Quantcast
The Official US Politics OT

Forums - Politics Discussion - The Official US Politics OT

EricHiggin said:

Person - An individual should be able to choose where to work no matter the conditions, however much that earns them.
People - Wrong. The Gov must force basic standards and wages that are outrageously high because individuals are weak and/or misguided.

Person - The Gov shouldn't allow an individual to sell their body as work because they are weak and/or misguided.
People - Wrong. An individual should be able to choose where to work no matter the conditions, however much that earns them.

Person - WTF?

cool strawman.



Around the Network
sundin13 said:
EricHiggin said:

Person - An individual should be able to choose where to work no matter the conditions, however much that earns them.
People - Wrong. The Gov must force basic standards and wages that are outrageously high because individuals are weak and/or misguided.

Person - The Gov shouldn't allow an individual to sell their body as work because they are weak and/or misguided.
People - Wrong. An individual should be able to choose where to work no matter the conditions, however much that earns them.

Person - WTF?

cool strawman.

good orangeman.



The Canadian National Anthem According To Justin Trudeau

 

Oh planet Earth! The home of native lands, 
True social law, in all of us demand.
With cattle farts, we view sea rise,
Our North sinking slowly.
From far and snide, oh planet Earth, 
Our healthcare is yours free!
Science save our land, harnessing the breeze,
Oh planet Earth, smoke weed and ferment yeast.
Oh planet Earth, ell gee bee queue and tee.

Jaicee said:

You're not getting it. My point in comparing prostitution and rape is that, once the transaction is made, the one party, for all intents and purposes, LOSES their free will, their bodily autonomy, and they DON'T typically enjoy it! I have but proposed that such a surrender should not be an option. That's not the same thing as taking away a woman's self-determination, but more like assuring it by removing the commercial factor. That's how I view it.

What is your take on non-physical contact sex work, a la video cams?  It's still transactional but operates purely on the sex worker's autonomy.  No pimp, no abuse, no exploitative corporate contracts, he/she controls all content....



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

Jaicee said:

Okay, one final aside on this topic of the sex industry. We've talked mostly about the consequences of the sex trade (prostitution, pornography, etc.) for heterosexual women, but not so much for lesbians. There was a story I was just now reading that I'd like to highlight: Google tweaks algorithm to show less porn when searching for 'lesbian' content.

The campaigners for this cause observed that "in their research, they found that only the word 'lesbian' was linked to pornographic sites, whereas searching for 'gay' or 'trans' linked to informative pages including Wikipedia, top news articles, and specialized blogs".

This is a real issue. Because lesbians are an all-female group by definition, we are sexualized way more than anyone else. The top search term on both Pornhub and YouPorn is, in fact, 'lesbian'. To judge by the leading search results one encounters (a large percentage of which seem to involve things like penetration with penile-shaped objects), one seriously doubts that it's mainly lesbians who are doing these searches. Even gay men sometimes participate in the sexual objectification of lesbians (example).

The consequences of people viewing lesbians more as entertainment than as people can get very real. To highlight a high-profile example of what I mean that made global headlines earlier this year, there was group of male teenagers who approached a lesbian couple on a bus in London and, on learning of their sexual orientation, demanded that they kiss for the group. When the couple refused, they were beaten and had to be hospitalized. Likewise, just the other weekend, a lesbian couple was physically attacked at Amsterdam Pride after refusing the advances of two men. In these sorts of ways, we can see how pornography fosters a dangerous culture of male entitlement to women, and not just the straight or even bi ones. So yeah, I'm very glad that Google has recently tweaked their algorithm for the term 'lesbian' to produce informative results comparable to what appears when one searches for 'gay' or 'trans'.

Just wanted to posit that as a final thought.

Yet again a wrong conclusion based on shallow research.

"Lesbian" has been for the longest time a category in porn, one of the most popular even. It is natural that the most things you'll find with that search term is porn, because that's the category on most sites and porn, as you might know, is kind of a big deal on the internet.

"Trans" is not a porn category, as such you won't find much if any porn under that search term. Try to search for "shemale" and be amazed because it will all be exclusively about porn because that's what the porn category is called.

