Connection between HAES/Fat Acceptance and supporting men in women's sport? by eddyelric in GenderCritical
[–]OrneryStruggle 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
There are illness fakers. There are all sorts of fakers of all sorts of things. I notice you just put chronic illness in particular in scare quotes.
Anyway. Yes, obesity IS often caused by actual chronic illness.
so because there's a reddit sub devoted to finding some random fat people being dumb, ALL fat activists do that?
Can muslim women be GC feminist too? by [deleted] in GenderCritical
I'm responding to what's in my inbox. I didn't go back and check whether the thread was erased or not (how bizarre and why does it matter?) and you can feel free not to respond to my comments if you don't want to. This is a REALLY weird way to behave.
If the discussion has no purpose, say so instead of acting outraged that someone... responds to your responses to their comments. This is a discussion thread, it's for discussion. I have no interest in divining whether I will change someone's mind or not. A thread was made, a question was asked, I answered the question and participated in the discussion. Maybe you need to log off if people discussing things on a discussion forum bothers you this much.
You did not say that anyone is welcomed to discuss anything, and I told you in my first response that Islam is not compatible with radical feminism. Give it a rest. I get it, you were arguing against something I didn't say because you forgot what I did say, which is fine, but what you're doing now is pretty weird. No matter how many times you agree with me while trying to be rude about agreeing with me, you'll still end up looking stupid and embarrassing.
Benjamin A Boyce: The Rise of Unreason | with James Cantor, PhD by catoboros in GenderCritical
[–]OrneryStruggle 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
You said he's not promoting pedophilia, and now you're admitting he is promoting pedophilia but that's fine because he makes a distinction between pedophilia and child molestation. Clearly he is promoting pedophilia in the tweet, thanks for linking to the proof.
Pedophilia is not a mental disorder.
Kyle Rittenhouse's mother by ImPiqued1111111 in GenderCritical
i'm not astroturfing, I've been a GC regular for 3+ years now, have you?
seems like the people who want to cape for rapists and wife beaters are astroturfing. this is a FEMINIST sub remember.
I'm not commenting on an erased thread, I'm responding to what's in my inbox...
You are being weirdly aggressive for no reason. If you don't remember what the post was about, just say so instead of being needlessly rude and combative.
The poster in the OP, which I remember but you clearly do not, was asking whether she is 'welcome' here despite being previously aware of radical feminism and a muslim. I'm saying we shouldn't discourage muslim women from middle eastern countries from at least reading about and talking to radical feminists as long as they're respectful. I don't understand why you're making such a big deal out of what I said but it's pretty weird. You're free to disagree and I won't mind.
[–]OrneryStruggle 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
He did shoot the guy "in the head" first but missed/grazed him, which was probably the shot that flew past the reporter. The fatal shot which I think dropped him was the groin shot, then the shot in the back must have been after he started falling as you can see he rotates as he falls.
[–]OrneryStruggle 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
One would think.
Here is a quote from Cantor's Twitter: "Pedophilia is NOT inherently wrong or harmful."
Another source on how Twitter's promotion of pedophile networks has led to further child abuse content: https://archive.is/TDDDE
[–]OrneryStruggle 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
He does promote paedophilia. Like I said in another post, he promotes paedophilia as a sexual orientation (and thinks there should be a P in the LGB), he is against jailing pedophiles including offending pedophiles, etc. This normalization of pedophilia and insistence that pedophiles should be free and allowed to perpetually reoffend is indistinguishable from pedophilia promotion.
He was also the consultant on the Twitter decision to allow pedophilia posts on Twitter. What is that if not PROMOTING PEDOPHILIA? They are allowed to openly post pedophilic content because of Cantor.
The "support" that "non offending" (lmao you mean not convicted/caught) pedophiles get through therapy actually increases offending and helps them further evade the law.
I really never ever said or suggested that you can call yourself a radfem and be muslim. I pretty explicitly said you can't. I'm not sure why you are arguing with me about this. It has nothing to do with my original point and I think I was very clear that I don't think you can be a muslim radfem.
My response was SOLELY meant to hedge against the idea (implied in the OP itself and some of the other posts) that we should only accept radfem posters in a radfem forum, since I think being welcoming to/explaining ourselves to other women may be helpful for them and for GC ideology in general. My main point was I don't think r/GC or this saidit sub should be exclusively for radfem posters, and that I don't think r/GC was, historically, exclusively for radfem posters. You literally started arguing with me because I said this: "my impression of "gender critical" both on reddit and here is more that it is a discussion space which centers the tenets of radical feminism, not that it is a space exclusively for radical feminists. I'd be interested in such a space but I always viewed GC as being more of an anti-censorship women's sub than a strictly radfem sub.
That's why I don't have a problem with women participating who aren't knowledgeable about radical feminism, as long as they are participating broadly following the sub culture and rules."
You are telling me nothing of note by continuing to argue that muslims can't be radfems which I said was true in my very first post. My point was made VERY EXPLICIT and my point was that I don't think non-radfems should be banned from posting or reading the sub. That is ALL.
No, I appreciate your clarification. I'm explaining to you what HAES actually is and where I see the smearing of HAES initiatives as coming from. I have seen threads like this on r/GC for years, typically made by different people and with a large number of upvotes, so I'm assuming people either have no idea what HAES is about or are genuinely upset that a "third way" has been suggested for fat people which doesn't involve obsessively fixating on their looks and the number on the scale. I find it plausible that most people are the former and some are the latter, but someone is leading a smear campaign against a science-backed health initiative and it's upsetting to see it amplified, as someone who 'HAES' ideas have helped tremendously (I am also a scientist and I don't like the smearing of perfectly good science for ideological reasons either).
