purpose, if you don't allow it to overwhelm you, because it can make people a little more self-aware, from what I've noticed.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-04-07T15:49:59+00:00

When you put it like that, it makes more sense. I've also considered that it might have something to do with the fear of "growing up". Which I think is a pretty common fear (I still feel inadequate and like I'm not doing "adulting" the correct way, oftentimes), but they appear to have a more extreme response to it.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-04-07T15:37:33+00:00

As for the Communism, that’s very curious to me. I was watching an Atheism panel from ‘09 yesterday which touched on this brilliantly and it talked about how the gap left by Christianity is filled by other religious streams of thought, usually; radical islam or Communism. I would say transgenderism qualifies too just on a smaller scale. Check it out if you’re curious; https://youtu.be/48V0m2lia5U

Thanks for the video recommendation! It sounds really interesting.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-04-07T09:07:48+00:00

I'm around your age and I have also noticed how the current generation of kids/teenagers seem to think we are "shriveled up prunes" already. I don't remember thinking people in their mid 20s were old, when I was a kid. I wonder what happened.

Interspaced between funny haha videos there’s young women having completely unnecessary surgery and arguments about how communism is good actually.

How do they reconcile plastic surgery with communism, though? Or is it normal for these type of people to hold multiple conflicting view points/ideologies at the same time? Could be an age thing, since they are so young, but something tells me it's a more severe failure in basic critical thinking.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-03-21T18:27:34+00:00

I think kpop is a very interesting phenomenon to look at, when talking about the sexualization or even, perhaps, objectification of male bodies. I'm young enough to have been exposed to the hype of kpop, when it first started spreading to the west a few years ago, and I admit that I had a bit of a cultural shock in the beginning. Prior to kpop, I had never seen men depicted like that in videos or on stage (or anywhere). The outfits, the dance moves, the styles and looks, it all felt like they were built with a female audience in mind. There's a lot of lip biting, hip gyrating, almost erotic dancing (not to mention the so called "skinship" between the male members of the group), and I find it very fascinating, because I don't think there's any western male celebrity out there who is catering to the "female gaze" like that.

Also, the guys in kpop seem to be going through the same extreme cosmetic procedures that are expected of women around the world. Most of them are hairless, their skin is soft and flawless looking, they wear lots of makeup, etc. And, while that isn't something every straight woman is going to be into, their rising popularity among teenage girls and young women seems to indicate that there is, actually demand for stuff like that. Women also want to see hot guys strike sexy poses, while half naked, but it's just not something the western industry is interested in producing. Not sure why, though.

I would also like to point that, while I understand the appeal of kpop, I think it's a highly exploitative industry, and I'm not sure I'd want to see it replicated in the west.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-03-11T21:16:12+00:00

Those are some good points, some of which I have never heard or considered before. I especially agree that discouraging girls from being as active as boys plays a role in reducing our "raw power", especially since we tend to be the most affected by that message during puberty, when most physical development and growth happens. But I think it also takes a toll on us mentally, because when we become disconnected from what our bodies can do, we might start believing we are much weaker than we actually are, and this feeds into a cycle. Granted, modern life doesn't allow many of us to exercise or be as active as we should be.

One of my grandmothers used to work the fields and do a lot of physical labor in her youth. She was a tiny woman, almost a head smaller than me, and I'm around average size for women in my country. But I've seen her do things that require an impressive amount of physical strength and endurance. And there were bigger and younger women than her, who were not able to pull any of that off, primarily because of a more sedentary lifestyle.

The explosive muscle power you mentioned is a real inborn advantage that men have over us, but it is nice to remember that we're not as weak and helpless as we might think. And that we also have our own physical advantages (than can even give us an edge on men in some sports, which would further justify segregation).

Thanks for the comment!

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-03-10T22:40:03+00:00

I might be wrong, but I think that one factor that contributes to men being more accepting of the reality that they have a physical advantage over women in most sports, is that a lot of them pride themselves in it. I've stumbled upon quite a few guys who make fun of the idea of males in female sports, but not because they actually care about female sports, but because they take pride in knowing they can "wipe the floor" with us, as one of them put it.