"Gay" certainly is also a porn category but in the porn community it is only applied to male homosexuals. Before you call sexism again this is just out of tradition and convenience because there is already a term for female gay porn. Now the reason why you won't find nearly as much porn under that term is that gay porn is about 1000th as popular as lesbian porn is. It is actually quite a niche due to the low demand compared to other categories. It also is a very familiar and frequently discussed topic outside of porn. The term "gay" itself is also about 1000 times bigger in non-porn communities than it is in porn. It's also generally applied to both genders outside of porn.

What you are calling sexism or an attack on females is basically just a mix of linguistics, tradition and simple demand and supply.

One funny thing I would add is this. It is very well known that males are generally regarded as more forceful, brutal and dominant than females. Part of it is genes and hormones but another big part is actually society. Men are very much built by society to be exactly like that. And funnily enough, people like you are exacerbating and pushing the issue by trying to put a wedge between genders. The constant reminder of all the differences in genders and the strict division between them is what very much enables toxic behavior from both men and women. It is in some way legitimizing toxic behavior because people like you who are pretending that it is just like this because of gender.

How about we remove gender altogether and treat people as they behave instead of what their gender is? How about we stop saying "men attacking women" and instead say "violent idiots attacking innocents"? That way we would also avoid all of that silly generalization.

It feels like the men you are criticizing about their opinions about porn and prostitution know a lot more about those subjects than you because they actively engage in them on a regular basis. I can't talk much about prostitution but believe me when I say that your view of porn is about as shallow as it gets.

Last edited by vivster - 5 days ago

If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:
Jaicee said:

Okay, one final aside on this topic of the sex industry. We've talked mostly about the consequences of the sex trade (prostitution, pornography, etc.) for heterosexual women, but not so much for lesbians. There was a story I was just now reading that I'd like to highlight: Google tweaks algorithm to show less porn when searching for 'lesbian' content.

The campaigners for this cause observed that "in their research, they found that only the word 'lesbian' was linked to pornographic sites, whereas searching for 'gay' or 'trans' linked to informative pages including Wikipedia, top news articles, and specialized blogs".

This is a real issue. Because lesbians are an all-female group by definition, we are sexualized way more than anyone else. The top search term on both Pornhub and YouPorn is, in fact, 'lesbian'. To judge by the leading search results one encounters (a large percentage of which seem to involve things like penetration with penile-shaped objects), one seriously doubts that it's mainly lesbians who are doing these searches. Even gay men sometimes participate in the sexual objectification of lesbians (example).

The consequences of people viewing lesbians more as entertainment than as people can get very real. To highlight a high-profile example of what I mean that made global headlines earlier this year, there was group of male teenagers who approached a lesbian couple on a bus in London and, on learning of their sexual orientation, demanded that they kiss for the group. When the couple refused, they were beaten and had to be hospitalized. Likewise, just the other weekend, a lesbian couple was physically attacked at Amsterdam Pride after refusing the advances of two men. In these sorts of ways, we can see how pornography fosters a dangerous culture of male entitlement to women, and not just the straight or even bi ones. So yeah, I'm very glad that Google has recently tweaked their algorithm for the term 'lesbian' to produce informative results comparable to what appears when one searches for 'gay' or 'trans'.

Just wanted to posit that as a final thought.

Yet again a wrong conclusion based on shallow research.

"Lesbian" has been for the longest time a category in porn, one of the most popular even. It is natural that the most things you'll find with that search term is porn, because that's the category on most sites and porn, as you might know, is kind of a big deal on the internet.

"Trans" is not a porn category, as such you won't find much if any porn under that search term. Try to search for "shemale" and be amazed because it will all be exclusively about porn because that's what the porn category is called.

"Gay" certainly is also a porn category but in the porn community it is only applied to male homosexuals. Before you call sexism again this is just out of tradition and convenience because there is already a term for female gay porn. Now the reason why you won't find nearly as much porn under that term is that gay porn is about 1000th as popular as lesbian porn is. It is actually quite a niche due to the low demand compared to other categories. It also is a very familiar and frequently discussed topic outside of porn. The term "gay" itself is also about 1000 times bigger in non-porn communities than it is in porn. It's also generally applied to both genders outside of porn.

What you are calling sexism or an attack on females is basically just a mix of linguistics, tradition and simple demand and supply.

