#conservative ideology is harmful folks!

[thedreadpirate-cupcake]

Gosh it's really such a heart-sinking feeling when someone you love starts to fall deeper and deeper into conservative ideology, anti-trans, anti-lgbtq Ben Shapiro/Matt Walsh/Jordan Peterson vibes coupled with the Elon Musk and shitty capitalist neoliberal sentiments.

Someone you love and have grown up with and want in your life because they're immediate family or a dear friend and basically all their beliefs and values are opposite to yours (in my case i am a non-binary, asexual lesbian leftist atheist). I value people having the freedom to be themselves, as long as they aren't hurting anyone. And to have someone who i genuinely love and care about have such hateful beliefs is really difficult to reconcile with my values and who i want in my life. Cause in my case, it's my older brother. He's gonna have a kid. I am gonna be an aunt. And i'm so scared that that kid is going to be absorbing such insidiously hateful crap or is queer themselves and gets taught to hate themselves from an early age like i did, being raised by "well-meaning" bigots.

I dunno, just a ramble. And i know this might be a bit of a displacement of emotion and it's not all their fault or anything but right now idgaf, they've contributed: fuck Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh and Jordan Peterson for spreading their crap around, and doing this to my family. We're not even American or living in the West and we're getting their shitty fucking brainvomits. I'm so upset about this actually lol.

#lgbtqia #family #asshole conservatives #fuck ben shapiro #fuck jordan peterson #fuck matt walsh #fuck elon musk #they can suck my metaphorical dick #conservative ideology is harmful folks!

[blackfilmmakers]

"you can't objectify characters because they're objects 🤓🤓🤓" well okay but you can reduce character traits' of characters that REPRESENT HUMANSSSS. Reducing character traits are a key process in the process of objectifying someone. I love how people use these type of takes to feed into their harmful ideologies while simultaneously downplaying and dismissing common forms of racism in fandom (demonization and/or fetishization of POC fictional characters)

idk man people will do ANYTHING but realize how your treatment of characters contribute to racism and OTHER forms of bigotry... it can be so frustrating sometimes, but I'm glad there's other black folks like you that can call them out, since as a black person, at times i just can't deal with these kind of people

This trend of reducing media literacy because "the curtains are just blue" people want to make fun of those they deem as elitists, are doing so much damage to yalls(not u specifically anon) minds

Why do yall think conservatives love making fun of art majors of any kind? Or any creative that learns about the history and thought process of those before them out of interest?

You learn how art can represent people, and you learn how it can affect people's perception of those groups irl. That has always been a thing. If it wasn't, then places like Ancient Rome wouldn't have fifty thousand stories that have heroes messing up certain territories presented as the bad guys, and are 'coincidencntally' enemies of the empire somehow

If not humans, a lot of times the monsters are supposed to represent a group of people too

It's basic metaphors and allegories type shit, yall should have learned this in elementary

#anon #media literacy

[read-marx-and-lenin]

I hope you don't mind my asking, you seem well-read and reasonable so I thought you might be able to help here - I'm a British communist trying to find a good organisation to join, there's tons of communist parties here but every time I search for opinions on one I either find out they're transphobic or see a bunch of people dismiss them as Trotskyist timewasters. Forgive me if the question seems a bit naïve, but how much do you think that sectarianism really matters these days?

I don't presently claim to be any specific form of communist, I've just read some Marx and some Lenin and agree with what they say, and when trying to familiarise myself with the various inter-factional conflicts I'm just not really seeing how relevant it is here - yes, some American Trots in the 50s ended up reactionary, and some MLs are concerningly eager to downplay the harm their favourite leaders caused, and everyone argues over the current state of China, but...how much does any of this really matter to building a revolutionary movement in 21st century Britain? Isn't it better to just find an active group and get to work building class consciousness than to dismiss each other for having the wrong opinions on shit that happened 70 years ago?

