All: Is autogynephilia normal in natal women?

adungitit · 2021-05-30T19:56:00+00:00

It baffles me why theory of this isn't banned - he constantly engages in textbook male derailing, bioessentialist wanking and the whole male-idiot-act where he asks for people to explain feminism 101 to him over and over and over again, and then quickly changes the topic with unrelated (but always identical and previously answered) questions when his wanking gets called out. Like, are the mods THAT stupid or inexperienced (or both) that they don't recognise textbook male trolling when they see it or is this another attempt to suck up to conservatives or what? Seriously - you've got a man who isn't even trans or QT wanking out answers to questions about female sexuality and telling women that they're actually biologically attracted to alpha chads, and the mods are like "seems legit".

adungitit · 2021-05-14T12:32:12+00:00

Comfort, dignity and not feeling afraid is already enough argument for single sex spaces.

Comfort? Dignity? These are extremely subjective. Tons of people feel discomfort around homosexuals in their spaces, and for good reason: people want to avoid sexually titillating someone whose sexual attraction they do not want to invite or be a part of. And yet we all still change together. Men could theoretically achieve the same status if they didn't consistently show they can't behave like human beings around women and compromise their safety.

just named reasons should be already enough.

Your reasons are based in harassment and fear of violence. You've provided no other reasons, and yet you claimed others exist.

Sports are single-sex as well

This is due to fairness. Fairness in competition has nothing to do with changing or peeing near other people.

adungitit · 2021-05-14T09:02:37+00:00

Young girls with first periods are fine changing pads when other girls are present in public bathroom. But would not be fine in unisex one.

Why not? And no, just saying "I don't wanna" isn't good enough.

in recent Kenya report...

🙄 Irrelevant. We are obviously talking about a reality where women/girls would not have to put up with harassment from men/boys all their life. Having mixed spaces makes no sense under the patriarchy because sexed spaces exist to protect female people from male harassment. This point has been stated so why do we have to go over it again?

adungitit · 2021-05-14T08:59:43+00:00

Everything this person says on this sub contradicts their claim to not “reify gender norms”.

Which is the whole point. If their views contradict each other, that's the real problem.

I’m not talking about trans people as a whole, I’m talking about this person in particular.

So it's just irrelevant personal drama with a single individual and not something indicative of emulated widespread problematic behaviour?

Also:

They have not ever said anything about transition being wrong or that they were pressured into anything

they themselves go on to acknowledge that they “pass” and lie on legal documents because it’s safer for them-

adungitit · 2021-05-14T08:30:00+00:00

Why should women specifically have the right to privacy from men, but not from other women? That doesn't make sense. If you remove the safety aspect, gendered spaces indeed lose meaning. Just saying "I don't want men around because yucky" is not good enough reason .

adungitit · 2021-07-08T14:09:26+00:00

Dysphoria is like any other medical condition.

Being convinced that a perfectly normal body is "wrong" based on literally nothing isn't "just like any other medical condition". The idea of "gender" as some kind of a soul compelling you to get plastic surgeries and amputations as well as hormones not meant for your body, and demanding that this be treated as factual to the point of science having to adapt to it despite contrary evidence and women's human rights having to be sacrificed for it is similar to a religion. It also relies on (in many ways similarly religious) patriarchal ideas that are objectively damaging to society.

Transition treats it.

Clearly not, since it still requires everyone around them to lie that the trans person is something they're not, or else the trans person gets a mental breakdown. Transition might make it easier to fool people into believing a lie, but successfully making someone or even most people believe a lie doesn't make it true (again, similar to religion), hence why trans people are in constant fear of the truth coming out. Ultimately they themselves don't seem to believe in what they preach because reality simply doesn't allow for magical sex transformations, and that's a hard pill to swallow when you have a mental illness telling you you should be something that you biologically simply can't. And the fact that you can't isn't the fault of feminists, or the medical community, or society not wanting to use one's preferred pronouns. No-one is to blame for reality being the way it is.

Being called a man is a deeply insulting term to me.

So is calling God's name in vain for many Christians. Things being insulting to someone does not make them wrong solely on that one basis, otherwise we'd still be arguing over whether the Earth is spherical or whether evolution exists.

it isn’t a religious question. At most it’s a semantic one.

Some Christians have tried to make evolution seem like it's all about semantics. At some point, though, no amount of mental gymnastics can turn reality into something that goes contrary to observation. If it is your religious belief that a man is a woman because he says so, I will reject that and go with the biological reality that has been understood and scientifically studied for a very long time.

adungitit · 2021-07-08T12:35:51+00:00

Penis. You are refusing to do things with male bodies and male genitalia literally for no reason other than them being on a trans person. You are a transphobe. How do you justify this to yourself and your community?

adungitit · 2021-05-30T23:58:13+00:00

And this is the third thread you've doing that in the past days.

More like the only thing he's ever written in years on this sub. This isn't some new commenting trend on his part, he's been trying to derail feminist debates to his fetish for "bioessentialism" for probably as long as he's had an account. There is nothing that a typical misogynistic bioessentialist man who isn't even trans/QT can contribute to a feminist space, which is why his entire modus operandi revolves around constant derailing, idiot-acts and useless "As a male, I think..." wanking.

adungitit · 2021-05-30T23:55:51+00:00

How many times has he been told to create his own threads? How many threads did he actually make? And if he's learned that making threads is what you should do if you want to debate, why is he still derailing everything to his bioessentialist wanking and getting amnesia afterwards?

adungitit · 2021-05-30T19:44:34+00:00

Women are brainwashed to think of themselves as objects and to view themselves through male lens, because this is the only way in which they are allowed to experience sexuality. To not engage in this means to disappoint the male partner and fail at sex (which is equated with the male gaze and male sexual desires) and also to lose your only worth as a woman, the only thing you can actually be valued for because you're automatically seen as a failure at everything else. Women are attracted to the idea of not being rejected by society, which is why they entertain patriarchal ideas about themselves as objects. When a woman feels so insecure in herself that she dare not even leave the house for a few minutes without a face full of makeup, that's a result of her not wanting to feel like garbage by society telling her she has no worth as a normal human being (because if she were a normal human being, she'd be a man). This is entirely different from actually being attracted to the idea that she's a subhuman. Men on the other hand don't think about the women they're attracted to at all beyond what other men's fantasies tell them, and this does play into the idea of women as literal subhumans.

Men perceive women as objects first, humans second. For women, that is by necessity reversed.

adungitit · 2021-05-26T08:07:54+00:00

now that gay men are being told they're bigots if they don't want to eat or fuck "boi pussy" and the like

Just to clarify, "boi pussy" has been a common term for anuses in the gay community way before trans issues took centre stage, as part of emulating misogyny.

adungitit · 2021-05-26T06:53:57+00:00

How I describe a male I want to date or myself is context dependent.

So, you're relying on sexist descriptions that are going to be understood in a sexist society. And you see no problem with that?

I assume you've never studied a non-germanic language

I am literally not a native English speaker, and I speak a gendered language. Just because I won't lie through my teeth and pretend that sexism isn't sexist doesn't mean I'm ignorant of other languages. Also, your whole "non-germanic" thing betrays your ignorance - grammatical gender is a common feature of Germanic languages, it's just that English did away with that (and lots of other Germanic characteristics).

Some Asian languages have a rule about how you address yourself depending on your sex (e.g. in Japanese, you're either allowed to say "watashi" or "boku" depending on the sex when speaking formally)

lol congrats on having watched anime at some time, truly your linguistic understanding is off the charts with that. None of this addresses the fact that gendered languages exist and inevitably work in favour of men.

They're just rules for people to address themselves or to address other topics, nothing more, nothing less.

And sexism is supposed to be ok because it's "in the rules"?

by some feminist logic, I should be offended and change some ancient rule in speaking.

I don't give a crap that misogyny is "ancient" or "traditional" or "in the rules". It was "in the rules" that women can't vote. It was "tradition" to kidnap your wife. Ancient rules never cared about women.

Some of them maybe are borne out of sexism, but that does not mean the user is going to be sexist because of them.

No, it means that language is normalising and furthering misogynistic views among people.

You're not going to fix anything by trying to change the language

You're just not going to exclude half the population from a ton of professions and humanity itself by virtue of being female. Seems like a good deal to me.

To not follow these language rules would be utter disrespect to the culture

I don't give a crap about how normalised misogyny is in a certain cultures. Misogynistic cultures can go fuck themselves just like misogynistic religions and other human inventions.

and actually make things harder to communicate with other users of their respective languages across different generations (to people from current to past generations).

I don't give a crap about old people wanting to preserve outdated sexist norms. Language changes literally all the time and people did not forget how to speak just because the language became different. You keep trying to appeal to tradition, despite said tradition always being sexist as fuck and demonstrating throughout centuries that it did not care about women.

It's like how people get offended when you call a female police officer "policeman" thinking that changes anything

It does. Not having "men" literally in the name of the profession is not excluding every woman in the profession by virtue of being female, and sending a message to every girl and woman that she's an aberration, an exception, a stranger in something distinctly male.

you should educate the populace by showing that there are female police who can do the job.

OR you could stop putting "man" into the word signifying the profession, instead of trying to convince people that female exceptions can happen too in something reserved for men.

majority of policemen are male and if you want to knock it out of the local culture's psyche that "policemen = male"

While there are practical reasons for men overwhelmingly being police officers, your argument claims that something being male-dominated justifies it being treated as exclusively male, failing to consider that maybe it's male-dominated because it's treated as exclusively male even down to the word itself.

What many feminists do not understand that if they force a change in language, they're ironically making people focus on the sex of the person by labelling them differently.

So, literally putting "man" in a word for "police officer" is not focusing on the sex at all...but removing the gendered word or saying "woman" is focusing on the sex?

The fact that people don't even perceive "man" as gendered, but suddenly hyperfocus on anything that even suggests a woman is a result of androcentrism, and it goes way beyond language. It's even apparent in medicine, where men are overwhelmingly used in studies, leading to ignorance of some facets of female biology. "Man" being equated with "human", while women are excluded as aberrations is the norm in most societies, because excluding and disregarding women has been so normalised through this "tradition" you keep mentioning.

I need them to remember I'm a "policeman"

So...it's important of everyone to remember you are a male police officer, but if you say you're a female police officer, then suddenly you're making it about gender and all your credibility disappears.

who's job is to enforce the law and should be treated like any other police officer.

Because "policewomen" couldn't enforce the law or be treated like other police officers unless she was treated as literally male?

Also, feminism advocates "police officer" instead of "policeman".

If there's anything I care about, it's the cultural attitudes and the methodology to counter them

Right. Normalised misogyny and androcentrism aren't problems, the ReaL PrObLeM is actually trying to counter them.

it detracts from the original purpose of the worker, they're there to do a job

We do not live in a meritocracy. Men constantly benefit from sexist norms which characterise women as objects for their amusement/lust and themselves as competent and worldly. Stereotypes, language and presentation all play into that. And given how hostile male communities are towards women, no, they're not there to "just do a job".
The fact that literally the same exact thing (gendering words) makes us "hyperfocus" on the woman, but treat the man completely neutrally is a problem, not some cute linguistic feature. In fact, even de-gendering words is seen as "focusing on the gender", anything that challenges the masculine norm is seen as "hyperfocusing on the gender", because men are seen as the norm, and women as aberrations.

adungitit · 2021-05-19T01:02:00+00:00

And how the actual f*** having pronouns that indicate the sex of someone is sexist or misogynist?!!!!!