One funny thing I would add is this. It is very well known that males are generally regarded as more forceful, brutal and dominant than females. Part of it is genes and hormones but another big part is actually society. Men are very much built by society to be exactly like that. And funnily enough, people like you are exacerbating and pushing the issue by trying to put a wedge between genders. The constant reminder of all the differences in genders and the strict division between them is what very much enables toxic behavior from both men and women. It is in some way legitimizing toxic behavior because people like you who are pretending that it is just like this because of gender.

How about we remove gender altogether and treat people as they behave instead of what their gender is? How about we stop saying "men attacking women" and instead say "violent idiots attacking innocents"? That way we would also avoid all of that silly generalization.

It feels like the men you are criticizing about their opinions about porn and prostitution know a lot more about those subjects than you because they actively engage in them on a regular basis. I can't talk much about prostitution but believe me when I say that your view of porn is about as shallow as it gets.

Hmm... Good points, good points. Bolded being particularly truthful. Men do have a lot of pressure from society to act/be a certain way just like women.

Her research may have been shallow and her views on porn are antiquated but her observation holds some truth. Lesbians, particularly in the western world, really are sexualized and objectified a lot but I do disagree that porn is the sole cause or even a major factor at play here. It's pretty complex.

I hope you don't feel all feminists "try to put a wedge between genders" and exacerbate the issue though.



 

Around the Network
tsogud said:
vivster said:

Yet again a wrong conclusion based on shallow research.

"Lesbian" has been for the longest time a category in porn, one of the most popular even. It is natural that the most things you'll find with that search term is porn, because that's the category on most sites and porn, as you might know, is kind of a big deal on the internet.

"Trans" is not a porn category, as such you won't find much if any porn under that search term. Try to search for "shemale" and be amazed because it will all be exclusively about porn because that's what the porn category is called.

"Gay" certainly is also a porn category but in the porn community it is only applied to male homosexuals. Before you call sexism again this is just out of tradition and convenience because there is already a term for female gay porn. Now the reason why you won't find nearly as much porn under that term is that gay porn is about 1000th as popular as lesbian porn is. It is actually quite a niche due to the low demand compared to other categories. It also is a very familiar and frequently discussed topic outside of porn. The term "gay" itself is also about 1000 times bigger in non-porn communities than it is in porn. It's also generally applied to both genders outside of porn.

What you are calling sexism or an attack on females is basically just a mix of linguistics, tradition and simple demand and supply.

One funny thing I would add is this. It is very well known that males are generally regarded as more forceful, brutal and dominant than females. Part of it is genes and hormones but another big part is actually society. Men are very much built by society to be exactly like that. And funnily enough, people like you are exacerbating and pushing the issue by trying to put a wedge between genders. The constant reminder of all the differences in genders and the strict division between them is what very much enables toxic behavior from both men and women. It is in some way legitimizing toxic behavior because people like you who are pretending that it is just like this because of gender.

How about we remove gender altogether and treat people as they behave instead of what their gender is? How about we stop saying "men attacking women" and instead say "violent idiots attacking innocents"? That way we would also avoid all of that silly generalization.

It feels like the men you are criticizing about their opinions about porn and prostitution know a lot more about those subjects than you because they actively engage in them on a regular basis. I can't talk much about prostitution but believe me when I say that your view of porn is about as shallow as it gets.

Hmm... Good points, good points. Bolded being particularly truthful. Men do have a lot of pressure from society to act/be a certain way just like women.

Her research may have been shallow and her views on porn are antiquated but her observation holds some truth. Lesbians, particularly in the western world, really are sexualized and objectified a lot but I do disagree that porn is the sole cause or even a major factor at play here. It's pretty complex.

I hope you don't feel all feminists "try to put a wedge between genders" and exacerbate the issue though.

I'm actually a big opponent of the word "objectification". It's being treated as something inherently wrong but there is actually absolutely nothing bad about it.

Sex and attractiveness are natural stimulants. People like their stimulants, be it food, games, drugs or just looking at a pretty sunset. Looking at an attractive person and getting your fill because you appreciate what you see is normal and healthy. Yes, you basically look at the person as if it is an object, a beautiful object that is fun to look at. But what else are you supposed to do? It's a stranger to you and you know nothing else but the pretty exterior. I see absolutely nothing wrong in looking at something pretty or even giving a compliment, as long as it's not too overbearing. If I see a hot girl and have a nice double take of what I just saw, what exactly am I doing wrong? What could I do better in that situation? Not looking? Should I ask for a date and send flowers before I appreciate the automatic and genetic reaction I get anyway?