And, as GConly said, younger women are the ones who tend to be more supportive of TIMs in women's sports. I suspect this might be happening because third wave feminism has tried to erase every difference between men and women, in an attempt to "empower" women or instill more confidence in them. I remember being a teenage girl and furiously refusing to accept that most men have a strength advantage over most women. It seemed horribly unfair (it still feels that way to me now, after coming to terms with reality).

Other factors that could contribute to young women being in favor of this is that they are more invested in being seen as "good people" who wouldn't deny others their "rights", and also, that a lot of them don't actually play sports, so they don't understand the implications.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-03-10T14:59:08+00:00

It always bothered me that the sports issue is what most people concentrate on when talking about TIMs in female spaces. While it's justified for people to be outraged about that, I would have thought putting convicted male sex offenders in prisons with women would've enraged the masses more. And maybe people think those women are criminals and deserve no sympathy, but what about allowing men access to women's domestic abuse shelters and rape crisis centers?

The truth is that the women who end up in prisons and shelters are some of the most vulnerable in our society, and have no voice. Everybody has failed them, especially (mainstream, liberal) "feminism". I wonder if we'll ever look back on this with horror and vow to never allow it to happen again, or if things will just continue to worsen, with no hope or justice in sight.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-03-05T11:54:11+00:00

I'm starting to believe that a scary amount of people really do have a hard time distinguishing reality from fiction. And by that, I mean that there seems to be a very large number of individuals who think porn is fiction the same way CGI in an action movie is fiction. They see "movie" and their brain goes "oooh, so not real, gotcha!"

Otherwise I cannot understand how they seem so unaware that people in porn actually have sex (although, given the brutality of most porn nowadays, I'm not sure "having sex" is how I should describe the act). It's not CGI or special effects. The male "actors" don't pretend to penetrate people, the same way they would pretend to shoot other actors with a gun, in action movies. There are actual children in child porn. Actual children who are actually penetrated (and touched) by actual men.

I didn't think ACLU could sink any lower.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-03-01T08:37:56+00:00

When I used to spend time on tumblr, I noticed that there is a trend of self-deprecating jokes amongst the "woke". But they are usually the type of jokes that are supposed to elicit some sympathy. For example, they would joke about their social anxiety being so bad that they can't look the cashier in the eye when they make a payment. But I've rarely seen them make fun of actually stupid things that they do (individually or as a group).

Of course, tumblr isn't representative of all the left, but I do think that it reflects a trend on that side.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-02-28T21:34:16+00:00

Yes, it's bizarre how extremism has managed to take over both sides. And I can see this tendency across the globe, especially in countries that generally have two main political parties.

You'd expect the average person to be put off by the extremism of either party, but if we look at what history has to teach us about that, I guess it's not so absurd.

I still hold hope there will be push back, as you mentioned in your other comment. Although, if it's just pushing back against the extremism of the liberals, to then choose the extremism of the conservatives, it's bleak. Like a never ending, miserable cycle.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-02-28T13:14:34+00:00

It's quite scary to realize how easy it is to convince people of lies, even when things can easily be tested for accuracy. It puts believing in dragons, witches, leprechauns and other magical creatures or phenomena into perspective (I guess nowadays we have otherkins and gender souls to replace those).

It's also fascinating (in a morbid way) how the human mind can come up with the most absurd explanations for simple, observable facts. We have available information about how human reproduction works. Information that fits with what we can easily observe happening. Even before science properly explained reproduction, humans still knew, at a basic level, how it works. They knew which sex can get pregnant and give birth, that you need a male and a female for pregnancy to even occur, etc. But now, all of a sudden, things are more "complicated". Men can, all of a sudden, give birth, but not because of an evolutionary anomaly or mutation, not even because of advanced technology. But because we have changed language and are referring to some of the female members of ours species as "men".

And if we can easily be convinced to rejects basic, observable reality, is it any wonder how we allow worse things to happen? I am curious to know if this is just the future we are heading towards. Nothing is solid anymore, because everything is relative. It leaves room for a lot of "conspiracy theories" that I might have called insane some time ago.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-02-27T21:12:49+00:00

It's ok. I even considered that maybe my comment doesn't show fully (not sure if that's possible, I'm not very Internet savvy), since lefterfield also brought up a point that I already addressed (with the clothes fitting different for men vs women).