It serves literally no purpose than to needlessly separate the language that the sexes can use, and this is always in favour of men. These languages are always androcentric, and the indoctrination that men are human and women are subhuman starts early.

adungitit · 2021-05-15T10:34:08+00:00

it seems like there's a lack of empathy on the part of transwomen in these scenarios

There is as much empathy in them as there is in your average man. It is indeed a lack of empathy, but a normal and expected one.

it seems like there's a lack of empathy on the part of transwomen in these scenarios

They think the same about women. Because women do not want to give up their hard-won rights and go against their better judgement and safety measures when it comes to male trans people, they are labelled as cruel and inconsiderate. The exact same approach is visible in the reaction to feminism in general: the fact that women push for their rights and reject misogynistic norms that men want to keep in place is constantly characterised as hateful, misandrist and supremacist. This has been the normal reaction for as long as feminism has existed. Appeals for women to centre everyone's needs but women's and to deal with being dehumanised and subjugated because "men will feel bad otherwise :,(" have always been a part of the patriarchy, because women exist as secondary characters for the benefit of someone more important and more human.

adungitit · 2021-05-14T14:51:45+00:00

Wow, you actually said something instead of pathetically trying to worm out of your own words. Still didn't actually clarify what you were supposed to, but hey, we're getting there. Actually probably not. I doubt you'll be able to go beyond repeating "buh dick says girls like Chads".

Your claim is femininity is bad and a construction of the patriarchy.

It...objectively is? Women are not born in high heels and dresses. Hell, those things weren't even associated with women until relatively recently. More and more women are wearing "masculine" clothing, more and more are taking on "masculine" responsibilities that have always been denied to them. Men are whining about this the same as always and jerking each other off about how incapable women are and how much happier they were or would be back by their masters' feet, and women are trying to coddle their egos by promising that they can still be sexy for them even if they're "empowered". This has been happening even before women could vote.

Femininity and masculinity are objectively damaging for women. You can lie through your teeth that they're not, but both women's experiences and statistics speak for themselves.

I don't think that's how the majority of women view it.

Women trying to haggle with the patriarchy and compromise with the dominant class for their acceptance has always been the case, as well as men using normalised oppression of women as evidence that women like being oppressed. Women being groomed and brainwashed to accept their oppression is nothing new. Women used to accept they don't need to vote, or have careers, or go outside, or be educated, or deserve sexual satisfaction and that they deserve to be beaten and owned by their husbands. All of these have been used by men to argue that women are happy in their oppression.

I'd also add the majority of women are attracted to masculinity.

Let me guess, because romance novels? Those are getting pushed out by things like fanfics which show a variety that would never be apparent just from the stuff published based on what women should be into. Moreover, a lot of women are into "feminine" pop stars and gay men to the point of it being a joke. Women not enjoying misogynistic sex, being objectified and men pestering them to do things for male benefit is seen as an integral part of heterosexual relationships and while men indeed love it and as always insist that women do, too (with ofc infinite orgasms that they're giving them in this arrangement because they're just so good like that), most women have a different story to tell. The embarrassingly low rates of orgasm for straight (and bi) women, as well as widespread traumatic experiences tells a different story from the submissive-housewife-happy-in-her-place fairy tale. Men proclaim these as misandrist overreactions and/or just ignore them no matter how normal it is to hear them, and apply survivorship bias to any woman who's proudly stockhold-syndrome'd herself into liking the misogynistic androcentric status quo that is given to women as the only option, and avoid the masses of unhappy, neglected, anxious and traumatised women who are sick of male bullshit. This sort of wilful ignorance and lying through their teeth that men engage in for the sake of prettying up the status quo is different from women, who, even when they say things that men want them to say, are usually still either aware of or suffer from the negative impacts of the things that they're pretending to be okay with for the sake of patriarchal approval.

I don't see who you can have "good gender non conforming males" if you condemn femininity.

Most gender nonconforming male people are fetishists. They are "nonconforming" because their dicks get hard from taking on the role of inferior subhuman women. This is why misogyny is paradoxically (but actually not when you think about it) still the norm among them just like with conforming men. There is no difference between the two except what specific fetish they're jerking to (which they picked up from other men in the first place). Men do not perceive women as human beings, they perceive them as caricatures, dolls created for their entertainment, so to men, gender nonconformity has nothing to do with freeing oneself from the gender hierarchy from which they still derive their entire worldview from, and everything to do with donning a patriarchal costume, a male idea of a woman and all the inferiority contained in it. This is in stark contrast with how women do nonconformity and relate to men.

adungitit · 2021-05-13T12:19:04+00:00

the fact of your transition invalidates your arguments

This sounds a lot like "yet you participate in society". People can feel pressured to do things to improve their own quality of life and safety while also being aware of why these things are wrong and trying to raise awareness (i.e. women pressured into wearing makeup for the sake of getting and maintaining a job while advocating against makeup).

adungitit · 2021-07-08T14:33:58+00:00

lmao I come back here and you're still arguing with a generic male troll who isn't even aligned with trans activism? What's next? Debating MRAs on whether women deserve equal employment? Debating if martial rape exists? If women should vote?

It's exhausting how feminist spaces so easily take the laziest imaginable baits that should be obvious from a mile away to anyone older than yesterday. Apparently explaining why the Earth is round to the millionth generic male misogynist is more important than actually debating trans activism.

adungitit · 2021-07-08T13:42:37+00:00

Imagine that literally every person you every interact with only looks at you with pity or disdain.

I mean, being a woman who rejects femininity, I'm pretty used to being treated as a failure at anything other than making men's dicks go up. I hear talks of how subhuman women are every day, including from trans communities who are currently pushing back decades of progress women have made for the sake of their validation.

Even if we got basic equality protections, you still can’t be normal

Well, yeah, you're in a group that's getting plastic surgeries and amputations, creating an artificial hormonal imbalance and spending a lifetime on hormones not meant for your body for no reason other than having a mental illness that makes you think a healthy, normal body you have is "wrong" and "disgusting". Even the trans people recognise that passing this off as having a male or female body isn't going to pass, hence why so many progressive positions revolve not around acceptance, but tricking people that you're really the opposite sex as effectively as possible. Imagine if gay people only insisted their partners legally be treated as the opposite sex so they could feel "normal", or if women had to amputate their breasts and take testosterone to stop being treated as subhuman...Oh wait, that one's already happening.

adungitit · 2021-07-08T13:15:18+00:00

You could say the same thing about women though, couldn't you? Most men wouldn't harm them, but there are too many who would.

adungitit · 2021-07-08T13:02:23+00:00

Uh, are we really going to act like feminine men being threatened and bullied by other men is a hard pill to swallow?

adungitit · 2021-07-08T12:57:32+00:00

It’s not just comfort. It’s safety

If male trans people understood safety, they wouldn't be demanding women's spaces include men just so they'd be validated. That's the whole point. You might advocate third spaces, but the vast, vast majority of male trans people do not, which means they don't register the actual problem with men beyond the bits that specifically go against their own interests (much like how even the men who are relentlessly bullied and screwed over by other men will still always take the side of men to work against women).

adungitit · 2021-07-08T12:18:38+00:00

You can say that about any man. The point isn't that men are plagued by self-centered, sexist, misogynistic, myopic, dick-obsessed thinking. We know that, that's like, feminism 101. We don't need even more demonstrations of it from men who have nothing else to offer. The point is in how this kind of thinking is used in liberal-aligned trans communities, how they specifically try to rationalise it, how it relates to defining gender and how they can possibly make it compatible with feminism. If I just wanted to debate your average male misogynist, I'd go to a MRA debate sub, or just turn to the first man on the street.

adungitit · 2021-05-31T00:11:44+00:00

Excuse me if I find it hard to swallow that all those not-my-Nigels men are as enlightened as women wish they were, just as I find it hard to swallow that all the people saying they're "not sexist" really aren't sexist.

adungitit · 2021-05-31T00:06:12+00:00

a few other intrepid people from the other side

What "other side"? He's a typical male misogynist, except he isn't even QT or trans. What exactly does he contribute other than the most typical bioessentialist male wanking that he can't even debate because he has to derail at every opportunity?

we'd never have any debate.

Constantly trying to derail, asking to be handheld through the most basic feminist/GC concept which he then promptly ignores and gets amnesia only to repeat the same tactics again and never addressing anything that is said beyond wanking out useless non-replies isn't debate. He employs typical QT derailing tactics, except he's not even QT, so why exactly should this be tolerated? He can't tell you anything about QT or feminism or the trans worldview or gender because his entire worldview revolves around ladybrains making women attracted to alpha chads because men's dicks say so. We know men think this, which is why any feminist space that has any hopes of moving past baby's-first-women's-rights has to ban men and their endless gaslighting and derailing, otherwise you have everything halt and start revolving around trying to debate the man who's just rubbing his bros' dicks faster.

adungitit · 2021-05-30T23:55:23+00:00

Women convincing themselves that their partners "aren't as bad" tend to fool themselves, yes. The more feminist ones will be open about it at least, but still have to constantly deal with their partners' double standards and misogyny. The ones who "don't need feminism" will make jokes about how shitty living with men and having to wipe their asses is.

Does that mean that there are close to zero good men out there?

Yes. And that is not the fault of women. Women should be discouraged from dealing with men's misogyny until men get their act together.

adungitit · 2021-05-30T19:11:57+00:00

Why the difference in responses?

Because women do not abuse men like vice versa, and no amount of your brainless mantra parroting can change that. Men simply do not live in fear of women harming them. Now, are you going to lie through your teeth some more that they do or are you going to conveniently ignore this as usual when you get caught in your lie?

The university reacted immediately, even sending a police escort with him to and from campus. After transition he worked at this university and was harassed at this university by a female student he was mentoring

jfc this again...

First, LOL at "abuse of men" being targeted towards a woman.

Second, even if what you're saying were true, it's telling that you could only think of one very specific example. No statistics or anything. One event. Believe me, I can give you a helluva lot more than a few names, there are whole masses of women who have suffered from male harassment literally for centuries, to the point that they couldn't even leave their house unescorted (and still can't in many places), to the point where we literally have shelters for them because their lives are in danger, to the point no-one acts shocked when they read of yet another woman beaten and murdered by their psycho husband. I could find you instances of little children killing their own parents. Do you think that would suddenly necessitate children's rights groups switching their focus on parents being in danger of their little children, instead of vice versa?

Third, women do not present a physical threat to the man in most cases. This is due to simple physical differences in strength between the sexes. Now, women might present a threat to men with the help of a weapon (but even that is already an extreme requirement - it's much harder to subjugate someone when you have to hold a weapon and ensure you can use it at all times, vs when you can do it through sheer strength alone), but, as it turns out, women simply do not want to do this. Women do not harbour sadistic, fetishistic, violent ideas about men that tie into widespread supremacist ideas on their own gender. They simply don't. No, you lying through your teeth about this isn't going to change reality. These concepts (male strength compared to women, male supremacy being tied to misogyny and male violence, male propensity to escalate to alarming and dangerous behaviour) have been well established and are also one of those things obvious just from using your fucking eyes.

You have been given statistics before in regards to women being murdered by their intimate partners. The numbers in reverse are in single digits (and also, most of these women are actually abused by said murder victims, and I'm talking actual abuse, not just flinging insults). The chances of a woman escalating and presenting any physical danger to the man are positively miniscule. That is why you do not need a police escort from a woman, while with men, the chances of the encounter turning dangerous skyrocket because of how much damage they're capable of and willing/feel entitled to do. Women are not even in the same ballpark, which is why no-one fears female violence. Are you going to lie through your teeth about this fact, ignore it, or are you going to actually address it for a change?