I can't recommend any British orgs as I don't live in the UK, but in general, if you find an organization that is actively doing work in your community that you agree with and want to support, then you should consider joining them even if they don't 100% align with your beliefs. Joining an organization is not a permanent life-altering decision, and you can leave if it turns out it's not for you.

I don't think you're conflating transphobia and sectarianism here, but I feel like I need to state that bigotry in general is not petty sectarianism, it's just bigotry. Racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, or otherwise reactionary orgs are not worth your time, even if you like the other things they say or do. We've all seen what happens when supposedly leftist organizations pander to social conservatives.

I don't think an organization has to take a stance on Soviet foreign policy or the events of the Russian Revolution in order to be a good organization. I think an organization can talk shit about Stalin or Mao and still be worthwhile to participate in, even if I think they're parroting Western propaganda. As long as they have are class-conscious, in favor of revolution and are doing good work in the community, then they're already better than the liberals and reformists. Even working with reformists can be a good first step when you're dealing with a lack of decent left-wing organization. I wouldn't work directly with liberal orgs, though, they're dead ends.

No organization will ever match your own personal politics and opinions. Organizations are made up of people who will naturally have a variety of different beliefs and opinions. It is a matter of organizational discipline to be able to handle these disputes and turn them into something productive. Low discipline is what creates splits and factionalism.

An organization that is hyper-focused on one specific and dogmatic ideological line that cares more about ideological purity than about actually doing real work is just as bad as a big tent party that prioritizes raw numbers above a coherent message and platform. Some sectarianism is necessary to ensure an organization even has a point to its existence. If you can't reliably and honestly say "we are not liberals", for instance, then what actually distinguishes you from liberals beyond the color of your rhetoric? Too much sectarianism, and you end up excluding folks who would otherwise be willing to support your cause over petty nonsense.

If an organization isn't dismissing you for ideological reasons and you see that they're doing good work, then I would say give them a shot. If they're not doing good work or they won't accept the help of someone who isn't already in line with their specific ideology, then why should you want to join them?

A counter-productive org is worse than no org, but no org is worse than a less-than-perfect org. Honest mistakes and shortcomings can be corrected over time. So long as the organization is demonstrably dedicated to dismantling capitalism and liberating the working class, then I don't see why you shouldn't consider working with them.

#anon ask #communism #socialism #leftism #anti capitalism

[butch-reidentified]

gotta be honest, I'm so tired of comments like this. it's a frustrating and unrealistic assumption to make. trans people are everywhere. how many of us HAVEN'T known trans people irl at this point?? what lesbian 20-something doesn't know trans people irl?? I run into trans people a pretty solid portion of times I leave the house these days. I mean, they're 5% of young adults and increasing.

but on top of that, if you even read my blog for 10 seconds you don't need to ask this. honestly you don't even need to read past my PINNED which links to this:

but I also post frequently, including just yesterday, about particular trans friends, especially the ones who contributed to my becoming disillusioned with gender identity ideology by listening to them explain how it was becoming more and more harmful to sex-dysphoric transsexuals.

I went to a small liberal arts college famous for being extremely far left and predominantly lgbt(q+). I speak about my multiple years identifying as trans and being around trans people daily irl for years. it's no secret. but people would rather make unfounded assumptions than do any actual informing themselves about the person they're making those assumptions about. and I really am tired of it.

not to mention, not all trans people even do subscribe to the ideology. TRA =/= trans. these are not synonymous. plenty of TRA's call themselves cisgender, and plenty of trans-identifying folk are not TRA's.

not to mention, nothing about criticizing an ideology or its rhetoric necessitates hating the people who subscribe to it. you can critique something without hate. dissent is not hate. you can speak out about how an ideology is negatively impacting you/certain groups without wanting people dead or stripped of rights and freedom. in fact, even many people with dissenting beliefs on sex/gender still support protecting trans people.