There is nothing wrong with appreciating beauty. People watch porn for the same reasons as they watch regular movies, yet no one calls out on cinema goers as bad people because they objectify actors. I mean there are people who laugh at deaths in horror movies. They're basically objectifying the victims for their own pleasure. Same thing in porn. It's a visual medium that is supposed to show you fantasy. You're not supposed to think of them as actual people but rather devices to fulfill your fantasy.

Same can be said about prostitution. Yes, prostitutes are basically treated like objects by their customers but that is literally the point. There is not supposed to be a special interpersonal bond. It's just one person doing manual labor for money. Construction workers are treated like objects, farmers are, literally every job that uses manual labor is basically selling your body for money. That is the whole point of it.

I will be damned for being called an asshole for appreciating things for their purpose. We're not talking about daylight rapists, we're talking about people who are hardwired to react to stimulants and would never hurt another human being.

As for genderism, the issue I have with a lot of it is the method of trying to obtain equality. People focus on the differences and celebrate the differences, but then suddenly demand equality while still being treated differently. That's toxic and unhelpful in my opinion. It's not "we deserve equal rights despite being women", it should be "we deserve equal rights because we are all humans". I actually hate genders and think they have outlived their usefulness. "Being proud to be a woman" is not more or less "toxic" than "manspreading". Gender should have absolutely zero bearing on anything unless you're talking to a doctor and biological sex is important for treatment.

I don't like feminists who try to achieve equality by claiming women are special or in some ways superior to men. The word feminism is already counterproductive. It's about human rights, not female rights. Society needs to grow up to a point where gender does not exist and everything that plops out of a vagina will be treated the same. That includes "harmless" things like gendered clothing and toys. The differences between men and women only exist in the first place because society works hard to separate the genders as much as possible. Just like a lot of feminists are working hard to establish that women are different while at the same time demanding to be equals.

On a side note, that's why I also have absolutely no respect for trans people. Because you cannot transition between arbitrary concepts that you invented yourself in your head. And that's what genders are; arbitrary concepts that do not hold up to any scrutiny when you seriously think about it. In my book trans people are inherently detrimental to any equal rights movement because they celebrate differences that do not exist and do not matter.

Last edited by vivster - 5 days ago

If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

See how many criminals said Trump inspired them, and try to tell me Trump's not a terrorist leader.

No president beforehand has inspired this many hate crimes, and by constantly spewing out his sociopathic xenophobia Trump is breeding white nationalist terrorism.

Thanks for nothing, America.



Some days I just blow up.

vivster said:
tsogud said:

Hmm... Good points, good points. Bolded being particularly truthful. Men do have a lot of pressure from society to act/be a certain way just like women.

Her research may have been shallow and her views on porn are antiquated but her observation holds some truth. Lesbians, particularly in the western world, really are sexualized and objectified a lot but I do disagree that porn is the sole cause or even a major factor at play here. It's pretty complex.

I hope you don't feel all feminists "try to put a wedge between genders" and exacerbate the issue though.

I'm actually a big opponent of the word "objectification". It's being treated as something inherently wrong but there is actually absolutely nothing bad about it.

Sex and attractiveness are natural stimulants. People like their stimulants, be it food, games, drugs or just looking at a pretty sunset. Looking at an attractive person and getting your fill because you appreciate what you see is normal and healthy. Yes, you basically look at the person as if it is an object, a beautiful object that is fun to look at. But what else are you supposed to do? It's a stranger to you and you know nothing else but the pretty exterior. I see absolutely nothing wrong in looking at something pretty or even giving a compliment, as long as it's not too overbearing. If I see a hot girl and have a nice double take of what I just saw, what exactly am I doing wrong? What could I do better in that situation? Not looking? Should I ask for a date and send flowers before I appreciate the automatic and genetic reaction I get anyway?

There is nothing wrong with appreciating beauty. People watch porn for the same reasons as they watch regular movies, yet no one calls out on cinema goers as bad people because they objectify actors. I mean there are people who laugh at deaths in horror movies. They're basically objectifying the victims for their own pleasure. Same thing in porn. It's a visual medium that is supposed to show you fantasy. You're not supposed to think of them as actual people but rather devices to fulfill your fantasy.