Fourth, women are constantly portrayed as "crazy bitches" if they don't keep quiet and bend over backwards to accommodate others to their own detriment. Hence why feminists (mostly female) bend over backwards to accommodate men, while pretty much every male-dominated community does nothing but complain about women doing...anything, really. Hence also the double standard of trans activists getting so furious at specifically feminist women and calling for their rape and murder (you can see the same pattern with the "Karen" meme, too), while the men who actually throw slurs, beat and kill trans people get grouped in with vague "transphobes". The progressive groups know that women do not pose a threat to them and that men pose a threat to women, which is why they try to use fear and violence (sexual or otherwise) to silence them. This is also why statistics on domestic violence that claim abuse goes both ways actually rely on "mutual abuse" and "verbal abuse", but intentionally portray it in a way that will make it seem like we have a pandemic of battered men, which is quite simply a lie. So excuse me if I find it hard to swallow that the abuse the person in question received was in the same ballpark from male and female perpetuators. Also, you seem to have slipped out that the abuse they received was from a single woman while it was from multiple men - and I legit wonder, given the fact that it's a professor of gender studies, if said "woman" was even female, given that lying about a person's sex in these groups has become so commonplace.

"Abuse is not "just female related" - it happens vice verse all the time, even if it's not that visual but it hurts even more." Sure, buddy, whatever you say.. They linked to a reddit post where a man says there should be more films and shows about women abusing men

lol I love how your own example literally says that the abuse men suffer isn't "visual" i.e. physical and yet, despite this, that it "hurts more" than all the bruised, battered and murdered women who literally need shelters to save themselves from male aggressors. Also, men have vastly different standards for what counts as abuse, to the point that we have enormous male communities claiming they're oppressed because women aren't having sex with them, and who claim they're abused by "nagging wives" because they're expected to wash the dishes once in a while, stop drinking or do something other than playing videogames. But given the amount of gaslighting that liberal feminism engages in, I wouldn't be surprised if being a "nag" or "crazy bitch" was seen as a form of endearment now, or simply something that DoEsN't HaPpeN because it's "just a joke, bruh".

Ovarit mocked the OP, even saying "men actually have the expectation of being treated well" when that's not always the case, like in Trystan Cotton's case.

LMAO "There are no widespread trends or social norms, look at this one example of a single person (who's actually a woman)" Riiight.

Yet GCs say women don't abuse men

Because they don't, for reasons that have been explained to you. You have been given statistics and just basic observations of the world around you. Are you going to respond with something other than lying or ignoring anything that shows you're a liar?

Oh, speaking of:

Right, you said this before (because of course you did), and were told that this "dysphoria", "hormones" and "surgery" aren't even needed to be trans in any way, and that claiming otherwise makes you transphobic. And, of course, you conveniently disappeared, but knowing you're wrong didn't stop you from parroting the exact same thing here, and it won't stop you from parroting it elsewhere.

Any plans to address this?

Here is an article on Feminist Current titled This thing about male victims on Feminist Current making up false statistics on women abusing men.

I don't get it...You post an article with statistics, and claim they're "false" based on...what exactly? Wishful thinking?

adungitit · 2021-05-30T18:25:49+00:00

I think it's unrealistic, and sexist, to suggest that women can & should go through life without ever having a positive or loving relationship with any male person.

That's not up to the woman one bit. The vast, vast majority of men are misogynistic and hold male supremacist views. The vast, vast majority of women with said "loving relationships with men" still constantly need to deal with misogyny, double standards and being thought of as lesser. Women not being thought of as subhuman isn't seen as in any way necessary for the majority of male-female relationships, where other things are supposed to make up for that.

adungitit · 2021-05-26T09:23:25+00:00

transmen are seen more often as victims unable to really make true decisions the way male trans people do.

Uuh, yeah. Cuz they're women. Women work from within patriarchal norms that seek to subjugate them all the time. Their agency, dignity and humanity are constantly stripped from them in favour of men and they are groomed since babies to know their place in the hierarchy. The idea that the sexes freely choose the patriarchy because women just naturally enjoy being subjugated simply is not acceptable under feminism. The same argument has been used to stall and sabotage women's rights since forever.

Men are narcissistic abusers because they're rewarded for it. Women bend over backwards to accommodate them because they're punished if they don't. Male and female trans people don't act particularly different from male and female people in general.

“not like the other girls” comes up a lot, which seems to me a like a ridiculous way to talk about someone’s struggle with dysphoria

Well first of all, "not like other girls" is literally used as evidence of being trans: "I hated dresses/I played with boys/I like STEM/I hated pink". These girls mistaken their body insecurities, anxieties and dislike of objectification, which the vast majority of women have dealt with since literal childhood, as "not being women". Society, even feminism, sells the image of a feminine woman happy in her own objectification compared to a man who's just...human. Girls think there's something wrong with them if they're not indoctrinated properly because they don't feel the gender "reward" for playing into gendered expectations. They mistaken their wish to be perceived as human beings as wanting to be men, in an androcentric society that divides the sexes into "human" and "female", and assume that the feminine women, who are just as rife with the same insecurities as them, must enjoy their subjugation on some base level, when in reality they're coping with the only role that is given to them. A lot of liberal feminism tries its damnest to sell "femininity" as normal and empowering to women. "Femininity isn't actually oppressive, doing these feminine things can be liberating if you just convince yourself it is!" And ofc the girls who don't buy into that wonder what's wrong with them if they don't get enjoyment out of being treated or thinking of themselves in this way, and they do if they think of themselves in neutral terms. A lot of us know exactly how this feels, we know the self-hate and social disdain that girls go through for being female and the futility of trying to play nice with patriarchal expectations, except radical feminism has given us a way to recognise these feelings for what they are, instead of trying to legitimise them through brainsex ideas or legitimising gender roles as some form of gendersoul innate to every person.

I feel like it would really bother me if I was a transman

I'm bothered by trans people hating women (of which I am one) literally all the time, but they don't seem to mind one bit. Why should I accommodate misogynistic worldviews just because misogynists can feel bad about themselves?

adungitit · 2021-05-26T08:02:01+00:00

Because women don't support men being shit towards them. Being against the patriarchy =/= being against all male rights. Men's "rights" that oppose women's rights are not supported by women (and this goes for male trans rights as well). Your desperation to appeal to anti-feminist male myths in order to make yourself seem better to men is really sad.

It just shows one of their main goals is to be anti-trans.

I though the feminazi are all about hating the poor poor men?

adungitit · 2021-05-26T07:58:51+00:00

I agree.

And yet you claim that men become women just by virtue of saying so. How can being trans be measured and why is no-one employing this method? Seems like it'd be a helluva lot more easier than puberty blockers.

adungitit · 2021-05-19T01:45:15+00:00

So, how do the women who hate being female and who hate their bodies (of which there are a ton in our patriarchal society) fit into this? Are they trans? I have heard plenty of people say they wouldn't care if they were the opposite sex, and I'm one of those (and I would expect anyone who sees men and women as equals to say the same). Are we all trans? And how does just wanting to be something make you that in any relevant way? How does merely wishing to be something create actual experiences of a lifetime of what it's like to be and be treated as that something?

If I was born male, I would feel great distress and want to transition via hormones and surgery.

Except according to QT, there is nothing to transition to or from because the sexes aren't real, and male and female bodies/genitalia are only defined by how you perceive them. By merely seeing yourself as female, you and everything about your body would automatically be female. Your penis would be a clit, and your anus would now be a vagina. And why do you even think you'd feel distress? According to QT, you do not need gender dysphoria to be trans, and you certainly don't need to transition at all, most definitely not through surgery.

I'm wondering if you're genuinely unaware of this, or if it slipped out of you by accident.

adungitit · 2021-05-19T00:15:50+00:00

You know exactly what I meant...

Again, pronouns do not have sex. Is there something unclear about that?

Show me exactly where the f*** I advocated for moral relativism and excused the misogyny of any country.

You're whining about not wanting to change shit in Spanish because "wahwah my language, colonialist white people". I don't give a damn - misogyny is misogyny. Culture is made up bullshit that has always failed women. It gets no respect from me.

All I say was every culture, included the developed world is guilty of sexism and misogyny.

Every culture is misogynistic. The vast majority do not attempt to address this. Feminists criticising other cultures are VERY aware of sexism in their own culture. They also do not have to live in a country or speak its language to use their brains and logical thinking and recognise when misogynistic double standards are in place.

And that is was the so called western countries who came up with "sex is a spectrum" and "sex work is work" and exported it everywhere they could.

So? We are pushing back against that just as we do against any other form of misogyny.

If you think having pronouns that indicate the sex of a person (however you want to call them) is on pair with things like FGM or child marriage we're going to agree to absolutely disagree.

Very feminist to claim that anything short of FMG and child marriage simply doesn't count as misogyny.

adungitit · 2021-05-18T23:26:53+00:00

Women do not present a threat to men, or other women for that matter. Female spaces exist and were set up in the first place to protect women from male harassment and violence, hence why men cannot be allowed in them. Male safety has never been in any way compromised by women which is why male spaces don't exist for male protection nor rely on female exclusion. A woman entering male spaces is taking a risk to herself, rather than presenting a danger to men. We can criticise ideologies that convince her men are harmless and not misogynistic, or that she's safe from misogyny because she put "he/their" on her twitter bio, but that's not really addressing the issues themselves.
Female trans people occupy the same role as female people in general trying to play nice with the patriarchy to gain male respect or establish how "not like other girls" they are. Women throwing women under the bus for patriarchal approval is nothing new, even though female trans people love to think their mere existence somehow dismantles radical feminism. Ultimately, most women working against their interests do so for men's sake and approval. Remove men dominating with their misogyny and you remove women's tendency to haggle with the patriarchy as well.
Women do not have the power to affect how men are viewed or how they behave. This is due to the aforementioned power dynamic between the sexes, as well as gendered upbringing and the historical precedent behind misogynistic myths and treatment of women. Men are the ones who invade female spaces, gaslight and preach misogyny, and benefit from a lifetime of socialisation fondling their egos, making them dominate conversations, drown out women's voices, think their opinions and feelings need to be centred by women no matter how misogynistic and full of shit they are, and overall have the kind of obnoxious baseless confidence combined with the refusal to take a step back and listen to women or even consider reality without their biased male lens. Men constantly abuse society's ignorance or plain wilful stupidity over women's bodies and their experiences to push misogynistic mythology and take what they want for themselves, and they constantly abuse women's meekness and politeness for it, because women are trained to bend over backwards to accommodate men.

adungitit · 2021-05-18T22:44:37+00:00

we were talking about sexed pronouns and words like aunt.

Pronouns do not have sex (in fact, 5 out of 6 personal pronouns don't). "Women" and "men" do.

They can easily point out the sexism and misogyny of other countries, but they are oblivious about their own

The person was literally saying this should apply to languages in general. People constantly criticise the dehumanisation, exclusion, abuse etc. that women put up with in their own culture, and want women to enjoy equal rights everywhere, regardless of culture.

sexism and misogyny exists in virtually every culture.