I don't think thin people who are prejudiced against fat people are monsters, ftr, just like I don't think male-aligned women who throw other women under the bus (e.g. Republican women etc) are monsters. We live in a society that treats some groups of people worse than others and provides handy excuses for those people to perpetuate the bigotry and feel good about it. Some of those excuses are extremely convincing. I'm not going to mince words about how stupid I find the excuses though. I'm not here to be nice and apologetic about my views - I wouldn't be gender critical if I was. I also think GC women should know better than to uncritically accept propaganda that's essentially based on tapping people's outrage that some women (LBR it's mostly women who are targeted) don't look socially acceptable and appealing/attractive, and sometimes don't even want to. HAES is so universally panned as a strategy (even though it effectively improves people's health) because it tells fat people (women, mostly) to prioritize their health over their looks and to reframe their health behaviours as HEALTH behaviours rather than a magical fix for their size. A lot of people are not very happy with this at all.
AFAIK she drove him across state lines to work, since he worked in Wisconsin. Don't quote me on this, I'm not 100% sure, but according to his lawyer's statement I think she drove him to Wisconsin where he worked as a lifeguard, he got off work and went to his volunteerism "job" cleaning graffiti, then went directly with a friend to the protest in response to a call for protection from a car dealership that had dealt with multiple arson attempts the previous day. I don't think his mom was involved in the job > volunteerism > protest part of the day, just initially driving him to work.
I might be wrong though, but she apparently didn't drive the gun across state lines and he got it from someone he was volunteering with as I understand it, so doubtful that she drove him to the protest directly.
I just directly quoted your previous posts, see above.
"fat acceptance" (whatever that means) is not the same as HAES, which is a health initiative started by a group of obesity researchers to combat the counterproductive weight loss methods hitherto touted by the medical establishment, which were historically making obese people fatter and sicker. Clinical trials of HAES methodologies show that people on HAES interventions tend to lose a similar amount of weight as people on other diet/exercise interventions (so, a small amount that is often regained) but their overall health improves more than it does on other interventions. There are no downsides to this that I can see except that a lot of people are big mad that fat people have the audacity to put their general health higher on their priority list than looking socially acceptable.
[–]OrneryStruggle 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
in that case I agree, but I'm bothered by the double standard that has kept everyone I know silent on the numerous children (many armed with automatic rifles, ironically, as in CHAZ) who have been involved in protests since Floyd's death but made them suddenly speak out on this particular 17 year old being at a protest. I am not implying you are one of those people, but this is really the first time I have seen this argument made by leftists and I'm surprised it's coming up suddenly.
Personally I think any non-adult should be kept away from protests/riots that are or are likely to turn violent, so I agree with you in principle. I don't think his mom had any say in him going though, as I understand it he went straight from work and after-work volunteerism, so I doubt she was involved in taking him.
Your original comment very clearly did imply that you think HAES itself is wrong. It was a response to the OP which said there's a type of women who support HAES philosophy and you put it down to "a general psychology of never wanting to tell anyone they're wrong, even when they're doing things that harm themselves or others". I then responded "imagine thinking that it makes sense to "tell fat people they are wrong" for being fat and wanting to eat healthy/exercise" and you responded "Sometimes we have to be "judgmental" and tell people that we think they're hurting themselves by continuing their behavior." If this is not a clear implication that you think you "have to" tell fat people they are wrong for wanting to be healthy and exercise, I don't know what it is. It seems pretty unambiguous to me in context but maybe you meant something different.
No one is denying that obesity can led to health problems, including the obesity researchers who started the HAES initiative. The point is that you are telling people you need to tell them they are wrong for TRYING TO IMPROVE THEIR HEALTH. Which is what HAES is about. It is about people trying to improve their health, independent of their size.
You are saying you feel like you have to tell friends and famiy members who are fat and trying to improve their health that they are wrong for doing so. There's nothing at all positive or defensible about this position.
TBF the 30-40somethings there were clearly not emotionally mature enough to be in the situation, but he was. I've never been pro-gun but watching the video of the altercation was absolutely amazing as this child showed extreme restraint, calm and quick thinking in a situation that could have turned deadly for him. He avoided shooting at/injuring anyone who wasn't directly causing a threat to his life at the moment (apparently that reporter was in his line of fire behind his aggressor but didn't get hit) and immediately turned himself in to police after running away. That's a level of clearheadedness that you don't see from cops or army or people way older and better trained with weapons than he was.
I agree that in general children should be kept away from violent riots/protests but at the moment they are not, and it is common for people to bring even their small children to such events. I find it curious that this PARTICULAR child was apparently too young to be somewhere with a gun while the hundreds of other minors at riots (many with weapons) have been given a pass until now and people like myself saying it's inappropriate to bring small children to riots have been mocked as conservatives/puritans until now. Not saying you were one of those people, but I'm suddenly seeing this argument everywhere when I never saw it before.
He also had firefighting training, EMT training (he was there working as a medic) and a job as a lifeguard, so he had relevant skills he thought he could use at the protest.
HAES is a method/strategy of helping fat people become healthier and you are arguing that it is wrong and you think you should shame and discourage people who want to improve their health as fat people. Not sure what's confusing.
[–]OrneryStruggle 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
I'm a liberal who thought he was a mass-shooter nut job until I looked into it. There are so many lies in this case, mostly coming from the Left. It's kinda shocking.