I will say, this study is flawed: while conservatives may believe that gender is determined by sex, this is not the same question as "can whether a person is a man or woman be different from sex assigned at birth?" this question only makes sense if you view "man" and "woman" as genders. radfems do not. radfems use the dictionary "adult human female" definition of woman, which specifies SPECIES and SEX, just like "doe" and "buck" specify for deer. gender does not factor into it.

gender refers to the patriarchal social construct that assigns stereotypes, roles, behaviors, styles, likes/dislikes, abilities, etc. based on sex. gender is assigning masculinity to male humans (men) and femininity to female humans (women). conservatives want to perpetuate this assignment of gender to sex, masculinity enforced in males and femininity enforced in females. TRA's want us to pretend sex doesn't exist, only gender, but it's fine because you can pick what gender label "feels right." radfems want to get rid of this patriarchal construct so everyone would be free to be themselves without the ridiculous pressure to conform to gender. radfems do not believe that simply relabeling oneself with a different gender label solves anything, but may actually worsen the issue by reinforcing the existence of the gender construct (which is inherently regressive and sexist). I don't want to call myself nonbinary or a man so that my body hair is more acceptable (for example); I want women to be allowed to just exist in our natural state. my body hair has NOTHING to do with "gender," it's just something every human being is born with and grows more of during puberty.

#mine #gender and sex #gender identity ideology

[korrasera]

The Reason People Fail At Being Leftists

The reason so many people fail at being progressive or leftist is because they fail to embrace the psychological growth that pulled them left in the first place. Before policy is ever involved, before ideology matters, what is most important is how you tend to your own growth as a human being.

The reason people are drawn to the left in the first place is because they see that authoritarian behavior harms all of us. They learn to recognize cruelty and indifference and the harm. They've seen evils of systemic prejudice, like racism or sexism or antisemitism, and they cannot stomach it anymore.

And everyone has seen leftists that try not to grow. The kind of people who flee one team for another team that they think is slightly less awful. Some of them think that being progressive is fighting for the red team instead of the blue team, ignorant of how it's their fear of other people and their need to get on teams and fight it out that's the real problem. And so many people like this eventually regress back to being conservative and authoritarian. Just consider the various problems that minority groups have had with certain strains of feminists that now gladly partner with conservative political groups, particularly when it comes to policing queer folks and people that aren't white.

If you want to be progressive, you have to start by looking in the mirror. Your fear is what keeps you from growing. You need to learn to control it. Only by controlling our fears do we learn how to care for each other regardless of race or creed or any other line that's been drawn in prejudice and hatred.

#authoritarianism #leftism #progressivism

[genderqueerdykes]

i keep seeing all these 15 year olds on here with like "proud TERF" in their bio and honestly its really scary?? I'm only a year older than them so to know that people in my peer group could follow these violent, harmful ideologies is actually borderline terrifying. it's also sorta just sad because i know that when i first discovered the internet i could've been just as easily brainwashed and I'm so lucky that my first exposure online was trans-affirming because TERFs LOVE to prey on people who have been extremely sheltered or only been exposed to conservative ideology

i feel you, it makes me very, very sad when i see "proud terf" and then the persons age is under like... idk 35 or some shit. it just makes me go :c thinking about what it must be like to be that young and to be hurting that bad that you find joy in violence toward others

it's really, really hard... i was brainwashed when i first got on the internet as well. i hate admitting this but i used 4chan for a while because all my friends did, and i wanted to "fit in with the guys" so i would browse with them. i almost never posted due to anxiety, even on an anonymous site, and i'm glad, because thinking back to those days, i didn't even enjoy what i saw on there, i was just doing it because i thought i was part of something. my friends all used it so i like... thought i was part of a community? even though i felt gross and sad every time i went on there.