And yet it was only modern Western countries that have made any real strides in regards to pushing back against it, way beyond any other culture so far. So, miss me with that "cultural relativism" patriarchy apologia. I don't give a damn what repetitive misogynistic crap some group of people has arbitrarily decided is going to be their "heritage" or "tradition", I give a damn about ending the patriarchy.

It was the "enligthened" and "progressive" western countries who started with the ideas of "sex is a spectrum", "TWAW", and "sex work is work" after all.

And according to your cultural relativism, any dumb shit is equally valid as long as a culture forms around it. Yeah, no thanks.

adungitit · 2021-05-18T15:07:15+00:00

why do you think it's reasonable to expect we modify our own languages just because some native English speakers find unnecssary to distinguish between the sexes?

Not the poster, but because pointless distinctions between the sexes such as third person pronouns are needlessly gendered and originate from the need to exclude women from normal life. I also want all cultures to stop pointlessly separating the sexes as well, and I really don't care how much they claim that misogyny is an integral part of their life and heritage.

Don't you think many non-English speakers would have a problem with this idea of getting rid of sex based words?

People literally always make up a stink over ending sexism. Nothing to see here.

We're a sexually dismorphic species and sex matters a lot in things like health care, safeguarding, dating, making a family, sports, etcetera. That is why we have words that indicate sex and why is important to recolect data segregated by sex.

Gendered pronouns are not needed for this. Words like "man" and "woman" are. Moreover, you can tell how unnecessary gendered pronouns are from the fact that English speakers are still perfectly capable of differentiating and speaking of men and women even outside of third person.

adungitit · 2021-05-18T13:53:20+00:00

Because it's not a MRA thing, it's a man thing, and most men believe it to some extent (even many women). Even in history classes or books you can still see women's subjugation passed off as "fatal female sexuality" or "the power that women had over rulers/husbands" and being sold the notion of "different but equal" in regards to historical marriages. I have seen even men who claim to be anti-MRA parrot these exact same myths.

adungitit · 2021-05-15T09:51:15+00:00

It is very much opinionated.

adungitit · 2021-05-14T20:26:06+00:00

placing all the onus on the persons being viewed (in your view who "titillate") and none on the viewers (who in your view are liable to be titillated at the drop of hat, or rather trou) - conveys a view of human sexual arousal and functioning that a lot of people would take issue with.

I was talking about the reason why these persons being viewed have an issue being viewed by the viewers, hence why I was talking about the feelings of the persons being viewed, rather than the viewers.

Your entire reply is pretty much the same playing-dumb act all over again despite these things already being addressed: Having mixed spaces makes no sense under the patriarchy because sexed spaces exist to protect female people from male harassment. No-one here is debating this. The thing being questioned is why sexed spaces would need to exist if this wasn't a concern.

Also, please provide some evidence for your claim that tons of people feel discomfort around homosexuals in their spaces, and for good reason: people want to avoid sexually titillating someone whose sexual attraction they do not want to invite or be a part of. And in so doing, please specify the sex, age range, place of origin & residence, religion etc of the "tons of people" you are referring to. And their sexual orientation, or rather their presumed sexual orientation.

lol

adungitit · 2021-05-14T19:49:03+00:00

I know this isn't a forum for personal beliefs

Uuh, what exactly do you think this forum is for?

adungitit · 2021-05-14T13:34:20+00:00

I have asked you this before, and (unsurprisingly) you had no answer: what "gender" is preferring Coca Cola vs Pepsi? Which one is masculine and which is feminine?

adungitit · 2021-05-14T13:31:47+00:00

I feel like women who are nonconforming like Worried and others would have an easier time. Same for nonconforming men.

If we didn't have gender, we'd all be "nonconforming". It's not just about the few outliers being able to feel normal, it's about people in general abandoning these toxic af ideals based in male supremacy.

adungitit · 2021-04-30T22:15:39+00:00

Re-read my comment. Again, ask yourself about why you do these things. When you answer it for yourself, you'll answer it for others.

adungitit · 2021-07-08T15:29:34+00:00

You mean the side you can get literally from every single man on the street? Gee, how educational. Truly a much needed perspective in any feminist space. I guess the conservative women really like hearing the same old bs and acting like it's something innovative the millionth time a man copy+pastes it.

I'm tired of having to block male trolls in feminist spaces just because conservative women want to suck up to their backwards men. This is something that mods should be taking care of, instead of letting the usual MRAs derail any discussion to holding their hand and trying to explain why women aren't subhuman, while they keep wanking their dicks.

adungitit · 2021-07-08T14:22:44+00:00

You're just demanding that people use another lie because reality is insulting to you. Male trans people aren't "neutral", nor are they cats or helicopters, or trees. They are men. They are men regardless of how many temper tantrums they throw over that, regardless of how depressed that fact makes them, regardless of whether they love it or hate it, regardless of whether they're sleeping, or awake, or juggling oranges.

You're demanding that society and even science lie about objective reality solely because certain severely mentally ill individuals find reality "insulting" and their mental healthy relies on believing in falsehoods (again, similar to religion). It's not the people with eyes and a brain recognising reality that are magically making men into men with invisible laser beams. It's simply reality being what it is. Evolution wasn't invented by atheists wanting to insult Christians. Round Earth wasn't recognised because people just hate flat-earthers so much. Vaccines aren't used because we want to insult anti-vaxxers. People don't have the gall to recognise reality because they're out to insult some group who revolve their identity around falsehoods that contradict said reality. So many trans people aren't even concerned with the fact that their beliefs are objectively false but only with how oh-so-"offended" they are by other people daring to not play along even when they need to sacrifice their rights and roll them back decades just to make them feel better.

adungitit · 2021-05-30T20:00:02+00:00

Why do you think man and woman only mean adult human male and female?

Because we do not acknowledge gendersouls. We acknowledge actual biological reality of the mammalian sex, as well as the socialisation that is imprinted onto them.

adungitit · 2021-05-30T19:31:16+00:00

Do you realise you're being transphobic with these statements? A man's vagina is a "bonus hole" and his clit is a "penis". Why are you refusing to do anything with their trans male genitalia on the basis of not being attracted to women?

adungitit · 2021-05-26T09:43:41+00:00

GC often isn't a single stable position. There are different beliefs.

These things have been stated over and over again, they're literally basic GC tenants you can see from the most cursory overview of their sub. The fact that you can constantly act stupid and amnesia-ridden and demand the same GC 101 explanations over and over again won't change reality to match your bullshitting.

Where does truly felt alienation from gender norms come from? Is it "natural" ?

You are trying to derail again. The point was that a person claiming to be alienated and tortured by gender norms didn't do jack to actually budge said gender norms and in fact worked hard to live up to said gender norms, making their claims highly unconvincing. Whether their gendersoul was compelling them to act in paradoxical ways in irrelevant.

I'm still never clear what you're idea of "good male trans people" are.

Not believing in male supremacist ideology and objectifying women would be a good start (which goes for all men). But let me guess, poor men's dicks didn't evolve for that :,(

It comes back to this issue of femininity being bad for everyone and masculine being seen as the "true natural norm."

Because femininity exists in the first place in order to be oppressive. Masculinity exists in order to maximise privileges and entitlement for men. Hence why femininity results in demonstrable widespread damage to women, and masculinity results in huge privileges for men. Because the system has caused and continues to cause immeasurable suffering for women at the hands of men, it needs to be abolished. But let me guess, "Poor men's dicks didn't evolve for that :,("

It seems to amount to "Gender will be abolished when everyone is masculine."

Right, you're still sticking to that "only masculinity and femininity exist" horseshit. Tell me again, which is feminine and which is masculine: Pepsi or Cola? Oh, you're gonna disappear again? Bye!

adungitit · 2021-05-26T08:50:02+00:00

But you essentialised masculinity to the man which is fine but that's a different argument.

No. They acknowledged that men still hold onto misogyny and masculinity even when they claim they're women. This is a tired debate that GC has had countless times already: we acknowledge masculinity and femininity as social factors that the sexes are inevitably saddled with as a result of their upbringing. This does not mean that we believe there are ladybrains and manbrains making the sexes inevitably act this way any more than we believe there are Muslim-brains or Hindu-brains making people follow religion en masse. THAT is essentialist.

A person who truly felt alienated by gender norms wouldn't go out of their way to follow them. Society does begrudgingly allow a degree of flexibility in regards to gendered presentation, but male trans people usually don't make use of that at all, because it's not about freeing yourself from gender norms, it's about imitating a caricature of inferior womanhood.

adungitit · 2021-05-26T06:59:29+00:00

Women working against their own rights in order to gain male approval has always been the norm, but at the end of the day it wouldn't be happening without patriarchal pressures. Hence why female trans people don't occupy a markedly different role in the discourse compared to other anti-feminist women trying to screw other women over.

adungitit · 2021-05-18T13:47:25+00:00

Some of them believed that they are "the best woman", because they are like "smart like man, sexy like woman, and can't get pregnant, so only positives".

I've seen it too and it makes me livid. The notion that women are privileged for something we have literally been owned as sex slaves for.

"In arabian countries and in medieval ages, men are fighting to death to get a woman, so men's life means nothing, but women's life is super valued and focused on"

This is a common argument even among self-proclaimed progressive men who ofc always need to reframe any feminist ideals as being all about making men's dicks feel better for them to care. So the notion that women have been pitting men to fight against each other for their benefit remains popular.

adungitit · 2021-05-16T08:37:40+00:00

While magical sex changes or gender never made sense to me, before knowing any trans people I used to baselessly assume that men who related to women to the point of wanting to be them would be the rare men who I could actually feel comfortable around as a human being. I also naively assumed the same thing about male feminists. What a joke that was lol! I eventually learned that even the male communities that by all logic should've moved past their misogyny (like communities for gender nonconforming men, submissive men, or men traumatised by other men and their patriarchal hierarchies) are just as misogynistic as any other male community and are still functioning according to the exact same mindset, with all their thoughts and feelings resulting from that. And the reason really is because men do not see women as human beings, so when men do these seemingly "nonconforming" things, they're not in any way doing them as a rejection of the patriarchal system, in fact they seek to re-affirm it. They see women as inferior caricatures as opposed to the actual (male) human beings. Imitating a misogynistic caricature for the sake of a fetish doesn't require you to reconsider, let alone abandon the male supremacist view the whole thing feeds off of, and it certainly doesn't require you to consider pesky things like the caricature's rights and dignity. No-one seriously thinks about Mickey Mouse's deep feelings or mouse rights when watching his cartoons or putting his costume on. That wouldn't be fun, and he exists for other people's fun. Hence why even the most progressive male communities still treat women's rights as "political" and "controversial", why the men who say they "love women" only mean they love jerking off to male-made misogynistic fantasies, why the men who notice women don't want their shitty misogynistic sex still demand women have sex with them and why male trans people can create their insular male communities where they jerk off to anime characters and porn and think this is representative of the female experience. In men's minds, imitating or desiring women is 100% divorced from women's feelings, experience, wants, thoughts etc. If a woman were human, she would be male. Since she's not, her humanity need not enter the picture and we can focus on the sexy parts that men and their supremacist system can feel validated by.

adungitit · 2021-05-15T18:24:26+00:00

I like how you're both claiming "this doesn't happen" and it the same comment talking about why it happens lol

adungitit · 2021-05-15T10:23:29+00:00

I feel like currently, the liberal approach is just to ask for acceptance for a small percentage of people who don't fit in, which is missing the point: gender itself is severely damaging to our society and that needs to change, not stay firmly in place as a norm justified with appeals to the status quo, evo psych, social preferences etc. Sure, we'll let the few "weirdos" who for some strange reason haven't been indoctrinated properly do their thing, but otherwise the system is perfectly fine as it is regardless of how much harm it causes society.

adungitit · 2021-05-15T10:18:32+00:00

I don't think anyone's ever done a study on it, but I remember it being a point of contention in sports where some straight players were uncomfortable changing around an out gay player. In a lot (in my experience most) of people's minds, the idea of being comfortable with nudity assumes a lack of sexuality in the environment. This, rather than fear of harassment, is presumed to be the reason for separating the sexes - privacy from being viewed sexually by someone whose attraction you do not want to be a part of.

adungitit · 2021-05-14T15:12:33+00:00

Gender nonconformity in general works as a way to widen norms, to make "anything is fine" as a norm.