I'm a liberal who thought he was a mass-shooter nut job until I looked into it. There are so many lies in this case, mostly coming from the Left. It's kinda shocking.
Unfortunately the group that now calls themselves the left often lies shockingly, to the point where it is no longer shocking to me. As soon as I heard there was a 17 year old 'mass shooter/white supremacist terrorist' in Kenosha (who killed 3 white men for some reason?) I immediately assumed something was up and went to find the actual unedited video footage because you can be about 99% sure the media is lying whenever a headline like this gets run these days. I was not at all shocked to find that the footage told a completely different story.
Jacob Blake was a serial rapist and was shot for resisting arrest at the scene of an ongoing rape (alleged) but the left is staying oddly silent on that as well in their rush to lionize him (and eulogize him since a lot of them appear not to have noticed he isn't dead). This is just another example of women and children being thrown under the bus and ignored if it's politically expedient, and I hate seeing radfems take the bait and join in.
Hmm it doesn't seem like him but it could be, there's no confirmation anywhere. His mom did pull him and his sister out of school for severe bullying, so that sounds plausible as well, but anyway I wouldn't use a video so blurry that the guy is completely unidentifiable as proof of anything unless there's some other confirmation it's him.
I hate the pedophilia-promoting piece of shit, but I agree about academic freedom and free speech. Up to and including vile opinions like his own of course.
Top Canadian sex researcher quits scientific group after being blasted for views on transgender issues by sallytomato in GenderCritical
He does promote pedophiles being allowed to abuse children, just implicitly. But that is exactly what he promotes, because he is against pedophilia being stigmatized and he is against putting pedophiles in prison. He also claims pedophilia is a sexual orientation and should be part of the LGB. I don't know what kind of crazy mental gymnastics it requires to try to spin this as 'not pedophilia promotion' but I don't really want to know. We shouldn't be supporting this guy at all. His former protege, a pro-porn and pro-BDSM researcher, fled to Mexico after sexually assaulting at least 7 undergraduate students too. This is a group of really bad men whether they believe in gender bullshit or not.
r/periods got brigaded today. how long till they go the way of r/pcos? by spicyramen in GenderCritical
im really mad about r/pcos still, i really needed that sub, although now I don't want to use reddit. It helped me solve problems i couldn't get my doctors to solve for years. i can't believe men are really trying to take/ruin everything.
Very true. I know how easy it is to scoff and feel superior to fat people as a thin person, because this used to be me. I was a fashion model and despite having a borderline eating disorder in an attempt to push myself below a 15 BMI, I had been 'naturally' thin my whole life after a brief stint with binge-eating in my preteens, up to and including my mid 20s. I always thought it would be IMPOSSIBLE to get that fat, all you have to do is eat in moderation and maybe be slightly active, how could people do this to themselves, etc.
Then I got raped and my lean PCOS turned into non-lean PCOS as the trauma triggered my cortisol and insulin to insane levels. I couldn't eat almost at all for years but my bodyweight tripled in a short time. I begged doctors for help but they kept telling me I 'seemed fine' and 'looked fine' and refused to test my hormones, until I was morbidly obese. Due to my endometriosis I was also essentially forced onto low estrogen birth control, which made me gain 50lbs in 2 months when I was already struggling with my weight. Only after I reached cat 3 obesity did they start telling me to eat less and starve myself, which I was already doing, but I did it more resulting in a couple of near-death experiences and further weight gain.
I have a graduate degree in a biomedical field and am a professional research scientist. It's not like I'm stupid. I also have a long history of tolerating near-starvation extremely well and have never had any issues with self control or appetite. I haven't had a sugary drink in decades and I'll eat sweets maybe once a year. But I was devoting every minute of every day to trying to lose weight. I sometimes went 1-2 weeks without eating ANYTHING at all and only drinking water, but at the end of such a fast would lose very little weight which was almost immediately regained after eating one meal. Finally I decided to deal with the root causes of my weight gain - a hormonal illness, PTSD trauma, a shot immune system from years of borderline-anorexia to maintain fashion model measurements into my 20s, and an obsession with losing weight that was making my completely neglect my ACTUAL HEALTH. Sure, I was going to the gym and weightlifting 6-7x a week, and I was eating "healthy" foods, but I wasn't paying any attention at all to my actual well-being and when I coughed up blood routinely from starvation and spit it out while walking down the street to my workplace I actually felt proud of myself that I had enough self control to get to that point.
I have finally lost a significant amount of weight basically effortlessly, without starving myself or ever being hungry, after I've started to address my hormonal issues and my out of control trauma and stress. I doubt I will ever go back to being thin but I am starting to feel like a real living person again, not a walking corpse. Ironically none of my self-hatred relating to my weight had anything to do with being 'entitled to feeling attractive' or angry at people for not being attracted to me - I had plenty of people still openly attracted to me including people who I had dated when I was still model-thin, my close friends didn't make a big deal out of anything, etc. What did make me feel awful was the people constantly implying I was lazy, didn't care about my health, was just too stupid or low on self-control to make changes, etc. It was the torture and stress of family members calling me disgusting names and side-eyeing me if I ever put a single morsel of food into my mouth in their presence. It was knowing that people didn't believe me about the debilitating symptoms of my multiple chronic illnesses and assumed an unhealthy lifestyle was to blame. It was relatives forcing me to push through hikes with a sprained ankle because it would 'make me stronger.' Attractiveness never was the issue for me, people's inhumanity was.
For me the most crushing thing was also that as a lifelong athlete I had to give up the 4 sports I had been doing intensely for years. I had to give up hobbies and fun. Not because I was fat (sure, being fat makes athletics harder but I can do them now and I'm still fat) but because I was ignoring my ACTUAL HEALTH and hoping starving myself would solve the problem.