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-02-27T20:45:03+00:00

Yes, I agree that changing or fitting rooms need to remain separate, and I mentioned that in my previous comment.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-02-27T20:15:24+00:00

I wouldn't mind there being no ladies' or gentlemen's section for clothing anymore (as long as the changing rooms remain separate), but I can understand people who would. After all, women's and men's clothes are made with different cuts and body proportions in mind, so it's more convenient to know where to look for clothes that might fit you better.

If they weren't fining stores over it, I would, honestly, not even care about this. When you consider the type of stuff so called liberals push for (with domestic abuse shelters, rape relief shelters, prisons, sports, puberty blockers, conversion therapy, etc), I'd be fine living in a world where all they're doing is waging wars on the gendered sections in shops.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-02-27T11:23:43+00:00

Yeah, it's weird that the "progressives" are supporting this, considering how a lot of trans identified people (or the parents who trans them) insist that they realized they were in the "wrong body" when they started showing preference for the "wrong toys". How else will people know who is a girl and who is a boy, if toys become genderless? Civilizations around the world will collapse.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-02-27T11:06:29+00:00

I find it weird that toys are separated by gender to begin with. They are toys. When left to their own devices (and if they haven’t already been brainwashed by parents to not touch toys for the “opposite gender”), kids are going to play with whatever tickles their fancy at the moment. This gendering of toys is, more often, done for the parents’ comfort, rather than for the child’s.

I suppose they could separate the toys based on activity rather than gender: puzzles and strategy, “action”, art, etc.

That being said, going as far as to fine department stores for this isn’t the greatest idea. It gives the impression that they are trying to force certain principles down people’s throats (under threat of penalty), and I’m pretty sure that this approach tends to make people more resistant to change.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-02-25T18:58:40+00:00

What I get from this is that gender is supposed to be a feeling, some inner essence you are born with and aware of, which is independent from both your physical body or social expectations.

It sounds a lot like the concept of "souls" to me. This really is similar to a religion, in a variety of ways: the borderline worshipping of certain figures, the "do not question, otherwise you're a sinner/bigot" mentality, the vagueness with which they explain their core principles, leaving room for interpretation according to what fits best in the moment, etc. And now this soul, pardon, "gender" business, which is both an integral part of a person's identity, and completely unexplainable and unmeasurable. At this point, they should start writing their Bible, to at least gain some semblance of consistency.

At least, people who insist that sex and gender are the same thing, are coherent in their arguments. You can actually have a debate with most of them.

I'm also amused that this person is angrily chastising others for confusing gender with "gender roles/stereotypes", but never actually explains the differences between them (outside from a vague "it's in your head, thus obviously real"). It's like they know their arguments hold no water, but hope that if they're super confident and definitive about them, it'll fool people. And I guess, based on the upvotes, that it worked (mostly).

Edited to add that it's very sneaky how they try to frame questioning gender as reducing people to their sex. Like "terfs" are trying to convince people we're just all a bunch of walking genitalia.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-02-22T09:53:19+00:00

These type of conversations always transform into some sort of competition.

Grown men raping children is not women's fault. They are fully responsible for their own actions, unless you are going to tell me that men are imbeciles who cannot make their own decisions and need women to tell them what to do. That is a convenient way of absolving them of all guilt. Especially when you consider how women were not allowed to vote, own property, or participate in politics for most of history. I bet those evil wenches were pulling the strings all that time, though. Whispering evil thoughts in men's ears and manipulating them to commit atrocious acts.

And of course men would never use acid on people. It has never been heard of. As a matter of fact, acid has been invented by women for the sole purpose of throwing it in men's faces. That's why it's such a widespread crime.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-02-11T09:50:29+00:00

I find most kinks and fetishes deeply disturbing, but what bothers me the most is that people who engage in bdsm tend to have this compulsive need to tell everyone about it. I suspect some of them are trying to convince themselves it's normal when they go into those long-winded descriptions about it, but I also think there's quite a few of them who get off on making people uncomfortable. It's basically part of their many paraphilias.