And this has already happened: No-one bats an eye anymore at women wearing pants and unisex t-shirts. People's brains did not explode because the same shirt and pants can now be worn by both sexes. A century ago this would've been hailed as impossible because men and women are built different, their brains are different, it opposes the natural order, the matriarchy is being installed, yadda yadda...Same for literally every other bit of progress feminism has made. Like literally every single one gets the identical whiny background noise that goes centuries back.

adungitit · 2021-04-30T22:20:07+00:00

Male trans people are not interested in preserving women's rights. They are, above all, interested in validating themselves and obtaining a twisted rose-tinted view of womanhood, with amazing ideas such as sexual harassment being validating. Female trans people are, like most women, above all interested in getting male approval, even if it means throwing other women and themselves under the bus. The dynamic is old and familiar.

adungitit · 2021-04-30T21:46:04+00:00

I would have more sympathy for this whole sentiment if trans people actively advocated for their own spaces. But they don't. Instead they call it discrimination to not let men into female spaces and then pull the "I'm scared for my safety" card for pity points, while actively trying to remove women's rights because they're not as important as their validation.

adungitit · 2021-04-30T21:42:02+00:00

It would seem useless at best and harmful at worst.

The same can be said of your posts, and yet you're writing them anyways. Ask yourself why.

adungitit · 2021-08-09T19:48:38+00:00

There really is no need for sexed spaces once you remove the patriarchy. There is no basis for them. Male and female bodies being different does not translate into needing separate spaces for them.

I also don't see men being particularly self-conscious of their bodies, aside from anxieties over penis size that is more in place because of other men anyways and its association with masculinity. Men are not saddled with the beauty standards that women have their entire personhood defined by, nor is there a history of stigmatisation of their bodies. In fact, they're very loud, proud and in-your-face with their bodies and bodily functions and tend to think the universe revolves around their penises. As usual, the worst treatment men can expect in this area comes from, you guessed it, other men.

respect for boundaries has to go both ways.

Becauuuse...? Women aren't the ones with an entire history of disrespecting men's boundaries and leering at them, to the point that they couldn't even leave the house due to constant sexual harassment and assault. No, protections do not need to go both ways because protections serve to protect the people who are actually endangered.

You proceed to talk about a person's normal right to privacy, which would apply both to their female and male family members. That is different from claiming that people must have privacy specifically from the opposite sex for really no reason.

I don't think we can expect boys to grow up into men who respect girls' and women's boundaries if we don't respect their boundaries in turn

Men don't understand boundaries because they don't experience the same traumas and dangers that women experience. Men are the ones who'll tell you it'd be awesome if they were sexually assaulted, because sex still by and large revolves around their pleasure and wants, glorifies their lack of self-control and overblown sexuality, and doesn't treat them as worthless objects for someone else's one-sided sexuality in all aspects of their life.

the more guys in general are going to feel less and less compunction about entering female spaces like the women's area of Wi Spa and pulling out their dicks and waving them around in the faces of women & girls of all ages.

What a stretch. Men already don't care about that. That's why they employ such a long list of double standards to control every aspect of a woman's life, and not once do they think of how it would be if this was applied to them. They apply entirely different rules to women to excuse their shitty treatment of them. A woman walking into their spaces isn't going to make them disregard women's spaces any more than women having to cover their chests is going to make men ashamed of being topless. They might try to whine about the double standards regarding sexed spaces and how unfair towards men it is that women are abused to such an extreme that they literally need separate spaces to lead a semblance of a normal life, but they already do that.

I also believe that saying "GC doesn't care" about the rights or boundaries of males because to some GC persons the rights and boundaries of males matter less than the rights of females do, or they matter not at all, is only going to turn potential allies away from the "GC" side.

LMAO what is this libfem attitude of shedding tears over male allies feeling "alienated"? There is no feminist movement that isn't going to alienate men. None. Even liberal feminism, for all its desperation to pander to men, is still seen as a matriarchal dictatorship by them.

GC cares a lot about not alienating and hurting the feelings of its conservative cesspool, but it fails to realise that the men who can't form a thought beyond spamming "there are only 2 genders!" and calling feminine men "trannies" aren't actually "on their side" just because they happen to turn their brainless ire on trans people. Instead of caring about alienating those patriarchal shit stains, GC should instead think about how it's alienating the women who don't want to suck up to misogynistic men just so they'd get their very limited back-stabby "support".

adungitit · 2021-05-30T17:33:20+00:00

Trans men are not women and do not wish to be classed with women.

Women said they don't need to vote and that being a stay-at-home wife obedient to her husband is "empowering" and that being beaten by their husbands isn't wrong. Women saying misogynistic things and trying to suck up to the patriarchy doesn't discredit feminism one bit. We've already been through this.

GCs shouldn't be forcing narratives on trans men, just like trans men don't force narratives on them.

Uuuh, enforcing a belief in gendersouls, removing women's protections and advancements in women's rights, telling women they're privileged for being female and gaslighting them in regards to their oppression IS forcing a narrative onto us, or rather women in general. You can't both advocate the removal of rights that a disenfranchised group has fought for, advocate for a completely unfounded regressive worldview with gendersouls to which women's rights need to be sacrificed AND claim that you're not being in any way political.

adungitit · 2021-05-26T10:19:06+00:00

Respond that you can't tell anyone's DNA either, and yet people seem to consistently target their attraction to humans instead of other animals.

adungitit · 2021-05-02T15:55:17+00:00

including one party coming to the realization that he or she is same-sex attracted, those with children, particularly young children, still usually place a great deal of emphasis on the wellbeing of their children and try to manage the split in ways that won't cause undue harm and pain to the kids.

lol yeah, no. Men tend to run off and leave women and children to fend for themselves because the man's gotta live his new life to the fullest. Stories of women abandoned by their gay husbands are a dime a dozen, and as usual, they are expected to support their husbands for the sake of the family and looking tolerant, and are called homophobes if they don't show endless support and compassion towards the men who lied to them (and frequently cheated on them) for years and ran off with their male lovers. Men constantly show disregard for their spouses and children, treat them as accessories and abandon them when their dicks get distracted by something, regularly skip out on providing any financial support and claim that they shouldn't even be expected to do it. Hence why the number of single fathers is miniscule compared to single mothers. This still does not make homosexuality or divorce unethical. Things are not defined as ethical only if everyone involved is perfectly mature and civil at all times.

it also often comes with downsides, particularly for close family members and for work colleagues who now are expected to share toilet, changing and shower facilities with someone of the opposite sex.

This is the problem with "transwomen are women", not physical transitioning.

children distressed over this dramatic change in their home lives have actually been taken aside in school to be "educated" into providing their parent with the 100% supportive response that gender ideologues consider proper.

Would you treat it as equally morally reprehensible to do the same with children distressed by divorce, or homosexuality? Kids being distressed by something =/= that something being unethical. What a childish mindset.

there are ways to go about ending a marriage, partnership or friendship so that the negative impact on all parties who might be affected is minimized.

Is that why so many of them end up as traumatising disasters?

adungitit · 2021-04-30T22:49:02+00:00

The problem isn't with women not giving men the benefit of the doubt (again). The problem is with men consistently working and advocating against women's rights. Trying to label women as bigots for noticing that men are misogynistic towards them is a common tactic, and it exists to favour the patriarchy.

adungitit · 2021-04-30T22:28:03+00:00

I feel like QT women would agree to that, much like how someone would proudly claim they'd fight against a bear from the comfort of their sofa. Hell, once the inevitable happens, they might even convince themselves that this predictable outcome was all just a stroke of astonishingly bad luck, and that perhaps things would've been better if only women weren't so exclusionary and misandrist against these poor men.

It's not that QT doesn't have eyes or a brain and that they legitimately are not aware of our society's patriarchal trends, it's that they can convince themselves against all rhyme and reason that male violence is either one big conspiracy by the extremist feminazi trying to make the cool feminists look bad, or they blame women for it because they're not understanding and inclusive enough of men. It's an ideology that preys on female complacency and tendency to self-blame combined with non-stop patriarchal gaslighting.

adungitit · 2021-04-30T22:08:25+00:00

You're saying "boys will just be boys" and are destined to harass women no matter what.

Gotta love it when liberals argue that protections of women from male violence are misandrist. Men harrassing and assaulting women is not the fault of women, nor is it up to women to fix men being fucked up and misogynistic. It's up to MEN to get their act together and stop preying on women in such high numbers that women need spaces free of them just to lead a semblance of a normal public life (which is the entire reason why feminists advocated for these spaces in the first place). Women's spaces are not the reason why men prey on women. It is absolutely fucked up to blame women and their spaces which exist as protection from male violence for the continuation of said male violence. Stripping protections of vulnerable groups because that's supposed to teach men not to assault women isn't going to make men not assault women. Even if your twisted misogynistic logic made sense, we literally have centuries of history where women lacked any spaces and protections, and guess which half of humanity specifically abused that to the point of having institutionalised ownership and rape of women, and guess which one didn't?

adungitit · 2021-04-30T21:31:50+00:00

I have more sympathy for the anti-trans extremists.

I have as much sympathy for your average male misogynist slinging slurs like tr***y as I have for them slinging slurs at any other group every time their fucked up patriarchal supremacist hierarchy gets questioned. It's gross that these men are grouped in the same basket as the women literally trying to preserve their hard-won rights to spaces free from male violence and bigotry, and to refuse being defined further according to male biases and ideas about what women should be.

adungitit · 2021-02-26T21:17:48+00:00

Don't you know that dinosaurs are still among us in the form of birds? Check mate! Humans are dinosaurs after all!

adungitit · 2021-11-25T14:48:06+00:00

there is no time I wanted my breasts.

This is such a strange argument to me and I see it a lot. I never wanted white skin, or blue eyes or those back dimples. But I have them. No-one ever asked me if I wanted these things, no-one ever cared how I felt about them, no one cares if I cry over them or jump from joy. I wasn't given a list before being born to check which traits I want. I couldn't "want" to be taller, hairier, stronger. These are simply the cards I have been dealt and there hasn't been one moment ever where my wishes or feelings factored into them.

I notice that a lot of people on the trans (rights) side seem to think women love being women, that they get euphoric from having breasts, they get overjoyed from being female. From a patriarchal and liberal feminist standpoint, this makes sense: there is a ridiculous amount of focus in society placed on sexualising women's bodies through the male gaze and for male satisfaction, and even "progressive" movements selling this as female empowerment and liberation. The image is painted of a sexy, very confident half-naked woman who's in control of her (male-gaze pandering) sexuality.