I agree with you that I don't completely buy permanent weight loss is impossible - I think it is impossible on the modern recommended diet for a lot of people, since we are ignoring real medical science about diet, exercise and obesity in order to keep promoting certain subsidized industries and of course the possibility for the lucky 'naturally thin' to feel smug and sanctimonious. The beauty industry is a racket and so are the diet and food industries, to a large degree. I'm not on board with absolutely everything about the HAES methodology and permanent weight loss is still a goal for me but I needed to put my health REGARDLESS OF SIZE first in order to see any improvement in either health OR weight. Imo it's a big step forward from 'fat people just eat less ha ha.'
I never disagreed with you there, of course you can't be a radical feminist muslim. I just said that I think we should accept non-radfems participating in the sub as long as they're respectful and interested in radfem positions.
you're hurting yourself and others by continuing this ridiculous behaviour of sanctimoniously telling fat people to stop caring about their health. you're free not to listen though.
imagine literally wanting fat people to kill themselves and ruin their health because you hate the normalization of fat people becoming healthier.
there's no confirmed video of him punching a girl and the boy in the video doesn't even look like him.
the other three men were misogynistic pigs definitely.
he was and it's clear to see from the video.
why shouldn't he have been there?
if he were a black PRO-BLM field medic would you still be saying he shouldn't have been there?
i'm defending the kid who defended himself against a pedophile rapist and wife beater and i'm a radical feminist woman.
i can't believe fucking RADFEMS are caping for literal VIOLENT SEX PREDATORS who attempted to murder a child who was running away.
[–]OrneryStruggle 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
no it's not. it's legal and he was doing it to protect himself while he rendered medical aid to protesters.
[–]OrneryStruggle 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
it was self defense, which in many people's books makes it ok.
[–]OrneryStruggle 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
source on him being a white supremacist?
not everyone here will be anti-gun. on the contrary many radical feminists are pro-gun. the child clearly saved his own life that day because he had a gun, instead of getting killed by misogynistic felons.
there is no such video, there is a video allegedly showing this but it doesn't look like kyle and no one has confirmed it was him.
imagine being in this sub and defending rapists and wife beaters and pedophiles who tried to kill a child after trying to burn businesses in a riot.
Lol being a 'racist' (hearsay - proof?) and 'showing up' to be a volunteer field medic at a violent riot after being asked is worse than being a repeat offender pedophile, rapist and wife beater? Maybe you shouldn't be on a feminist forum if you think this.
He was shot at the back as he fell - being shot in the front and side of his body first. The fatal bullet (and likely first bullet) was to the front of his groin. It shattered his pelvis and he bled out, according to the last coroner's report I saw. There are eyewitnesses including a reporter who was in the line of fire saying kyle only shot the attacker after he was cornered and the pedophile made not one but TWO attempts to grab his gun. There is no way a shot in the back was the first shot.
He showed up to a protest to act as a field medic, and had a weapon to protect himself since the national guard stood down and police were not preventing local buildings from being torched. He gave an interview maybe 5 minutes before the shooting saying so, in fact.
[–]OrneryStruggle 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
1) If the prosecution could show Rittenhouse did something to provoke the mob to attack him. I haven't found footage of what happened that caused the mob to start chasing Rittenhouse, so I can't say for sure that he didn't do something that would reasonably provoke them here he could use that as an excuse to shoot them.
1) If the prosecution could show Rittenhouse did something to provoke the mob to attack him. I haven't found footage of what happened that caused the mob to start chasing Rittenhouse, so I can't say for sure that he didn't do something that would reasonably provoke them here he could use that as an excuse to shoot them.
^ I have the answer to your question here. He brought a fire extinguisher to a fire they were trying to set at a gas station, and after the fire was put out the first attacker (pedophile in the red/orange shirt) became outraged and started shouting racist slurs and telling people to shoot him. he seems to have picked kyle out of the crowd later and gone after him specifically, but at first he indiscriminately attacks various members of the militia who put out the fire. that's the video where he's confronting the militia - it was moments after the fire he was trying to set was put out. he starts chasing kyle and grabbing his gun apparently immediately afterward.
kyle will walk anyway, everything he did was 100% self defense. the people he ended up killing (who tried to kill him first) were convicted pedophiles and wife beaters attacking a child for helping put out a fire they were trying to set at a gas station.
whether she is charged as an accessory or not nothing whatsoever will happen because there is video clearly and unambiguously showing everything he did was self defense. the only charge that may stick is possession of a firearm, and his mom probably wont be culpable in that since AFAIK the firearm was borrowed from an acquaintance and his mother had nothing to do with acquiring it.
The Democratic National Convention on Tuesday featured a panelist who identifies as a “nonbinary/gender transcendent mermaid Queen-King” by [deleted] in GenderCritical
no one cares about this. virtue signaling is more important than saving lives by keeping violent felons behind bars.
Someone said "let's not just talk about TRA's all the time." Can we finally talk about this? Or are we still too afraid of this, too? by vitunrotta in GenderCritical
Late but like I said, femininity is ritualized submission. What we consider 'feminine' traits are literally just submissive, socialized traits. There is no such thing as 'good' femininity unless you think women should be oppressed.
Late response but I'm saying that "GC subs" both here and on reddit after the sub reached 15-20k people were never really 'radical feminist' subs to begin with. I know they are based in radical feminist ideals, but in practice, many or even most of the posters are not radical feminists, and mods/regular users frequently encouraged women to join GC who were not radical feminists.