I would say it is a good thing that these guys are upfront about their sexual "preferences" (instead of unexpectedly starting to strangle women in bed), but I have this nagging feeling that most of them, especially the ones who talk about it so openly ("I want to slap you and spit on you") during their first date, are doing so because they fall under the "getting off on it" category. They probably really enjoy watching the confusion, horror or disgust on women's faces.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-02-07T10:02:06+00:00

I agree. But there are people in this thread who are accusing them of censorship too, of removing things that they find offensive. I've never been a moderator, but I imagine it's difficult to walk the fine line between not allowing anonymous people online to post insulting or "bait" material, but also making sure you don't suppress genuine debates and conversations centered around sensitive subjects.

If they don't delete some questionable comments, even those made with no ill intent, that can be used against the entire community, but if they do keep track of these things and use the "better safe than sorry" principle, people will, inevitably, accuse them of censorship. Especially since people usually disagree on what constitutes opinions that are offensive enough to deserve being removed.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-02-07T00:04:47+00:00

I usually agree that people should be allowed to express opinions that are outside the "party line", even if they are more unsavory, but I think we need to take into account how battles likes these are being fought online.

As others have said, one out of context print screen can easily sway the public opinion against you, nowadays. And, most people won't go out of their way to read the source material and see for themselves what was being said, especially not when the source material is being framed as coming from evil bigots who want to kill innocent people just for existing. So I can see the need to maintain a certain "order", even if it's not the most ideal way to foster (genuine) discussions.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-02-06T21:46:31+00:00

This is an argument that seems to be quite popular among trans activists: that black women are "manly" and, if we accept them as women, we should also accept transwomen as women. Gender Critical feminists criticize/make fun of that argument constantly, which leads me to believe that what you saw was, most likely, sarcasm, or perhaps, quoting one of the assholes who say stuff like that. I'm not on Ovarit and I'm sure that, like any other online community, they have their issues, but I don't think anyone there would post stuff like "black women aren't really women", unless they were a troll.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-01-26T14:07:03+00:00

"Porn that portrays nonconsensual sex, for instance, isn't necessarily misogynist if it centers all characters' pleasure and agency".

I've heard my fair share of arguments for why rape porn isn't bad, but I think this one takes the cake. I'm not even sure you can call this mental gymnastics. I would like the author of this piece to look up the definitions for "nonconsensual", "pleasure" and "agency" and then re-read what they wrote. But I guess this is what happens if words cease to have an established meaning. You can write this type of nonsense, and have it make sense in you head, somehow.

I don't say this very often, but this is, absolutely, grooming. And then we wonder why teenage girls have started identifying in droves as non-binary asexuals.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-01-16T16:54:48+00:00

Thank you for the details. It is amazing to me that anyone could read about the events that occurred, and still willingly support these asswipes, or have the gall to fawn over them on social platforms and call them "brave".

And I think you are right in believing that there was something more insidious that motivated Nixon to do what he did. Otherwise he wouldn't have spent decades running a crusade against the one shelter that denied him access to rape victims.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-01-16T12:56:42+00:00

I think the shelter was defunded, not entirely shut down, but it's a horrible thing to do in either case. And what makes it worse is that, as far as I remember, this whole mess started because another TIM wasn't allowed to volunteer there to work with the victims (about a decade ago).

In conclusion, a couple of dudes worked hard, over the course of a few years, to destroy a rape crisis shelter, because it refused to allow men (however they identify) to "offer their services" to very vulnerable women, who would, most likely, not have been very appreciative of said services.

Even if these guys had good intentions, somewhere along the way, the meaning of the word "volunteer" was lost on them. But I'm not deluded enough to believe this was born out of anything but a huge sense of entitlement, because their little performative act of "volunteering to help" was more important than actually helping by backing the fuck off when asked.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-01-09T10:24:59+00:00

If I didn't know where this quote came from, I would have said this is satire. The judge's comment reads like a middle school level essay. One of those where kids have to write down pros and cons about subjects they know, or care, very little about.