i get being young and in a state of mind where you're fragile, easily manipulated and angry, but it hurts to see terfs successfully grabbing people who are that young. i just wonder why, like i have to wonder what they're saying to even hook people in to begin with that can entice someone, especially someone that young. i really don't understand it, and i hope that those people are able to gain perspective outside of those echo chambers and hateful, toxic environments and engage in positive and inclusive spaces instead. i get wanting to feel like you're part of something, feeling jaded, disconnected, different and feeling like you're "not like other girls"- i was there too when i was younger, but violence and hatred toward people who cause no harm is not the answer.

i hope we see a sharp decrease in those kinds of people very soon. it's disheartening to see, but luckily it's very few folks in comparison to the amount of trans, nb, gnc and pronoun non conforming people i see. hopefully those kinds of folks are able to heal and move on. i'm glad you were able to get past the toxic spaces that grabbed you at first when you got online, as well. it's hard to do. take care of yourself, stay safe.

#asks #answers #terf mention #terfs tw #ask to tag #brainwashing #negativity

[nakibistan]

Trans and gender non-binary people have always existed in this world. We can trace their history back in several pre-modern societies and civilizations. Native+Indigenous Americans have a rich history of gender diversity. Moreover, Asia has been known for it's recognition of multiple trans and gender variant identities, such as, hijra/kinner, khawaja sara, mukhannath, köcek, khanith, sida-sida, doh-jens/dojence, waria, kathoey, mak nyah, calalai, calabai, bissue, bakla, etc. Gender fluidity was celebrated among earliest christians, jews & muslims. We have to understand that gender diversity is not a modern phenomenon or a western ideology. It is worth noting that, gender-diverse folks weren't never seen as threat to 'traditional family values' in pre-colonial era. They were treated with dignity & respect.

Nowdays, it is very disheartening to see that the existence of trans & queer folks is often devalued, and that they have to fight tirelessly to get their rights. It is a grave concern that in many countries, trans rights are under attack. We sadly observe acts of violence and discrimination against gender-diverse folks, we have lost so many trans & non-binary lives for this hate 😞

Shame on you, right-wing extremists, woke republicans, woke conservatives, and TERFs. Shame on you, who weaponize so-called 'religious views', 'women's safety', 'morality', & 'family values' to normalise hate against the trans community. Shame on you, filthy transphobes. Your intolerance and cruelty will be met with justice one day. Your harmful actions will catch up to you through the karma.

[thenalanita-art]

Uhh... this is a bit awkward, but you're still ok with interacting with folks that aren't huge fans of wokeness/sjw/feminism, but still hate all the right wing conservatives as well, right?

In a sort of "let's just agree to disagree in a civil manner" kind of way, you know?

I'm sorry for sending this, that last reblog is just giving me mad anxiety, as someone who has a couple of criticisms towards leftists. And I just want to confirm that the fears of you hating and judging me for that are unfounded. (Because really, there's no malice or hate behind any of it, I just don't think that ideology is going to result in the world becoming a happier or better place. Especially with how aggressive and close minded a lot of the people behind it are)

On a more fun note - I love the goofy black cat, and if you're ever on a burnout (or in literally any other situation, really), but still feel like posting stuff, I'd be happy to see 'em! :D

First of all: As long you don't wish harm for people because of your views I hoestly don't really care. I'm not the type who'd argue over other people's views anyways because it's waste of time. Block button supremacy

And second of all: I'm glad you're enjoying my silly content!

#ask

[liskantope]

I had one of those Moments today while socializing with a small group of friends I've made among faculty at my university (pretty much the only friends I've made since moving here, actually), who are a very SJ-ideology-right-down-the-line bunch as is most often the case in academia (they're all in the humanities, which doesn't help). The two most aggressively SJ of them, who frequently make references to how racist restrictive immigration policies are and how racist everything is in general, are a couple from Canada. Today they were ranting about the history of demographic issues in Quebec. I know next to nothing about this, but I understand from them that many decades ago the French spoken in Quebec was in danger of being supplanted by English and so measures were taken to get more immigration from French-speaking countries, then when that turned out to include a bunch of African or otherwise non-white countries the government went, "Wait, no, we didn't mean those kinds of people" and managed to turn this into a large influx of French people, mainly from Paris, instead. But the problem with that is that Parisians are used to paying tons of rent (because, well, Paris) and so were willing to live at a much higher cost than was the standard in Quebec, eventually raising rent for everyone there. Those two friends were vehemently denouncing this trend and the harm it did to the Quebecois who were already there; at one point one of them said that she "hated" the Parisians in Quebec for this.