Same can be said about prostitution. Yes, prostitutes are basically treated like objects by their customers but that is literally the point. There is not supposed to be a special interpersonal bond. It's just one person doing manual labor for money. Construction workers are treated like objects, farmers are, literally every job that uses manual labor is basically selling your body for money. That is the whole point of it.

I will be damned for being called an asshole for appreciating things for their purpose. We're not talking about daylight rapists, we're talking about people who are hardwired to react to stimulants and would never hurt another human being.

As for genderism, the issue I have with a lot of it is the method of trying to obtain equality. People focus on the differences and celebrate the differences, but then suddenly demand equality while still being treated differently. That's toxic and unhelpful in my opinion. It's not "we deserve equal rights despite being women", it should be "we deserve equal rights because we are all humans". I actually hate genders and think they have outlived their usefulness. "Being proud to be a woman" is not more or less "toxic" than "manspreading". Gender should have absolutely zero bearing on anything unless you're talking to a doctor and biological sex is important for treatment.

I don't like feminists who try to achieve equality by claiming women are special or in some ways superior to men. The word feminism is already counterproductive. It's about human rights, not female rights. Society needs to grow up to a point where gender does not exist and everything that plops out of a vagina will be treated the same. That includes "harmless" things like gendered clothing and toys. The differences between men and women only exist in the first place because society works hard to separate the genders as much as possible. Just like a lot of feminists are working hard to establish that women are different while at the same time demanding to be equals.

On a side note, that's why I also have absolutely no respect for trans people. Because you cannot transition between arbitrary concepts that you invented yourself in your head. And that's what genders are; arbitrary concepts that do not hold up to any scrutiny when you seriously think about it. In my book trans people are inherently detrimental to any equal rights movement because they celebrate differences that do not exist and do not matter.

You bring up good points and I can understand where you're coming from but ultimately we were born into a sexist, patriarchal society, at least in the states. What feminism does is to specifically look at the effects that sex and gender play with inequality and injust treatment of individuals. There are many different sects of feminism most recognize that gender is a social construct, just like race, but these social constructs have very real effects in the real world. To just flat out deny their importance and the role they play on the sole basis of them being socially constructed helps no one and furthers the problems people face because of them. A lot of sects feel that feminism will inevitably lead to an abolishment of the gender construct, which I'm in favor of.

I believe Jaicee's lesbian feminism is an offshoot of white feminism which is very problematic in and of itself. White feminism only focuses on cis white women particularly in the western world, thankfully it's on the decline. White feminism tends to lead to racist, sexist, xenophobic, and/or transphobic observations and conclusions. In contrast, intersectional feminism takes into account class, race, gender, age, disability, religion and creed and how they relate to one another when establishing and achieving political, social, and economical equality between the sexes.

As a trans person, I find that last paragraph extremely problematic. We are the ones who defy gender stereotypes and the traditional gender roles of society and bring into question what it actually means to be a certain gender. So I don't see how that leads to more traditionalist genderism.

Last edited by tsogud - 5 days ago

 

tsogud said:
vivster said:

I'm actually a big opponent of the word "objectification". It's being treated as something inherently wrong but there is actually absolutely nothing bad about it.

Sex and attractiveness are natural stimulants. People like their stimulants, be it food, games, drugs or just looking at a pretty sunset. Looking at an attractive person and getting your fill because you appreciate what you see is normal and healthy. Yes, you basically look at the person as if it is an object, a beautiful object that is fun to look at. But what else are you supposed to do? It's a stranger to you and you know nothing else but the pretty exterior. I see absolutely nothing wrong in looking at something pretty or even giving a compliment, as long as it's not too overbearing. If I see a hot girl and have a nice double take of what I just saw, what exactly am I doing wrong? What could I do better in that situation? Not looking? Should I ask for a date and send flowers before I appreciate the automatic and genetic reaction I get anyway?

There is nothing wrong with appreciating beauty. People watch porn for the same reasons as they watch regular movies, yet no one calls out on cinema goers as bad people because they objectify actors. I mean there are people who laugh at deaths in horror movies. They're basically objectifying the victims for their own pleasure. Same thing in porn. It's a visual medium that is supposed to show you fantasy. You're not supposed to think of them as actual people but rather devices to fulfill your fantasy.