Sometimes, I despair thinking about the quality of people in high positions.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2021-01-04T12:25:12+00:00

Just like with the "Americans" category, they might be referring to the fact that the majority of reddit users are in-between 20 and 30 years old. That being said, it's still ridiculous. What happens when one person is part of a majority in one category, but part of a minority in another? For example, someone is part of a racial minority (in America), but they are heterosexual, "cisgender", neurotypical and between the ages of 20 and 30. Are they still considered a minority, or does being part of multiple "majority" groups cancel their minority status? Is there an hierarchy to these categories? Maybe I don't properly understand the context in which this rule was instituted, but from where I stand, it looks incredibly dumb (beyond being unhelpful to anyone).

Also, whomever made up this rule seems unaware that although women make up the majority of the population numerically, historically women - even white women in white countries - were treated as lesser and for all intents and purposes - even in legal definitions - were considered a "minority" group.

That was the part I wanted to address the most too. These people, including the so called feminists, seem to be incapable of understanding that the way discrimination against women worked (and still works to this day) has nothing to do with our numbers. They look at all the other categories of people that got discriminated against in history, see that one of the main factors for the majority of them was that they were at a numerical disadvantage, and conclude that women couldn't have been oppressed. Or, maybe, they think there were fewer of us in the past? Do they think we only got our right to vote about 100 years ago (or a few decades ago in some places), because women made only 20% of the human population back then, or what?

No matter how you look at it, these people aren't very bright.

*Edited to add that I admire the work you've done in that refugee resettlement, especially the help you provided to girls and women.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-12-29T13:55:20+00:00

Since this thread has mostly become an argument about pronoun usage, I would like to put in my two cents:

When I started to become skeptical of the TRA movement, I had this dilemma regarding Miranda Yardley: he’s a man, but I think he is a good, respectable person. So what do I do in terms of pronouns? I went through a period of time when I decided to call the “respectable” trans people their preferred pronouns, because why be an asshole, right? But then I realized that I am, basically, determining who is worthy of having their preferences respected, and who is not. I become some bizarre pronoun judge. Why am I using female pronouns for Yardley, but not for Yaniv? Because Yaniv is a piece of shit and Yardley isn’t? What is the line a trans identified individual must not cross, in order for me to continue using their preferred pronouns? Things become muddy and they start loosing consistency.

The people in here (and other GC spaces) might choose to utilize pronouns based on biological sex, even for the "good" trans people, not because they are meanies who think every trans identified person is a rapist and a creep, but for the sake of consistency (and, of course, accuracy).

The only exception to this rule (for me), is the scenario in which a trans individual “passes” as their desired sex, and those around do not know of their actual identity. "Outing" someone in that situation would be quite an asshole thing to do. But that scenario is incredibly rare, and chances are that, if the person actually passes well, you won’t know they are trans either.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-12-28T09:09:50+00:00

So I think that it's less a case of women having a naturally-authoritarian bent than that, sometimes, anti-authoritarians just have really piss-poor analysis.

That's a very aptly put observation.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-12-28T09:02:40+00:00

I think (I hope) this situation will reach a breaking point sooner rather than later. But I'm afraid it's not going to be women who will bring an end to it. I think it will take a few high profile men to put their foot down (when things will start affecting them personally, or when they will feel emboldened to play the hero). I also fear feminists, alongside the LGB, will bear the brunt of the backlash when it will happen. People won't care that there were some of us who opposed the situation.

I would like to be wrong. Perhaps the average woman realizes what is going on and we all come together to put an end to this insanity. The problem with that scenario is that most of the current "SJW" activism (and, specifically, trans activism) is being debated at an academic level, by youngsters of a relatively high socioeconomic status, and the average woman has neither the time, nor the interest to follow that debate.