And I was sitting there thinking, "Isn't this, in economic terms, just a variation on one of the main basic cases American conservatives make against immigration? Which I know according to you just entirely boils down to hating darker-skinned people, but if you listen to the genuine concerns some of the anti-immigration folks have, it's about how people from a lot of less privileged countries are used to lower wages so they'll accept a bunch of menial jobs for lower wages than Americans are willing to get for those jobs, and then the immigrants will cause wages to go down for everyone. In this case, instead of talking about how little people are willing to be paid, it's about how much people are willing to pay, but your 'hating' Parisian immigrants for what they're doing to the economy seems to be a very similar principle, no?"

And of course, as almost always, I kept my thoughts to myself, because I value not injecting tension between myself and some of the very few true friends I have in this geographic region.

#social justice #racism #quebec #french language #immigration #how would one frame the the difference between the two? #in terms of supply-side vs. demand-side or something? #please feel free to inform me on Quebec or on eco terms #i try for certain boundaries on complaining about friends here #and i'm pretty close to crossing that line with this one

[dipperdesperado]

Hogwarts Legacy and the Limits of Liberal Allyship

Seeing the conversation around Hogwarts Legacy has confirmed my belief that the bandwidth of conventional American politics is so small, and can't encompass literally any action that challenges the status quo.

For those who don't know, Hogwarts Legacy (HL) is an upcoming AAA Western RPG where you play as a created character in the Harry Potter universe. It's gotten a lot of flak due to its ties to JK Rowling (JKR). She still gets money from anything in the Harry Potter IP due to her contract negotiations. The issue with JKR is that she doesn't believe that trans women are women. Due to this, a lot of folks, especially those in trans communities are asking people not to play the game.

The issue comes in when people are not only going to play the game but are loudly playing it. People revel in the fact that there are those who "are mad" that they're playing a game.

But, it's so much more than that. Just because people have such a strong affinity for Harry Potter, they feel like they can't help but play the game. While I've never really engaged with the IP, from what I do know, that shit did not age well in most regards.

The simple fact is, if someone from a community is like, "hey, can you not do this thing that enables people to harm me and people in my community"? Our answer should be yes. There should be no argument. Why is this an issue?

It's an issue because of the prevailing politics of the day. As I mentioned before, this is American-centric, but neoliberalism is worldwide, baby. It affects all of us.

In the liberal conventional thought around social issues, supporting marginalized movements and ideologies is only acceptable within a certain range of actions and contexts. It all ends up being performative, due to a very shallow, mostly aesthetic analysis.

Like, anything that makes them uncomfortable is too far, and any dissent from the community is asking too much.

While liberals see themselves as being more progressive than conservatives, it seems that the extent of their allyship is the yearly rainbow flag logo shit. Both groups inherently uphold the structures that exist (which cause the need for there to be such strong allyship in the first place.)

To bring it back to HL, if people want to play the game, I don't agree with it but like, I'm not gonna smack you over the head. It just proves the point to a great degree when they feel the need to not only buy it (instead of 🏴‍☠️), but to tell these folks that you're going to. They're upset because people don't seem to care about their issues, especially when a lot of LITERALLY genocidal things are happening to trans folks.

The whole thing just feels very scary. How many times do we have to go through historic moments before people start to see the patterns? I really hope that people start understanding that allies don't mean shit. Folks need accomplices.