In practice however, anxieties over one's body and a lifetime of endured objectification, self-hatred and sexual dysfunction are very common in women. In my experience, they're so common that I no longer believe any woman who tries to paint a picture of a woman overjoyed by these things. It's like asking me to believe that your average Muslim woman really did choose her subhuman god-given role. No matter how euphoric it makes her, I'm not going to buy it when we know from history how genuine this contentment with one's oppression is.

adungitit · 2021-08-11T10:18:21+00:00

The policies I advocate are for the real world in the here and now

Just because you advocate a policy for a current issue does not excuse a complete lack of thought into any of its future implications and reasons for existence.

I have never heard anyone say there'd be "no need for sexed spaces" and "no basis" for them anymore.

lol what an argument. I've never heard of tau neutrinos either, but that doesn't make them stop existing.

So in the post-patriarchy utopia as you envision it, there'd be no spaces for lesbians or gay guys that exclude members of the opposite sex?

People have the right to form spaces on the basis of certain shared interests and identities. That is entirely different from legal protections for said spaces because they are necessary to lead a normal life, as is the case with women.

So a world without patriarchy would mean "no basis" for separate male and female sports?

Obviously sports require a sex-based division, as do medical issues. These divisions are based in physical differences in male and female bodies requiring different expertise and different evaluation standards. This is different from spaces that serve to protect women from the social problem of patriarchal violence and harassment. Women are still targeted specifically for their sex, but the reason why they need protection is entirely external.

No separate accommodations for the two sexes in jails and prisons, hospital wards/rooms, LTCFs, dorm rooms, school and scouting trips?

If we were ever to reach a world where men did not pose a threat to women in these environments, yes.

In the post-patriarchy utopia you imagine, women who go to, say, a community swim pool with their teen or adult sons and male in-laws will have to share the same change rooms and showers with them?

If they would get naked with their male parents, why would they not with their female parents?

Will getting rid of patriarchy mean the vast majority of boys and men won't be heterosexual any more, and/or they won't have eyes and dicks?

It's unlikely that most men would be heterosexual if we got rid of the patriarchy. Most "heterosexual" men really just have a fetish for femininity and misogyny. Moreover, you can be heterosexual and not act like a creep, just as homosexual people manage to do.

And that within families and households, there will be no need or basis anymore for the kinds of sex separation that customarily is put in place as children grow up and relationships change?

How exactly do you think gay people are able to function? Is there sexual tension between every non-straight family member?

Such as girls no longer being seen naked by their dads or brothers once they hit puberty? And pubertal boys being given bodily privacy by their mothers - and vice versa - too?

If the same things were to be normal with their same-sex family members, then yes.

adungitit · 2021-07-29T22:46:21+00:00

Most replies seem to just say "Because it's factually untrue" and while, yes, that is indeed the case, what's much more important is why these ideas are misogynistic and regressive.

First, we don't define a woman as anyone who "passes" as a woman, otherwise we'd just call butch or androgynous women men. We define them as female people. To define them according to how much they pass is to define women according to an artificial harmful patriarchal construct, rather than the reality of being female. Women do not become female through "passing"; they are born female and they remain female always (even skeletons can be sexed). Their female physiology doesn't go anywhere or change regardless of how they feel about it. A man might trick me into thinking he's a woman, but that still doesn't make him a woman any more than me thinking a butch woman is male makes her a man, and it certainly doesn't make him more of a woman than her (which plenty of QT people will actually argue).

Second, gendered socialisation is ingrained into people from their youngest most impressionable years, and this is impossible to avoid. The results of this are very apparent in the majority of trans people, especially since their ideology is not conductive to questioning gender roles on which they rely on for their identity. Transitioning does not erase this socialisation, hence why it's harmful to women to let men speak in the name of women and share their spaces (similar problems like with, say, male feminists). It is also harmful to tell girls who are saddled with very stressful freedom-limiting misogynistic and beauty expectations treating them like sex objects that they're trans if this cruel reality causes them fear and anxiety.

Third, trans people are extremely invested in and euphoric over performing a certain gender role, to the point of suicidal ideation if they can't do it. Plenty of them have fetishistic reasons for this revolving around emasculation and female inferiority. This has nothing in common with women who are women because they're female, nor men who are male because they're male. Women or men did not choose their sex, just as they didn't choose their shoe size or their eye colour. As such, even when male trans people pass and experience patriarchy for themselves, they tend to view it through euphoric "Imma real gurl now!" lens (which is why they often hold sexual harassment in fond memory as validating). Trans people in general tend to promote regressive ideologies for validation (things such as dismantling gendered spaces, gaslighting about gendered issues, brainsex theories, defining gender by gender stereotypes), and women are pushed into accepting this in order to validate them, both because women's rights always have to take second place due to what an integral ever-present facet of society their oppression is, and because women are socialised to be endlessly accommodating.

adungitit · 2021-05-26T10:44:33+00:00

If some gc person says "well I don't agree with all of gc or gender abolition or the complete constructionist model" then fair enough but it's part of the debate.

Because that person is disagreeing with what GC is (a position that is known through basic familiarity with the movement), not because any bullshit you can think of passes for whatever you want.

If you cannot recognise basic tenants of a certain position that are spelled out to you on the sub's front page, then you have nothing to argue over. You are acting stupid and should not be allowed to debate.

It is not derailing.

And if you just say you're not, that magically makes it so!

The point was that a person claiming to be alienated and tortured by gender norms didn't do jack to actually budge said gender norms and in fact worked hard to live up to said gender norms, making their claims highly unconvincing. Whether their gendersoul was compelling them to act in paradoxical ways in irrelevant.

Are we talking about a man or woman here?

You are derailing again. The point was that a person claiming to be alienated and tortured by gender norms didn't do jack to actually budge said gender norms and in fact worked hard to live up to said gender norms, making their claims highly unconvincing.

Making male non conformity entirely about rejection an extreme male chauvinism. I don't recognise that at a reasonable position.

Just wanking out a "I disagree" is as worthwhile as wanking out that the moon is made of cheese.

The logic of this is everyone should be masculine.

The logic is that both femininity and masculinity are oppressive constructs. Masculinity facilitates abuse, femininity facilitates objectification of women and taking abuse.

Actually I think women generally want masculine men for sexual reasons

Riiight. And all the abuse, trauma and anxieties resulting from that just happen because "it's what women want". And the fact that men never gave a fuck about women's pleasure is also just because women have been secretly mind-controlling them, right? As are the orgasm gap, the dehumanisation, objectification, harassment, double standards, domestic expectations etc. After all, women were owned by men because they wanted it, right?

Their sexual desire is not an invalid reason.

It just so happens to, through pure coincidence, coincide with what men want and have been pushing onto them for centuries, and also result in high rates of dissatisfaction, anxiety and trauma. But let me guess, none of that matters because you can wank out that you "don't think so".

Pepsi or Cola aren't gendered. They could be. But they aren't.

It was you who made the claim that the patriarchy and its gender norms cannot cease to exist because everything has to be either masculine of feminine. Which one is Pepsi, and which is Cola? Feel free to reconsider your opinion if you can't answer this.

That something isn't gendered does not mean gender isn't natural.

Appealing to nature and justifying male supremacy as innate has been used by men to oppress women for as long as the patriarchy has existed. Turns out women can vote and have careers, though. So I'm afraid I don't care much for your male supremacist wanking. That's worked out marvellously for men, and has done nothing but screw women over.

adungitit · 2021-05-26T10:06:14+00:00

By arguing that "white people" criticising misogynistic norms in other cultures and languages are doing so for colonialist purposes.

And yes, the irony of the colonialist history of Spain kinda flew over their head, likely because they're speaking from a Latin American perspective.

adungitit · 2021-05-26T09:32:24+00:00

Women said they don't need to vote and that being a stay-at-home wife obedient to her husband is "empowering" and that being beaten by their husbands isn't wrong. Women and men say misogynistic things literally all the time. If just saying "I'm not misogynistic, but..." changed anything, we wouldn't live under the patriarchy, because most people claim this, and yet most are misogynistic.

adungitit · 2021-05-26T08:22:08+00:00

So women never physically harm other women? Gotcha!

Close enough to "never" that we don't need any protections from it. And even if it does happen, there isn't likely to be a huge strength and power imbalance in the aggressor's favour. Moreover, women do not prey on and attack other women for sexual and sadistic purposes. This simply does not happen, and no, it wouldn't turn into a problem even if you could dig up 1 out of a million of women who have experienced this. The person below provided the relevant statistics, not that any person who can use their fucking eyes should need them. You can simply talk to women to know that most of them have had experiences with men following them, grabbing them, catcalling them, creeping on them to straight up assaulting and raping them. This is not some rare exceptional event, it's a rampant issue that most women have experienced. Meanwhile, good luck finding men who have been preyed on in such a way, especially by women. You won't, hence why the mere idea of a predatory woman is a joke in most men's eyes, a fun harmless little fantasy not to be taken seriously.

Now, are you going to keep lying through your teeth some more? Are you going to give these women the usual "You're just overreacting/making it all/hysterical/you should take it as a compliment" bs? Or maybe you want to call government agencies liars for correctly identifying the criminals' sex? Or is this going to be too much even for you, so you'll just conveniently disappear and re-appear elsewhere to lie some more in hopes that no-one will call you out on it?

adungitit · 2021-05-26T08:16:41+00:00

"internalized misogyny" applies to women, not trans men.

And a whole lifetime of being raised as female and treated with all the double standards that female people are treated with simply...didn't happen? That person has entered an alternate reality just by changing their Twitter bio?

adungitit · 2021-05-26T08:12:24+00:00

A trans man who had top and bottom surgery and passes well can enter a gay sauna.

You do realise that the requirement for transitioning and especially surgery is seen as transphobic by your own community, right? A woman's vulva and clit are now a "front hole" and a "dick" because she's using he/him pronouns.

adungitit · 2021-05-26T08:03:56+00:00

Women do not need to have a loving relationship with their oppressors in order for their views on male oppression of women to have legitimacy.

adungitit · 2021-05-26T07:34:32+00:00

If it weren't for posts like this, we wouldn't be saying feminists are man hating.

You mean the post that is accurate, but is "manhating" because it doesn't lie and gaslight that women are the problem and that the matriarchy is a thing? You have been given statistics and just basic fucking observations of the world around you. Your response? Lying through your teeth and ignoring anything that puts a dent into your lying. When you tire of lying, you disappear.

GCs on Ovarit and Saidit constantly use slurs against trans people, such as narcissist, delusional, fetishistic, lying little shit, mental case, fujoshi, YAOI, "everyone wants to be oppressed" just to name a few. I didn't make up these slurs. They are from actual GC threads.

Those are not slurs. You could describe them as insults or stereotypes or just descriptions, but they are not slurs. Slurs are actual words uniquely targeted at a specific group for the purpose of insulting them. Calling fetishists or narcissists what they are is not a "slur". Hell, even calling marginalised groups those words isn't a slur, because a "slur" is a very specific thing, not just any insult.

There is a thing called dysphoria and it's not caused by social contagion. I was born female. The thought of me having a penis grosses me out. If I was born male, I would feel great distress and want to transition via hormones and surgery so I wouldn't fee

Right, you said this before (because of course you did), and were told that this "dysphoria", "hormones" and "surgery" aren't even needed to be trans in any way, and that claiming otherwise makes you transphobic. And, of course, you conveniently disappeared, but knowing you're wrong didn't stop you from parroting the exact same thing here, and it won't stop you from parroting it elsewhere.