I suppose, in the meantime and as you suggested, speaking up and coming to the aid of women who put themselves out there is the least we could do (if we have the possibility to do so safely). But even that has to be done in a careful manner, lest we be accused of being irrational, shrieking harpies and forever remembered as such, even when time proves us right.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-12-27T20:46:58+00:00

More women than men tend to be faithful adherents of any religion. The same is true with respect to poorer vs wealthier people, and I think the basis for both is the same. Women are more likely to be poor, more likely to have no power over their own lives, more likely to feel they need help from a higher power. You should question why, despite these 'likelihoods', more men are in positions of religious authority. You seem to focus a lot on women's ideological devotion while ignoring men's.

This is a very good point that I think gets overlooked very often. I suspect a lot of people don't think that men in positions of religious authority actually believe that much in what they preach. It might be true, or it might be heavily influenced by the popular idea that men are more rational and, thus, wouldn't fall for something as silly as magical thinking. I've hinted at this in my other comment too, but whether it's crazy ideologies or religion, it's usually men who create and run them. And you can argue they're just taking advantage of the masses, but who's to say they don't, at least partially, believe in what they spew. And when men become zealots, things go south real fast. As another commenter said, you don't see many women beheading people, blowing up buildings or hijacking airplanes.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-12-27T15:00:57+00:00

In general, I think women (especially young women and girls) are more supportive of SJW movements because it is expected of them to do that. Women are socially expected to be kind and tolerant, and the punishment for a woman who doesn't play into that role is harsher and more immediate than the punishment for a man. I suspect that, for many of these young women, this is mostly a performance put on so that people do not gang up on them to accuse them of being "mean". Especially when women who fall out of line are publicly and viciously made an example of (think of "TERFs").

I'm not sure if this would apply to women being more enthusiastic supporters of dictatorships, for example. We don't really have statistics for that, but I suspect that if we did, we wouldn't see much of a difference in terms of who is more vocally in support of it between the average man and the average woman. What we would see though, is that the majority of positions of power and authority in such regimes are held by men and that it has been men, historically, who have created, ran and expanded extreme ideologies.

Which brings me to Trans activism. I'm sure you've noticed that the current hierarchy of TRA has "transwomen" at the top. As a matter of fact, "transmen" are merely an afterthought for this movement. Sometimes they get mentioned, usually (and ironically) when they give birth. So, while there might be more women engaged in this type of activism out of a wish to not appear bigoted or unkind, its most ardent supporters and the ones who hold the real positions of power are still men.

Another point to keep in mind is that women tend to be more supportive of social reform. Look at the LGB movement. Historically, it has seen a lot more support from straight women than from straight men. And, generally, homophobic women tend to respond to LGB people a lot less violently than homophobic men. The current environment of woke social activism is taking advantage both of women's genuine desires to help those less privileged, and their fears of being perceived as "unkind" and "bigoted". I mean, we are talking about people who were threatening JKR with death and telling her, in graphic detail, about how they would like to rape her with their "girldicks". And they did this with no restraints, in a public space, to an author that has a large underage following. Do you really think less powerful women didn't look at this and realize what awaits them if they speak out of line?

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-11-30T13:26:47+00:00

It is rather suspicious how fast a lot of straight people were to jump on the TRA train (when you compare it to the more gradual trajectory LGB acceptance had). I think part of it is mindlessly following "woke" social media and wanting to be praised for being on the "right side of history" (as other commentators pointed out). But I suspect a lot of straight people still hold disdain (disgust?) for same sex attracted individuals, yet can't openly express it because it's no longer socially acceptable to be homophobic (at least in western countries).

That's how you get a worryingly large number of parents who would rather transition their GNC children, than accept that said children might grow up to discover they are homosexual or bisexual. For whatever reason, it appears that the more conservative someone's values are, the more they lean towards transitioning as a "cure" for homosexuality, or for fixing behaviors that don't align with specific gender roles. How these people call themselves "progressive" while telling a little boy who's playing with dolls that he might be a girl because of it, is beyond my ability to understand.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-11-25T12:55:50+00:00

On TikTok, Brooks favors glittery mesh tops, jangly earrings, jewel-toned hair dye and bedazzled combat boots; with Chlapecka, they are one of the unofficial leaders of the bimbo movement on TikTok, going viral in October with a video of him summarizing the bimbo aesthetic. “The bimbo is not only blissfully and ignorant and spacey but exists at the aesthetic intersection of tackiness and luxury,” they say in the video. “To be a bimbo, one must let go of their former earthly possessions and relationships to adopt a gaudy yet lonely lifestyle.”