Did I ever say radfems should be silent about how bad Islam is? I simply said women who are religious shouldn't be banned from participating, since there is no requirement that one be a radical feminist to participate here.
Nice dig at people with serious illnesses there.
I'd also like to see evidence for this :)
And the converse - treating women like they are automatically healthy because they are NOT fat - is a serious problem as well. When I started gaining weight due to multiple serious illnesses, I went to dozens of doctors to talk about what was happening to my body and without exception was told to stop worrying because I "look fine." The fact I threw up all food and even water and tea on the regular and gained 50% of my bodyweight in a couple months didn't matter to doctors because the metric we REALLY use for whether young women are "unhealthy" enough to need a health intervention is whether they look pleasing, not whether they are well. By the time I had become morbidly obese after years of begging doctors for tests, I was finally taken seriously and diagnosed - but haha too late, now I'm informed it is basically impossible to lose most of the weight back, and the damage to my joints, organs, etc. is already done.
Luckily I may be in the tiny minority of people who can lose and keep off weight, no thanks to the doctors who tortured me for years because I looked 'hot', but most women don't have the science credentials I do to leverage against their healthcare providers or trawl the scientific literature for solutions on their own.
I think you're onto something with the youth.
But it would be good if more older fat people also got on board with trying to improve their health despite their weight. Maybe if people stopped stigmatizing the idea so much...
HAES is not a science denial movement and is heavily scientifically supported. It was started by a group of obesity researchers with MDs and PhDs and is increasingly gaining traction with more and more researchers and clinicians. The "overlap" between HAES and trans activism may simply be that young people are more likely to be aware of/involved in both than older people, who either no longer care about getting healthier or aren't following new scientific and social developments.
may be worth considering who is acting like a narc in this situation. what is with the entitlement to other people's bodies?
imagine thinking that it makes sense to "tell fat people they are wrong" for being fat and wanting to eat healthy/exercise. lmfao.
there is no connection. fat people wanting to be treated like human beings and trying to improve their health has no parallel whatsoever in men wanting to be treated not LIKE HUMAN BEINGS but specifically like women and for taxpayers to pay for the further destruction of their healthy bodies.
the posts on the old GC subreddit about this were equally bigoted and idiotic. just admit that you want there to be at least one socially acceptable group to punch down on and give it a rest.
i'm a former model and fat due to a hormonal disorder that affects exclusively women (made worse by rape PTSD which is one of the main causes of weight gain in women) and i've been a lifelong serious/competitive athlete at a level most women can't even imagine. the idea that fat women have 'never played sports' is stupid enough without the addition of your attempt to stigmatize fat women getting active and STARTING TO PLAY SPORTS which is what HAES promotes.
thanks for your patience in explaining this. the one thing you can rely upon with anti-HAES people is that they have absolutely no idea what HAES is or promotes. just another excuse to hate unfortunate people for something that is largely outside of their control and vilify them for actually pursuing an improved life. people getting angry about people following HAES reminds me of TRAs getting angry at detransitioners who have accepted what they cannot change and started making positive changes in their lives. "no, stay miserable and self hating forever!" most people don't even realize how deeply their concern trolling about fat people reflects a deep desire to feel superior to other people rather than any genuine concern for their health or well-being.
What is in it for women? by fuckupaddams in GenderCritical
sucking up to men has always made life easier for women, the physically weaker and more vulnerable, oppressed sex. And then they have to resolve their cognitive dissonance about it by genuinely convincing themselves they have those beliefs.
I think radical feminism is a radical movement, but my impression of "gender critical" both on reddit and here is more that it is a discussion space which centers the tenets of radical feminism, not that it is a space exclusively for radical feminists. I'd be interested in such a space but I always viewed GC as being more of an anti-censorship women's sub than a strictly radfem sub.
That's why I don't have a problem with women participating who aren't knowledgeable about radical feminism, as long as they are participating broadly following the sub culture and rules.
TBH I'm not on here much because I'm busy. But I will when I have the time to.
Gender criticism inherently rejects the idea of inherent "femininity" and "masculinity" so yeah, I have no room for strong "feminine" women since all femininity is is ritualized submission. That is a basic tenet of gender criticism. You aren't gender critical at all if you believe in pseudo-religious woo like inherent femininity or "strong" femininity i.e. submissiveness.
I just think of myself as having a personality and don't link my personality traits to patriarchal concepts like femininity, you should try it sometime. All women are biologically similar and temperamentally/characteristically unique human beings with their own preferences and traits.
Unfortunately I think you're right, but I also feel like GC spaces should accommodate some level of "moral impurity" on feminist issues to really reach/help liberate the most women. It takes some women a long time to even start to understand their intrinsic worth as human beings and I don't want to discourage any woman from reading/participating here unless she is being abusive/misogynistic herself in her comments.
I think anyone is "allowed" on this forum pretty much, as long as you're not misogynistic/promoting abuse of women etc. But you probably just have to be able to tolerate reading people be rude about your religion. I don't think there's anything wrong with people expressing vitriol against Islam, personally, but I get that it makes religious people uncomfortable to have their beliefs questioned. It's good to learn to live with that discomfort in order to have honest conversations.