Same can be said about prostitution. Yes, prostitutes are basically treated like objects by their customers but that is literally the point. There is not supposed to be a special interpersonal bond. It's just one person doing manual labor for money. Construction workers are treated like objects, farmers are, literally every job that uses manual labor is basically selling your body for money. That is the whole point of it.

I will be damned for being called an asshole for appreciating things for their purpose. We're not talking about daylight rapists, we're talking about people who are hardwired to react to stimulants and would never hurt another human being.

As for genderism, the issue I have with a lot of it is the method of trying to obtain equality. People focus on the differences and celebrate the differences, but then suddenly demand equality while still being treated differently. That's toxic and unhelpful in my opinion. It's not "we deserve equal rights despite being women", it should be "we deserve equal rights because we are all humans". I actually hate genders and think they have outlived their usefulness. "Being proud to be a woman" is not more or less "toxic" than "manspreading". Gender should have absolutely zero bearing on anything unless you're talking to a doctor and biological sex is important for treatment.

I don't like feminists who try to achieve equality by claiming women are special or in some ways superior to men. The word feminism is already counterproductive. It's about human rights, not female rights. Society needs to grow up to a point where gender does not exist and everything that plops out of a vagina will be treated the same. That includes "harmless" things like gendered clothing and toys. The differences between men and women only exist in the first place because society works hard to separate the genders as much as possible. Just like a lot of feminists are working hard to establish that women are different while at the same time demanding to be equals.

On a side note, that's why I also have absolutely no respect for trans people. Because you cannot transition between arbitrary concepts that you invented yourself in your head. And that's what genders are; arbitrary concepts that do not hold up to any scrutiny when you seriously think about it. In my book trans people are inherently detrimental to any equal rights movement because they celebrate differences that do not exist and do not matter.

You bring up good points and I can understand where you're coming from but ultimately we were born into a sexist, patriarchal society, at least in the states. What feminism does is to specifically look at the effects that sex and gender play with inequality and injust treatment of individuals. There are many different sects of feminism most recognize that gender is a social construct, just like race, but these social constructs have very real effects in the real world. To just flat out deny their importance and the role they play on the sole basis of them being socially constructed helps no one and furthers the problems people face because of them. A lot of sects feel that feminism will inevitably lead to an abolishment of the gender construct, which I'm in favor of.

I believe Jaicee's lesbian feminism is an offshoot of white feminism which is very problematic in and of itself. White feminism only focuses on cis white women particularly in the western world, thankfully it's on the decline. White feminism tends to lead to racist, sexist, xenophobic, and/or transphobic observations and conclusions. In contrast, intersectional feminism takes into account class, race, gender, age, disability, religion and creed and how they relate to one another when establishing and achieving political, social, and economical equality between the sexes.

As a trans person, I find that last paragraph extremely problematic. We are the ones who defy gender stereotypes and the traditional gender roles of society and bring into question what it actually means to be a certain gender. So I don't see how that leads to more traditionalist genderism.

I will disagree with the statement about transgender. In my opinion it's not a bold stance against gender stereotypes, but pretty much the opposite. It is very much defeatist in nature. Instead of trying to fight for the recognition of being themselves as the person they're born as, they try desperately to affirm gender stereotypes by changing their categorization to fit the boxes society has deemed them to be in. Transgender people basically say that it is impossible for a man to display female characteristics unless he changes his gender. That is extremely detrimental to the gender they were born with because it gives power to people who strongly adhere to gender stereotypes and affirm their believes that genders should be treated inherently different.

Since you seem to be a reasonable transgender person I will ask you the question that always burns on my mind when thinking about this topic. How do you define the gender that you are transitioning to? And why do you believe that that definition is impossible to apply to your original gender?

Modern humans have evolved beyond their physical limitations. Yes, society is still inherently sexist, but that doesn't mean it has to stay that way. I struggle to find a single positive aspect about that strict separation of genders, All I see is plenty of negative aspects, that you as a transgender person should be very much familiar with. It is a self imposed hard limit on humans to live to their full potential. Women should also be very much familiar with that hard limit. I myself find myself very much limited as a man. While I do reap the benefits of the male stereotype I am also very much boxed into that stereotype since I absolutely do not fit into it. I am limited in my freedom of expression and very much looked down upon by the majority of males for my expression of traditionally non-masculine interests. Now you tell me what's so great and beneficial about keeping us boxed in.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

vivster said:
tsogud said:

You bring up good points and I can understand where you're coming from but ultimately we were born into a sexist, patriarchal society, at least in the states. What feminism does is to specifically look at the effects that sex and gender play with inequality and injust treatment of individuals. There are many different sects of feminism most recognize that gender is a social construct, just like race, but these social constructs have very real effects in the real world. To just flat out deny their importance and the role they play on the sole basis of them being socially constructed helps no one and furthers the problems people face because of them. A lot of sects feel that feminism will inevitably lead to an abolishment of the gender construct, which I'm in favor of.