The author of this piece can't seem to decide whether to refer to this guy as a "he" or a "they", which makes reading this rather confusing. Also, those last quotes remind me of when I was a kid (around 12 years old) and started writing "deep" poetry by using all sorts of pompous words that either didn't mean anything, when taken in context, or were contradictory to each other. How does one let go of their "earthly possessions and relationships" by adopting a gaudy lifestyle that exists at the intersection of luxury and tackiness?

I'm becoming more and more convinced that these people are, intellectually, very lazy and have developed a fear of "adulthood". They're adopting all these silly identities in hope that society will go easy on them for being so weird and oppressed for it. This is goth/emo, but on steroids and with more horrible repercussions (and this is coming from someone who had a goth phase).

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-11-21T09:43:24+00:00

Yeah, "beta white man" is a dead giveaway. I'm not saying there are no lesbians out there who use that terminology, but it is highly unlikely, since that is MRA specific language. Couple that with previously made comments by this "lesbian" (who seems very angry at TIFs but highly invested in the well being of TIMs), and I think it's quite obvious.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-11-20T20:28:32+00:00

DICK: We use this word to describe external genitals. Dicks come in all shapes and sizes and can belong to people of all genders. FRONT HOLE: We use this word to talk about internal genitals, sometimes referred to as a vagina. A front hole may self-lubricate, depending on age and hormones. STRAPLESS: We use this word to describe the genitals of trans women who have not had genital reconstruction (or “bottom surgery”), sometimes referred to as a penis. VAGINA: We use this word to talk about the genitals of trans women who have had bottom surgery.

Will I ever stop being amazed by how stupid we humans can be?

Also, I will not stand for this slander towards the urethra! IT should be the front hole. The other one (the one that shall not be properly named unless a man claims to have one) is merely the middle one!

Although, at this point, I wouldn't be surprised if PP thinks we pee out of our vagina.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-11-20T17:48:30+00:00

I have been disappointed by a lot of women's response to this whole mess. We talk a lot about toxic masculinity, but I feel that we do not talk enough about how women are socialized to view "kindness" as such an important quality to have, that they are willing to throw themselves (and, implicitly, other women) under the bus just to be praised for performing it properly.

It's also sad how feminism has fallen prey to this whole "boomers are stupid" mentality, which guarantees that the loudest voices we hear right now are naive and inexperienced teenage girls and young women, from relatively stable socioeconomic backgrounds, who don't yet have the foresight to realize the consequences of what they are supporting (and who are more vulnerable to fall prey to this performance based reward system, especially in online spaces). I'm not trying to be an asshole to younger people (I am still in my 20s myself), but I feel that we have a lot to lose by disregarding older women as "obsolete second wavers".

I do still hold hope that they will grow out of this phase.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-11-20T11:10:49+00:00

They are doing to infertile women the same thing they are doing to intersex people. They are latching onto the genuine struggles of some groups, in order to legitimize their continuous whining. And, in the process, they end up dictating what those groups should stand up for. Like all of you pointed out, infertile or menopausal women weren't (and still aren't) going around screeching that they are being invalidated by terms like "pregnancy", "menstruation" or "female". I'm amazed that people can't see what they're trying to do (or, perhaps, they don't care).

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-11-16T10:17:18+00:00

You make very good points. I am also confused about how they plan on defining "identity as the other sex". What does that mean? How do you measure it objectively? You can place this in the same category as trying to explain what a "soul" is. And if you plan to approach it from a more material angle, you can only do it, as you mentioned, by relying on gender stereotypes (which are also highly dependent on time and place).

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-11-06T09:47:34+00:00

The reality is that there are still proportionally less MTF politicians than cis male politicians and cis female ones.

And the reality is that there is much less MTF people than males of females. And yet they are disproportionally represented. So if you take "on average", there will be much more MFT politicians per 10000 trans than female politicians per 10000 females. And the sole fact that MTF's are taking positions in office that were supposed to be female positions from Equality Act speaks volumes.