In every thread, you are proven wrong, you always fail to address anything that was said, you constantly lie through your teeth even when faced with statistics, only to disappear and reappear elsewhere and parrot the exact same lying. Even with this very limited engagement, when the reality of female oppression becomes impossible even for you to ignore, you switch to claiming you can't be a misogynist because of these specific instances where you've oh-so-bravely virtue-signalled for equal rights of various disenfranchised groups, waiting for an applause. None of this disproves your misogyny when you consistently lie, gaslight and espouse misogynistic views and male myths that are directly harmful to women. But the fact that QT "feminists" are so consistently misogynistic for the sake of male approval does prove a good point in regards to how self-hating a woman has to be in order for QT to make sense.

adungitit · 2021-05-07T06:46:48+00:00

Aaand I see that GenderCritical has finally ended up squarely under the heel of bigoted conservatives co-opting it for their own bigotry. This is what happens when you suck up to shitty people and don't gatekeep your community because "it'll alienate Republican allies :,(".

adungitit · 2021-05-05T13:59:56+00:00

ROFL being against trans ideologies =/= being GC. GC is feminist. You cannot be GC if you are against women's rights, because GC is a branch of feminism. Seriously, how can you people constantly base your entire worldview on an easily disprovable lie, disappear when you realise it's a lie, and STILL repeat it the next time you open your mouth? That is absolutely baffling to me.

Feminist does not equal gender critical

Radical feminism pretty much does. Feminism nowadays can mean anything from men supporting prostitution and kinky porn while actively sabotaging women's rights, to liberal feminists kissing the shoes of male trans people talking about how valid their ladybrains and makeup make them feel. All of these groups will call themselves feminists, but at some point you have to notice that fixing the actual problems and inequalities women face isn't compatible with a movement engaging in constant gaslighting and apologetics for why said problems and inequalities aren't really a problem, that they are actually "empowering" or that they even count as privileges. Nevertheless, I don't care to argue that liberals (or even conservatives) who claim they're feminists while espousing misogynistic values aren't really feminists - that's a lame attempt to divert to semantics and it doesn't actually answer the question of whether their ideologies are misogynistic.

adungitit · 2021-05-02T12:53:49+00:00

Nothing says feminism like writing off the patriarchy with #NotAllMen.

adungitit · 2021-04-30T13:44:32+00:00

I do not define men and women according to how well they "pass" because I do not define men and women according to misogyny, I define them according to their actual biology. As such, I do not think that gender nonconforming women, or women with more testosterone than expected of women, are male. Nor do I believe I become a man every time people mistake me for a man. The fact that the trans community has trouble grasping the fact that you do not become something just because you trick people that you are it is still unbelievable to me. I can lie that I'm a part of the royal family, that wouldn't actually make me as such if enough people believed it.

Lots of people can struggle understanding this because radical feminism spends a lot of time discussing gendered socialisation and resulting biases, which is consistent with sex because you need to be male or female in order for society to treat you as such. This does not mean that women or men are born with gendered socialisation but that gendered socialisation is inevitable under a patriarchal system and until that system and the ideologies furthering it are completely removed, men and women are going to fall into gendered behaviour, and need to put extensive work into undoing it. And no, the trans community, rife with overt misogyny, absolutely does not provide an environment ideal for this, in fact it feeds off of the same ideals as the patriarchy does for the sake of gender-affirmation.

Now, what you can argue is that a trans person passing as the opposite sex makes it more likely that they experience a part of the gendered socialisation targeted at the opposite sex. This does not negate their gendered childhood (the most vulnerable years of human development) and frequently extensive years beyond that, their resulting gendered biases and the simple fact that they are biologically merely modified members of their own sex. You can argue this, but in my experiences, passing male trans people are just as misogynistic and male-acting as the non-passing ones, so this statement isn't going to go unchallenged, much like any other statement claiming that a percentage of men is not problematic by virtue of them claiming they aren't, or because they're disadvantaged by other men.

Is there proof that people can not be born in the wrong sex or body?

Is there proof that a person cannot have the soul of a wolf? Or an anime character?

Even if people can be born in the wrong sex or body, there's a leap from that to "I am the opposite sex and I deserve equal protections as the actual members of the opposite sex because I feel I should belong to the opposite sex".

Is it hateful, rude and disrespectful to call a man who identifies and passes as a woman a man, or a woman who identifies and passes as a man a woman?

I think any ideology that relies on defining women according to things other than the simple fact of being biologically female is harmful to women. The inevitable assumptions of what makes a woman more of a woman (feminine clothing, feminine mannerisms, ladybrains, how sexually attractive she is etc.) have shown time and time again to work against women's well-being and dignity. I do not see it as a matter of courtesy and respect to entertain misogynistic ideologies and how those define women.

adungitit · 2021-04-17T14:45:32+00:00

female athletes are much more vulnerable to certain kinds of injuries like concussions than males in sports

Considering how many men injure and kill themselves due to their far-too aggressive sports (and other things, i.e. military training), I find it a bit of a double standard when people show disproportionate concern specifically for women facing risks of injury.

Also, allowing trans-identified females into male sports & intimate spaces would create minefields in other ways. Trans-identified females who consider themselves to be gay men are bound to get pissed off that the boys/men they crush on don't want to have sex with them, so they're bound to hurl accusations of homophobia & transphobia - & some might behave in ways that are sexually inappropriate & boundary-transgressing.

You can say literally the same thing about gay men.

& some will probably say they've been coerced, raped & or sexually assaulted in other ways.

What is this "false rape accusations" fearmongering?

Another exception theoretically could be for males who've lost a testicle to cancer.

I thought losing one testicle didn't affect testosterone?

adungitit · 2021-03-21T09:07:11+00:00

I don’t see it as essential to the men’s gender because it’s usually seen as bad behavior and not how men should be

Men use toxic masculinity to bond and further misogyny literally all the time and other men give them high fives for it. Plenty of things men do is not seen as objectively positive, but they get a free pass with "boys will be boys" logic. Like I truly don't understand how you can deny the damage that this causes.

I don’t really know how men experience it though.

If you're trans, then you do know how men experience it, because you've been put through that socialisation whether you like it or not.

I feel like men who need to be misogynistic or abuse their male privilege to reinforce their manhood are not secure and confident.

But they are, because society gives them confidence and authority by rubbing their male egos at the expense of inferior groups.

adungitit · 2021-03-19T20:35:29+00:00

Aww, did I make you boo-hoo because I ripped your delusional fairy tale to shreds? Sowy :,c Maybe next time try to think of something that's not destroyed with a modicum of brain usage and you'll avoid the tears and embarrassment. Bye!

adungitit · 2021-03-18T22:25:24+00:00

Truly the world of business is biased against men who have to fight each other for every scrap in a matriarchal world where women hog all the power and money.

Also I'm sure we can somehow make it a problem that women apply for jobs they're actually qualified for, instead of men bullshitting their way through life and getting free chances anyways regardless of how inept and unqualified they might be.

adungitit · 2021-02-20T18:18:55+00:00

GC needs to stop saying people agree with them just because they agree that there are no magical girl/boy transformations. But they by no means reject misogynistic bioessentialism.

adungitit · 2022-07-15T21:38:26+00:00

Well, namely, pretending that plastic surgeries and artificially induced hormonal imbalance makes someone into a woman just because they claim they have a "female brain" or "feel like women" or "because women are anything under the sun and have no meaning as a concept" is not something that feminist women should be required to partake in. It's basically telling women to play-pretend with a distinctly backwards and misogynistic ideology that has a long patriarchal history of being harmful to them (erasure of women's issues, ignorance of female biology, androcentrism, brainsex, claims of female inferiority and gender roles being innate etc.).

adungitit · 2021-11-25T14:06:17+00:00

It seems like there's a cure and even ways to prevent gender dysphoria or transsexualism from ever happening to begin with

One thing that often gets overlooked about this (because both GC and QT know they have to ultimately appeal to misogynistic men if they're to keep their numbers up) is the role that society plays in all this. You can tell a person to just be themselves all you want, but when society treats them like crap for it, ofc they're going to pick the value system that doesn't do that over a lifetime of being told they're wrong (also why women defend femininity despite how obviously damaging it is to their well-being. Well, that and a lifetime of mass 24/7 brainwashing to put men's needs first). Difficulties with gender are going to exist in different intensities as long as we place so much value into genderist beliefs, so the only real way to fix it is to take on genderism as a concept straight on for its anti-humanist ideals. This however, would get GC's conservative women and especially their boyfriends pissy, and meanwhile QT has already legitimised gender as something so crucial to one's identity that it can literally make people suicide if not respected and played to. As such, genderism always has to be presented as a "preference" regardless of how many mental issues and tragedies it keeps causing, a preference that a minority of weirdos simply didn't get up to speed with, but one that is great and peachy otherwise and how the world should be. Trans people are an extreme case, but there have always existed many more people who are unhappy with these expectations, and far more who are unhappy, but don't realise why or don't dare to put a finger on it because it's easier and more sensible according to the existing value system to redirect all the blame and related trauma onto women.

GC likes to pretend there's some plague of "genderism" that's only started with the trans rights movement. In reality most people are fully on board with genderism, which is why we live in a patriarchal society, it's just the rigidity of it that people disagree on. Conservatives force people into cages so the proper world order can be preserved. Liberals want to maintain the cages because they help men feel superior and/or hornier, but in view of the trauma and anxiety said cages cause, liberals kindly allow people to choose which cage looks the shiniest according to everyone's super special unique snowflake preferences. Both believe in the natural patriarchal order and both put copious amounts of effort into prettying it up so people who derive their worth from it can sleep better at night.

There is a lot of talk about girls being pressured into surgeries, feeling ashamed of their physiology and pretending they're not female for respectability, but these things were a part of girls' experiences long before the trans craze took over, because all of them originate from the same pressures. Girls who openly hate being seen through pornified and subhuman lens that they are inevitably viewed through are still going to feel these feelings. Girls who claim they like being seen through these lens are still going to be saddled with mountains of anxieties, trauma and lower standards compared to men directly resulting from these expectations. And the ones who have internalised self-hatred to the point of getting amputations and maintaining a lifetime of an artificially induced hormonal imbalance are not suddenly going to be cured, just as any other girl wasn't. You can't end trauma and mental illnesses resulting from genderism without tackling genderism, not just as a "preference" or a special cage for special people, but as a toxic, damaging system it is.

adungitit · 2021-08-18T16:00:19+00:00

Yup, women are never a threat to men. Talk about stereotypes.

Is that why no men fear women assaulting them, while women do? Is that why half of women are murdered by their male intimate partners while the reverse not only barely happens, and when it does, it's usually done by a victim of domestic violence towards her abuser? You've always so quickly gone silent when this reality of violence against women was pointed out to you, but that's never stopped you from disappearing, reappearing elsewhere, and still continuing to lie about this. You have been told the statistics before and even if you weren't, the ubiquity of male harassment in the vast majority of women's lives that isn't replicated in reverse should clue you in. You only have to open your eyes and think about the world around you, instead of parroting patriarchal delusions because men will get pissy and called out otherwise.

When you transition, you are the sex you identify as.

Based on what exactly? The amount of testosterone and estrogen in your body? This is not what sex is, or else we wouldn't be able to recognise the sex of men and women with hormonal disorders, and reproduction wouldn't still keep working the way it does in literally all cases known to humankind. Moreover, aside from making mentally ill people feel better, what is the benefit of actually changing the definition of sex from what it actually is to how much of a certain hormone you have in your body? The reality of one's sex is still impossible to change, and that is a simple biological fact.