I believe Jaicee's lesbian feminism is an offshoot of white feminism which is very problematic in and of itself. White feminism only focuses on cis white women particularly in the western world, thankfully it's on the decline. White feminism tends to lead to racist, sexist, xenophobic, and/or transphobic observations and conclusions. In contrast, intersectional feminism takes into account class, race, gender, age, disability, religion and creed and how they relate to one another when establishing and achieving political, social, and economical equality between the sexes.

As a trans person, I find that last paragraph extremely problematic. We are the ones who defy gender stereotypes and the traditional gender roles of society and bring into question what it actually means to be a certain gender. So I don't see how that leads to more traditionalist genderism.

I will disagree with the statement about transgender. In my opinion it's not a bold stance against gender stereotypes, but pretty much the opposite. It is very much defeatist in nature. Instead of trying to fight for the recognition of being themselves as the person they're born as, they try desperately to affirm gender stereotypes by changing their categorization to fit the boxes society has deemed them to be in. Transgender people basically say that it is impossible for a man to display female characteristics unless he changes his gender. That is extremely detrimental to the gender they were born with because it gives power to people who strongly adhere to gender stereotypes and affirm their believes that genders should be treated inherently different.

Since you seem to be a reasonable transgender person I will ask you the question that always burns on my mind when thinking about this topic. How do you define the gender that you are transitioning to? And why do you believe that that definition is impossible to apply to your original gender?

Modern humans have evolved beyond their physical limitations. Yes, society is still inherently sexist, but that doesn't mean it has to stay that way. I struggle to find a single positive aspect about that strict separation of genders, All I see is plenty of negative aspects, that you as a transgender person should be very much familiar with. It is a self imposed hard limit on humans to live to their full potential. Women should also be very much familiar with that hard limit. I myself find myself very much limited as a man. While I do reap the benefits of the male stereotype I am also very much boxed into that stereotype since I absolutely do not fit into it. I am limited in my freedom of expression and very much looked down upon by the majority of males for my expression of traditionally non-masculine interests. Now you tell me what's so great and beneficial about keeping us boxed in.

It seems you have some misconceptions about what it means to be transgender. To put it simply transgender individuals have a gender identity or expression that differs from their assigned sex at birth. You don't have to transition to be trans, some people can't transition due to medical or economical reasons and others just don't wish to transition. Transitioning itself also has various levels, for example, a trans man might just go through hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and not wish to go through top or bottom gender reassignment surgery and he can be perfectly fine with it. Likewise another might go through HRT and top surgery but not go through with bottom surgery. It's up to the individual to determine to what degree they feel comfortable and authentic with their external appearance. Even without medically transitioning a trans person can change various things about themselves like hair, clothes, pronouns and name to be more authentic to themselves.

There are many different identities under the trans umbrella, the ones we hear about most often is transitioned transwomen and transmen but there are others such as non-binary, genderfluid, agender, demigender, etc.

I'm a non-binary trans person my gender is neither male nor female. My gender expression is a mixture of masculine and feminine or straight up androgynous. So being who I am I can't really answer your questions because I haven't medically transitioned. The gender binary is pretty much bullshit to me but I do recognize that for other trans people it treats their gender dysphoria to medically transition to a male or female and look more traditionally masculine or feminine.

Feminism ultimately wishes to free individuals from the shackles societal gender roles and stereotypes has given us. Men and women can be liberated to be there authentic selves. Men can show emotions without looking weak and women can hold a positions of power etc. In feminism sex and gender shouldn't matter and it shouldn't be something that holds someone back from being who they are or want to be.

So hopefully you can see that neither "transgenderism" nor feminism puts people in boxes such as you say. We're striving for something better than what we were born into.

I kinda rambled on a little there so let me know if you need me to clear anything up.

Last edited by tsogud - 4 days ago