If you can't handle hearing insults to your religion because it supersedes your respect for other women and their rights, maybe you don't really care very much about women's rights. Most religions are highly misogynistic and patriarchal, but not every woman is going to have the same negative or positive experiences of any given religion. You may find it difficult, but if you care about having integrity as a human being, it's worth confronting why your religion is so horrible and harmful for so many people, and whether you are complicit in that by practicing and defending it. Do you just excuse parts of your religious text and dogma and practice that denigrate other human beings because you feel they can be ignored, because you feel like it's just an old book, or because you actually think denigrating other human beings is OK? Or have you just had a much different experience of that religion than people in other countries, families or sects?
I can't answer these questions for you but they're worth asking yourself, in my opinion. It's up to you what you do. This shouldn't be a space where women have to shut up about women's issues to prevent offense to others, though - that's why we ended up here after being kicked off reddit.
Men's Health magazine. How to choke a woman. I don't want to live on this planet. by our_team_is_winning in GenderCritical
Not a funny joke.
Well, actually having a man choke you without asking literally is trauma and abuse. So yes, all the women who have experienced this have been the victims of it.
[–]OrneryStruggle 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
It's disgusting that you're saying something like this on a feminist forum. Preteens very rarely knowingly "seek out" companionship with abusers. You don't know someone is an abuser by looking at them. Jesus what a disgusting thing to say.
Go ahead and blame all the people who for decades have been eating breads, cereals and low fat yogurts for now having weight and hormone issues because the government, scientists, and society at large lied about what healthy food was for half a century.
Or maybe don't and realize that people don't just come out of the womb knowing everything there is to know and equipped with the tools to stand up to society, culture, and larger/stronger human beings (aka the boys/men choking these girls/women, who might get hurt even worse if they fight back).
A lot of the time they're not really 'partaking in strangulation for the kicks.' When I was a teenager a guy kissed me for a few minutes/seconds maybe and immediately choked me without warning after starting to kiss. I wasn't exactly able to say anything about it because I was shocked and also being choked, obviously. I didn't continue seeing that guy after that, but he did it so casually I thought I was the weird one for not feeling OK with it. I told a female friend afterwards and she laughed and acted like it was normal. It took a few months to admit to myself that it wasn't, and by that time I was no longer in contact with the man in question.
I don't think it makes sense to blame the teenage girls who are being made to believe this is as normal as hugging or kissing.
Apparently not stripping in front of TIMs is "transphobic". I never thought that they'd come up with something more rapey than the "cotton ceiling", but here we are. by justradfemthings in GenderCritical
This is a very good point that doesn't get made often enough and thank you for reminding me of it. I think we often miss this rebuttal because things like this are so creepy and wrong on their face the first reaction is just horror, but there is also a deep hypocrisy happening in TRA movements where women are asked to feel increasing shame around our bodies for the benefit of TIMs while TIMs also expect women to be increasingly comfortable with dicks, talk about dicks, etc. Both, they claim, are for their own validation or acceptance in society, but this only makes sense in a context where males are the only people who matter.
I’m so sick of unequal comparisons between women and men on reddit by Confuzzled in GenderCritical
I think it is/can be both but I see the "grow up" meaning more in my personal life than the "don't be so feminine" meaning. There is even a phrase a lot of people use (mostly women), "woman up," which also means "grow up" rather than "don't be masculine."
Yeah, the key difference is that telling someone to "man up" is telling them to do (male stereotypical thing with positive connotations) thus further associating maleness/manliness with good things. Telling women to get back in the kitchen is the opposite - it is telling them to stop doing positive things with positive associations and know their place.
I don't know why men are so prone to whining that they are inherently associated with good things and told to do those good things or display those good traits. Obviously I don't agree that these stereotypes are good ones, but being on the positive stereotype side is generally positive for the people who are on the right side of it. Men complaining about being told to man up are essentially complaining about being called woman-like, which they interpret as inherently bad. It's still an insult against women (or boys - I think a common interpretation of the phrase 'man up' is similar to 'grow up' where the implication is that someone is acting immature/childlike and should act more adult).
I see. I normally don't pay much attention to usernames in the threads and it's not clearly marked who the OP is like it was on reddit, so it gets confusing.
I actually feel like this community has gotten less interested in normal women's rights discussions over time.
Seems like you are not "gender critical" at all.
I don't get what you mean by "finally" - this was discussed frequently on the old GC.
A blue check saying that WOC are masculine so it is RACIST to believe transwomen are not women and only RACISTS feel that way... This makes me feel amazing as a black woman! by throwawayfuckreddit in GenderCritical
LOL woke people I know started saying black women are ~not really women or ~not feminine thus transwomen are women way back, like 5 or more years ago, and I was absolutely shocked that it was apparently now acceptable and encouraged to say something so racist. Now it's just standard leftist rhetoric. Remember when everyone was saying Serena Williams looks male? Because she has defined shoulders? LMFAO imagine being that racist.
The infuriating rise of anti science behavior in every corner of society. by Bogos in GenderCritical
So in an editorial they affirmed they "could" reduce the spread.
But what's the actual evidence that coverings help prevent people from spreading the virus? They don't link to any. CIDRAP and Oxford CEBM both are clear that there is no evidence.
The JAMA study is currently subject to calls for retraction by dozens of scientists as it's just a modelling study by a couple of computer scientists with no background in bio, physics, virology or epidemiology and its methods don't pass muster even to the untrained eye.
The fact that two hairstylists didn't give COVID to their customers is what we call an "anecdote" and not a study at all. Most people who are in contact with COVID-positive people don't get COVID, even when they live with those people.
How do you really feel about Joe Biden saying his VP pick will be a black woman? by medium_tomato in GenderCritical
I hate communism too as I'm from a post-communist country but even my relatives who lived through brutal communist regimes are pretty down with SOME of the social programs implemented during communist rule which have remained, and miss others which have walked back. The society seems to be more communal and cohesive too even if that cohesion is often based on negativity and suspicion toward governments and government diktats, so I find it kind of strange that Americans who didn't even experience the brutal aspects of communism are so allergic to mildly "socialist" programs.