Also, you do realise you're being transphobic, right? Trans ideology claims that people do not need to transition in order to be whatever sex they claim they are. How do you justify this transphobic view to fellow trans activists? Are you also the same transphobe who said you wouldn't have sex with female genitalia even if the person identified as male?

There are ways which men are disadvantaged by society over women. Pointing it out does not make you an MRA or a misogynist.

Continuously lying that women do not experience oppression while also lying about ways in which men do does. If you are parroting misogynistic myths for the sake of patriarchy, you are pretty much an MRA even if you don't actively identify as such. You don't need to actively be a member of a patriarchal movement to be affected by patriarchal brainwashing and misogyny. Again, "I'm not sexist, but" is not the excuse you think it is.

most trans men say that is not why they are transitioning

Right, just as you say you're feminist while lying, downplaying and covering up the oppression that women experience while pushing imaginary male oppression against all evidence to the contrary and women's lives being ruined as a result of this tradition of lying about their oppression. Just as traditional women claim they're not in misogynistic relationships when they think they deserve to be beaten and have their husbands control every aspect of their lives.

Again, "I'm not sexist, but" is not the excuse you think it is.

I have excellent critical thinking skills

lmao you continuously lie when faced with evidence to the contrary. Your comments usually don't even respond to anything that was said, but only stick to parroting "Transwomen are women". How in the flying fuck do you think that's compatible with "critical thinking skills"? You can't repeat whatever you've been trained to, refuse to respond to any criticisms, lie and ignore anything that rips your parroting apart, and brag about what great "critical thinking skills" you have lmao

Trans men aren't women.

See, if engaged in the kind of brainwashed parroting that you do, I would just respond "Female trans people are women". You would respond "Transmen are men" and we could keep going on and on like this forever. Given that my brain doesn't get a rush of "Wow I'm so smart" from just copy-pasting a single statement regardless of what is being said, I can't actually do this dance with you. But I can take it further and explain why women biologically cannot become men and vice versa, and also why trans ideas (along with a host of other accompanying misogynistic ideas) are damaging to women's rights. And it's not because "they feel that way".

I actually don't care if you feel that "transwomen are women" or that cats are actually dogs or if the Earth is flat. No, really, I don't. What I do care is when you cannot justify this statement with anything. If you say the Earth is flat, I will demand you to explain why. If you merely respond with "The Earth is flat" and then add that you have "great critical thinking skills", how convincing do you think I'll find that to be?

Yes. There are women who opposed women's rights to vote. There are women who believe women should be restricted to certain occupations. There are women who harshly judge other women for not meeting their standards of modesty.

I don't know if you've ever spoken to these women, but very, very few of them will tell you they hate women and that women are subhuman. So, by your logic, they are not sexist, nor do they actually hate women. See, that's the problem with "I'm not sexist, but...". Even women beaten by their husbands and the husbands who beat them have used this. It's almost like people parroting mantras that are directly at odds with all of their sexist behaviour and ideals doesn't magically render everything they do not-sexist. It's almost like things exist beyond just people telling you stuff that isn't true, and you having to believe them in order to be emphatic and validating.

Also, I love how your example of "real" sexism is vapid stuff like "Being judgemental of the way someone dresses" while here you are, literally lying though your teeth about all the assaults, rape, deaths and terror that men put women through. Honestly, I'd rather you criticised someone's shoes than pushed the delusional male fantasy of women lying about their oppression and actually being the real abusers of men.

So the Reddit threads I cite aren't surprising but aren't evidence either?

Evidence of what? That trans people go against radical feminism, pander to men and believe they have magical gendersouls or brainsex compelling them to transition? Yes. I know. Duh. How is this relevant? Can you spend more time actually addressing what I say without lying or ignoring it and less time hunting down friggin Reddit threads that tell me all the things I've already addressed and explained why they're in line with patriarchal socialisation? What's next, you're gonna hunt down comments about women claiming they don't need abortion and gendered spaces to prove that feminism is bs?

Also, ofc you're only gonna get the affirming trans stuff when anyone who takes issue with it gets banned.

adungitit · 2021-08-14T22:39:42+00:00

Anyway trans men are invisible in society compared to trans women.

Men are a threat to women. Other women can suck up to a patriarchal society, but they're ultimately not the ones causing the issues, nor are they a threat to other women. As such, GC focuses on upholding the rights of women in face of a male threat.
Misogynistic movements tend to disregard women, which is why you see the same patriarchal dynamics play out the same way, even when the parties involved roleplay as the opposite sex.

All of this is predictably in line with the patriarchy and pretty easily explained.

A few trans men have said people will make statements like "men are trash" but then turn around to them and say "no, not you!" as if they aren't men.

It's almost like even supposedly progressive people understand why trans ideology is bullshit. They know that women do not pose a threat, no matter how much they roleplay as men. As such, they forget to lie and pretend that they do, and trans people as usual freak out when they're reminded of reality and demand that others play into a lie.

Male trans people are still the ones with male-pattern violence like sexual assault and homicides. If you think this fact is unfair solely because it's not gender-affirming to trans people, try thinking of the women who are actually targeted by and who experience this male-pattern violence, and then ask yourself which of these two is an actual problem that needs to be addressed.

Also masculinity is not so much celebrated in society as much as femininity

Is this going to end up with you going full MRA claiming that men are actually the real victims of society?

Just don't forget to mention that you're totally not misogynistic, but...

most trans men are more supportive of the trans movement than gender critical feminism

Duh. More women in general are supportive of progressive movements. I have yet to come across a progressive movement where women didn't let others walk over them, or threw other women under the bus for the patriarchy's approval.

Funny enough GCs say trans women talk over trans men way more than trans men say that themselves. Yet GCs themselves talk over trans men.

I mean, we also talk over women who think it is their duty to be an obedient slave to their husband and a walking sex doll for the male gaze. Talking over misogynistic women has always been what feminism does. Certain women being invested in supporting and excusing the patriarchal system because they don't want to rock the boat and they think they can make it work in their advantage does not discredit feminism. If it did, women wouldn't get the right to vote because they'd just agree to not talk over the women who thought they didn't need the right to vote. The key difference is that we're not progressive men talking over women, like how male trans people talk over female trans people.

They keep insisting trans men are only transitioning to escape sexism or that they are lesbians in denial or are fetishizing gay men. Most trans men say that is not the case.

Is there any misogynistic woman out there who just comes out and says that she hates women? Misogynistic people's "I'm not misogynistic, but..." disclaimers are worth jackshit. What matters is the kinds of views they espouse and support. I don't for a second believe that self-hating women who parrots misogynistic ideas aren't in any way motivated by these views, and that they're instead lead by some gendersoul or whatever. I'm gonna go for a more logical conclusion here.

Also, what is it with you using Reddit threads as...evidence? I've talked to plenty of trans people and been to their spaces. None of what you say is in any way surprising to me, or the GC movement. It's pretty consistent with how men and women act under patriarchal pressures in other areas as well.

adungitit · 2021-08-01T16:42:19+00:00

Do you think there are differences between them and people who identify as the opposite sex or not?

I'd say a negative fixation on one's sexed characteristics to the point of amputating them is a serious mental illness, though one very much rooted in societal pressures. Nonbinaries mostly seem to be just a new brand of NotLikeOtherGirls that's not willing to take it as far as the women who insist they're men.

What do you think of neo-pronouns?

If pronouns suddenly don't signify sex, then I fully support whatever bs a person can think of for their pronoun. In fact, I find de-sexing third-person pronouns, as an element of English that isn't even close to universal, far less batshit crazy than pretending you can de-sex literal human beings just by changing their pronouns.

Do you think people who identify as such should be able to get their official documents changed to reflect their "gender identities" instead of their sex?

If we can all play-pretend that men are women because they want to be, then the same should apply to nonbinaries. Why is one utter lie somehow better than another utter lie? Both of them are the sex that they are and that's a fact, which makes their claims to the opposite sex, or no sex, as valid as their claims to being a wolf or a dragon.

adungitit · 2021-08-01T16:07:36+00:00

That's precisely why the whole masculinity-femininity dichotomy doesn't work. Men are raised with useful, self-serving skills and allowed the freedom to be average and normal and not have their whole appearance and behaviour revolve around coddling and serving others. The patriarchy also makes sure that the world revolves around them while excluding women as aberrations. A woman who rejects femininity isn't "masculine" or "male" or "genderqueer". She is normal, something that always should've been the standard for women just as much as it is for men.

adungitit · 2021-08-01T15:49:59+00:00

It blows my mind that "feminism" is doing all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify something so overtly and shamelessly one-sided and misogynistic, just so men wouldn't have to think about the way their entire fucked up sexuality treats women.

adungitit · 2021-08-01T15:47:57+00:00

Fairly related, but liberal feminism is a godawful movement and I wish GC recognised how much all the toxic aspects of trans ideology directly feed off of and abuse its ideas. Even if trans activism specifically is the one currently doing the work of removing women's rights, it wouldn't happen if the misogynistic thought-stopping ideals of liberal feminism didn't have its back and train women that it's super feminist to "choose" to pander to men and get trampled over by them. Liberal feminism is basically the patriarchy for people who want to sleep better at night.

adungitit · 2021-08-01T15:25:39+00:00

is me squirming out of answering this.

Sooo, why did you only now answer the question then? What was the point of this typical little derailment dance that every QT poster has to do?

Yes, misgendering is ok. Is that clear enough for you?

Suuure. So, are you resisting social and legal demands to make misgendering unacceptable, or are you silently approving of it? Doing the latter doesn't suddenly make you unaccountable because it's "people you don't know" doing the work to make these ideas a reality.

They're not my arguments though

Lying, denial and avoidance do not change what you say in any meaningful capacity.

when I did distance myself from them, you wrote me a novel about why I'm not allowed to do that.

Skirting out on responsibility for furthering toxic and irrational views is not distancing yourself from toxic and irrational views. Neither is proceeding to parrot these same toxic and irrational views with merely a disclaimer about how you wish they weren't toxic and irrational. You cannot claim you've distanced yourself from something while continuing to parrot it.

adungitit · 2021-08-01T13:41:32+00:00

Again, just saying that you don't support toxic and irrational ideas isn't enough when this contradicts your own statements. You wishing that your views weren't toxic and irrational is completely irrelevant to the fact that they are. There's a reason why no-one takes "I'm not sexist, but..." seriously, because it's as valid as saying "I'm a unicorn". If you don't like how your statements make you sound, either reword and rationalise them so they're no longer toxic and irrational, or say you've changed your mind, instead of beating around the bush and complaining because people hold you accountable for what you're brainlessly parroting.

adungitit · 2021-08-01T12:03:35+00:00

Wow, this is the literal exact opposite of what I said earlier re: words.

And it fell apart to a laughable degree, with you completely failing to respond with anything other than pathetic "I shouldn't be held responsible for justifying my illogical views" derailment tactics. Yeah, welcome to a debate sub.

adungitit · 2021-08-01T11:38:28+00:00

Your reading comprehension is really bad if you think I said either of these things

The reasons for this have been explained to you. You have failed to address or clarify any of it, and have focused only on the fact that you don't like being held responsible for toxic and illogical views. Boohoo. Welcome to a debate forum where you gotta put more effort than saying "words don't mean a thing".

The entire rest of your novel is not even relevant to me.

It directly addresses your claim of "I'm not interested in defending ideas I don't hold or defending people I don't know."

adungitit