I was also about to address this point, but you did it better. Sometimes, I feel like these people are very, very young (at most in their teenage years). Either that, or they are not particularly bright. Because they seem to lack a basic understanding of how things work, and are also not big fans of critical thinking.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-10-22T14:45:08+00:00

How do you rehabilitate someone who killed 77 people? You can't accidentally go around killing almost 100 people and not know any better because no one told you not to do it. I agree that prisons should aim for rehabilitation when possible, but there are some criminals that are beyond that and the best thing to do is to lock them away for the rest of their lives so that they don't hurt anybody else. I suspect you wouldn't be so forgiving if one of these criminals killed or harmed a person you loved only to be allowed to walk free after a couple of months of rehabilitation and writing some phony apology letters. Violent criminals (including rapists) tend to re-offend at pretty high rates and tend to also be very good liars who can convince trained therapists that they would never do it again.

And what would 3 years of rehabilitation look like for the horrible crime of misgendering? Forced re-education? Norway really fucked it up with this one.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-10-09T13:51:06+00:00

I appreciate your efforts, but it is quite clear that this vintology guy is not someone you can have a reasonable debate with. If "terfs" said the earth is a sphere he'd be going around yelling that it is, in fact, a square. It seems to me that he just wants to prove "terfs" wrong, regardless of the subject being discussed. Such acts are better left ignored. Edit: I'm also noticing that he keeps saying some men need to be put on estrogen because the world will be better, or some nonsense like that ( and to think "tefs" get called man-haters). I smell a troll.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-08-26T08:23:00+00:00

Honestly, I’m starting to think that some of these responses came from trolls. The whole “children can fantasize about gangbangs and it’s perfectly healthy and not a sign of sexual abuse” seems too outlandish. They also come off as very childish when they respond to criticism with taunts and making fun of our “depressing sex life”. It’s reminiscent of children losing an argument and calling their opponent fat as an insult. So my bet is on some teenage troll who has too much time on their hands.

I also think you are right and there’s a high chance the article was purposefully written to stir outrage and get more views. There are too many things that make little to no sense in that article.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-08-25T09:41:07+00:00

I have to admit, I was quite irked by your other comments, but this one just makes me sad. I said what I had to say as I am quite sure continuing this conversation will take us nowhere. Have a nice day.

Nosce_te_ipsum · 2020-08-25T08:11:28+00:00

I generally lurk around here, but your comment gave me whiplash, so I need to butt in. First of all, nobody here said that women who have these type of fantasies are not women. Second of all, did you just write "just because they were born with these fantasies"? Are you telling me little girls run around fantasizing about being gangbanged? Because that's what being born with it implies. It implies that, somehow, wishing to be violently penetrated, shoved around, strangled, slapped and called whatever array of degrading words is something that a little girl is capable of dreaming about since the moment she gains self-awareness.

Also, your comparison of BDSM with horror movies is laughable. Horror movies cannot impregnate you, give you prolapse, STDs, vaginal or anal fissures or kill you (as is the case with BDSM strangulation and such other acts). It seems to me that a lot of people don't understand the distinction between what is actually fantasy and what is not. Fantasizing about a gangrape is one thing, actually having a bunch of dudes you know nothing about (who also have girlfriends, mind you, and we don't know if the girlfriends are aware of this arrangement) come to your house and jump you like that is a completely different matter. Also, as other people have pointed, we are not prudes who only have missionary sex with the lights off. The fact that people like you sneer at us with your whole "I'm more enlightened than you because I like to have unconventional sex" speaks volumes about what you really think of women's right to choose what kind of sex acts they engage in. This loud defensiveness comes from somewhere and reminds me of men when we criticize their porn use. We're not taking away your kinks. Trust me, this little corner of radical feminists on the internet is not going to destroy the BDSM community. The OP was very respectful in the way she worded her concern, and if you are not capable of having a debate on the issue and accept that it is reasonable for women to be concerned about this influx of young women who, all of a sudden, engage in what can be very dangerous and very degrading acts, perhaps you should take a step back and evaluate why that is?

Nosce_te_ipsum