Why is it that Americans don't want what the rest of the developed world has and celebrates?
This seems to go a lot deeper than individual politicians or even parties (democrats don't support M4A either, generally speaking - the party certainly doesn't) but it's such a weird anachronism.
I don't know what you think tokenism is if old white racist pedophilic molester Biden "picking" a black woman for VP isn't tokenism.
The problem is that other people who don't get their jobs based on merit at least give the impression that they did. When people see women getting positions BECAUSE they are women it undercuts all the women getting those positions "normally" (even if the normal way is nepotism etc.) in the eyes of the public and discourages girls from trying to actually achieve things in the future.
I know this is not a popular opinion among radfems but I don't like the implications of wanting to select a female politician from available female candidates simply because she is female. I don't think it will be good for women in the long run.
I also think that whoever Biden picks as VP is likely to be barely more competent than Biden himself, which will be an optics disaster if it ends up being a minority woman. No one remotely intelligent would be associating themselves with Biden.
the role of yaoi/anime bL in the “gay” tif (specifically tumblr/twt) community by gencritcurious in GenderCritical
Does anyone remember mpreg? When I was a teen a lot of my friends in school who grew up to be trans men/enbies were really into mpreg fictions and stories. At the time I was completely baffled that the "mpreg" genre even existed but now looking back it's obvious that m/m fanfictions and comics weren't really about or for men at all and that's why the male characters got pregnant in so many of the popular stories.
They do not very significantly lower the spread of sars-cov-2 or any other virus.
The CDC does not have any evidence, which is why the page you linked me contains exactly zero sources actually providing evidence for masks lowering viral spread. Nice try though. Maybe read things before you send them to other people as 'sources' first, next time.
Anyway there is no reason to try to lower the spread of a virus that is not even at epidemic levels anywhere in the anglosphere anymore and which is approximately as dangerous as the common flu. It's over already. Masking people in July after there is no longer an epidemic is peak security theatre but ironically universal masking is actually dangerous for a significant portion of the population who happen to be the people everyone keeps talking about "protecting."
JK Rowling book sales unaffected by transgender views row by RadioSilence in GenderCritical
TBH I'm glad she spoke out but I really don't think she desperately needs more money right now and I don't think the HP books were that good... I feel like there's better ways to contribute to feminist activism than making an almost-billionaire even richer with multiple purchases of the same physical books. She's far less vulnerable than 99.9% of other women who share her views but might need the support more.
I believe there's a divide between radfems and gender critics who aren't necessarily radfem by [deleted] in GenderCritical
I don't really call myself anything but while in radfem spaces I try to align myself with radfem stances as much as possible. That is, if there's ideas I have that are not really in agreement with radical feminist politics, I tend to keep them to myself in radical feminist spaces.
I have stopped wanting to label myself as part of any political/ideological group in recent months since I think there's a lot of purity testing and expectations of conformity that go along with that basically always. I don't want to delimit my beliefs in that way since I'm reasonably young and they're frequently changing. I'm here because I support women and women's liberation generally and I am pretty incensed by the censorship of r/GC, although it was grating to me in the last year or so and I had stopped posting there for the most part.
From the study you linked:
"It is important to note that in the realistic situation of masks worn on the face without elastomeric gasket fittings (such as the commonly available cloth and surgical masks), the presence of gaps between the mask and the facial contours will result in “leakage” reducing the effectiveness of the masks. "
The study goes on to say that there is a huge drop in efficacy if even 1% of the air leaks - but of course, much more than 1% of air leaks when a real mask is being worn. They also note "Opportunities for future studies include cloth mask design for better “fit” and the role of factors such as humidity (arising from exhalation) and the role of repeated use and washing of cloth masks. "
So essentially, this study is saying exactly what I just said.
CIDRAP, the CDC, the WHO, the Oxford center for Evidence Based Medicine and others have all failed to find any evidence whatsoever that cloth masks and even, most likely, surgical masks would reduce viral transmission during this pandemic, so IDK what you think you know more than all the scientists working at all those agencies but this article ain't it.
Personality Disorders and Personality Profiles in a Sample of Transgender Individuals Requesting Gender-Affirming Treatments by _UngodlyFruit_ in GenderCritical
Yeah and what those other people have is opposite-sexed bodies, in the case of trans people.
It is something that is documented, so whether you "see it" or not is besides the point
You just said people with NPD do not become envious of other people because they think they're already perfect. I said that you are clinically speaking wrong.
TRAs were angry when r/gendercritical existed. Now they're mad s/gendercritical exists. It's almost like banning subs doesn't delete people from existence by [deleted] in GenderCritical
[–]OrneryStruggle 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
I think it's basically malpractice to respond affirmatively to suicide threats, as a mental health professional or other health professional, but what do I know.
I think a lot of younger people who are "interested in psychology" grow up loving the DSM because it is like a book about video game character types, like the DnD chaotic evil/lawful neutral types and a lot of confused teens love that sort of cut-and-dry sorting of people/personalities into bins that explain their behaviour. And when so many of the people who are interested in psychology have psychological problems themselves, a lot of the people most interested in the DSM are also those to whom it most applies.
Obviously for the people WRITING the DSM, it is a money-making business, and many of the people on DSM committees even admit that the process is highly flawed and unscientific, but try telling someone who has treated it like a bible since they were 13.
Creepy support of pedo organization by twitter by [deleted] in GenderCritical
I don't recall when exactly, but if you read their TOS/rules it's actually explicit in the rules. They have a specific section of their rules that's all about which pedophilia content is allowed.
But women are not allowed to call TIMs by male pronouns or they will have their accounts deleted.
[–]OrneryStruggle 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
And not only are their delusions being treated as reality, they are getting what they want out of uttering threats. Normally if a mentally unwell person threatens to kill themselves in front of a mental health professional or medical professional, that person is responsible for institutionalizing them until the threat has passed, not giving them stuff they want.
SOURCE WARNING (conservative): Antifa anarchist brags about his "female penis" on Reddit by WrongToy in GenderCritical
The BLM organization itself is a TRA organization (read their about on their website), and antifa is similar in that regard although they have the cover of "not being organized" (they are). Antifa definitely does operate as a terrorist org even if a lot of the hangers-on to antifa are just regular kids who care about social justice.
It is pretty par for the course for people with sinister motives to hijack or seek cover under organizations that 1. promote anonymity during violent altercations, 2. get a lot of funding to "disrupt" society in various ways, 3. don't have official leaders participating in/leading protests and thus make it hard to hold anyone accountable for the actions of the group.
Wait, Evergreen doesn't have a grading system? Then how could people go on to grad or professional school?
But yeah, I had internet friends back in the day who went to Reed and I think they were all trans and had multiple mental disorders, I think they had dorm assignments based on interests and stuff like that. I think HP fans wanted to go there because they thought it was like Hogwarts.
Giggle app moves to become female only after feedback. If TiMs are reported they will be removed. by jet199 in GenderCritical
So is there an algorithm for that?
No, NPD is indeed common in trans people. One of the clinical indicators for NPD is actually envy.
I mean, Twitter did literally go out of their way to change their policies to explicitly allow pedophilia talk and communities on their platform, and yes, many of those people are TRAs pretty publicly. It's hard to deny at this point.
Anybody else encountered TRAs and their allies claiming no one sees anyone naked in a locker room? by NDG in GenderCritical
LOL this. They are NEETS who haven't seen sun in years.
Hysteric in this context is an adjective, how can it be a slur?
Aerosols are not and cannot be stopped by masks.
Only droplets (which are not the same thing as aerosols) would be, and only by certain kinds of masks, and only for a short time before the mask has to be thrown out.
It is scientific ignorance to think you can "control" a virus.
The people acting like real scientific criticisms of politically-motivated public policy are "anti-science" are the real scientific illiterates here.
And nah, it's actually disabled and chronically ill people with serious conditions who are being harmed by this security theater, the lack of access to medical care was bad enough but the mask hysteria is adding insult to injury. It is vulnerable people who are harmed by these political ploys, actually.
You can choose to drive or not. Driving is not a basic right in any society. When you drive you agree to conform to rules that, when conformed to, maintain your driving privileges. This is not the same as impinging on people's basic rights to exist in a free society.
You are entirely correct that masks are just safety theater to make people feel safer and calmer and like they are "doing something."
I am also sick of being asked to make my chronically ill ass sicker so that other people feel like they have control over nature.
Yes, stopping the spray of saliva and mucus when you cough or sneeze (i.e., are having a symptom of illness) prevents the spread of symptomatic illness. Your elbow also is not porous.
This does not at all translate to "common knowledge" that masks reduce the spread of respiratory diseases. In fact there is basically no high quality evidence of any kind that masks reduce the spread of respiratory diseases, ESPECIALLY in asymptomatic people who likely cannot spread them at all. If there were any such evidence someone would have produced and acknowledged it already, but no one appears to be able to find any.
You are entirely wrong that any gathered data suggests sarscov2 is spread by asymptomatic people. No such data exists.
[–]OrneryStruggle 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
Where's that conclusive proof then? You must have heard of it before the WHO did.
Countries making masks mandatory when COVID-19 is no longer an epidemic there and in the middle of non-flu season is just hilarious security theater to make it seem like politicians are doing something to "keep people safe" when they're actually safe because the epidemic is over.
You responded to an actual peer reviewed study with thousands of participants with a press release about a correlation that most likely is NOT causally related, lmao. This in no way proves masks "work" and it certainly doesn't prove that cloth masks work.
Medical N95 masks (the ones that have some plausible/somewhat evidenced efficacy) are impossible or difficult to purchase for most regular people right now, you need to be trained how to wear them and have them fitted, and they reduce blood oxygen levels which can result in things like road accidents when people pass out wearing them.
I tried some alternative therapies for some of my health issues which actually had a good track record of showing efficacy in clinical trials - a lot of medications that actually work are only "naturopathic" because they are natural and thus can be sold OTC without a script, but can do similar things to drugs on the market. Ephedra is one example from Chinese medicine. For a lot of women with weird health issues no one knows how to treat, this makes naturopathic medicines attractive I think BECAUSE it is all OTC and doesn't require a prescription, and therefore self-medication is possible.
They actually did help (I had a very clearly quantifiable symptom which resolved almost immediately upon starting them), and my GP ended up telling me to keep it up, so it's not even like doctors don't accept "alternative" therapies at times. I had a specialist actually recommend an OTC "natural" medicine for a symptom once.
To be fair most contemporary psychology research is actually biology research, and involves stuff like staining brain slices, genetically engineering rats to have cancer to measure their hormone levels, etc.
But the woo-woo "personality psychology" and clinical psych fields are... a mess. Anything to do with the DSM in particular is politicking all the way through.