If you want to know how to help, find those communities in your locality and get involved. Send them some bands, like the amount that you would've spent on the game if you were to buy it. Show up, in real solidarity. We have to protect each other. This kind of shit does not end well for marginalized people in general (bigotry will always try to envelop more and more people). Stay safe, and stand with your community. Here's a link to learn more.

#hogwarts #harry potter #hogwarts legacy #jk rowling #trans rights #support trans people #support trans youth #support trans rights

[shut-up-rabert]

Honestly, some far right "hindu" groups may not be too keen on lgbtq which goes on to tell you how far from Hindu they truly are (come on, even Dr. Bhagwat supports the lgbt), but they aren't out there to harm them either. They still keep their distance, out of spite albiet, despite being problematic in more ways as I mentioned in a previous post.

That being said, the far left lgbtq groups aren't a treat either. The reason why most Hindus unaware of the group refuse to accept them is because of 🌟bollywood🌟 and Turk and British rule deluding us, currently the pride parade fiascos are a much bigger factor in the groups being alienated these days. That smbg lines drama this year, Bharat mata being a lesbian and Kashmir drama last year.

Look, I'm not saying that they are invalid in having whatever viewpoints they want because more often than not, they are ostracized and go through atrocities for neing the way they are, and develope trauma and hatred, and its human decency to not bring up trauma inducing stuff in front of people, even if they are being assholes. Do you think I will go to a rape victim who hates all men because of what she went through? Fuck no.

But here's the deal: anyone who has hatred because of trauma is ,while entitled to their opinion, is not allowed to be disrespectful to other people who did nothing wrong. A rape victim still isn't right in wanting men to die. A pride parade participant who had trauma because of conservative 'hindu' parents isn't right in disrespecting hindu religion and culture at the pride either, because that isn't constricted to their family and bringing it to mass media will hurt sentiments.

No matter what you went through, gling out of your way giving disrespect to disconnected people is still wrong.

And this is regarding the ones who have actually have trauma, most aren't even close. The same way majority of the "all men should die" radfems haven't gone through anything severe and are raficalised by the net

They are simply pissed off and decide to take their frustration out in a way that not only makes it difficult for religious queer folks to connect to them, but also make it difficulties those in closet by making enemies out of previously unconcerened/not severely negative family members.

When you are a flagbearer of a moment, you are supposed to be careful with the message you send. We all saw what happened when the feminist moment failed in that and let the crazies hijack, even equality driven men and women refuse to call themselves feminist today and the concept of gender equality is seen seperate from feminism. Same is beginning with other leftist (and even rightist) ideologies. I'm afraid the severity of present Queer moment is going in the same direction, because the base for it seems to be formed.

#lgbtq #delhi pride parade #gay pride parade #desiblr #hindublr #hinduphobia

[thkingslayer]

i am furious. i am heartbroken. abortions won’t stop, but safe ones will. people will die. while this ban will affect many, it will disproportionately harm low-income women, women of color (particularly black women) and lgbtq+ folks. and, this could only be the beginning.

because a court that is supposed to be impartial is political. conservatives have pushed this agenda under the guise of “religion” and caring about babies. and yet, when there are measures, like gun control, to protect children from getting shot in their schools or anywhere else, they don’t support them. do not say you are “pro-life” when so much of your political ideology in fact restricts or ignores people’s rights.

i am sad for myself and those around me at this moment, as i live in a trigger ban state. i am sad for everyone across this country. but i am angry too and i know we can’t give up. somehow we have to find the strength to keep protesting, speaking out, and supporting the fight. abortionfunds.org

#roe v wade #abortion is a human right #reproductive rights #bans off our bodies

[aizenat]

Standing by your community doesn’t mean you have to like what all they do. Black ppl trend more religious than white Americans and I fucking hate the hold Christianity has on Black folk. I don’t go out of my way to be antagonistic, but if anyone asks, instead of the general issues of sexism and stuff I know Black ppl don’t care about I would simply say my reason for not being a Christian is that it’s insane for Black people to trust our slavers and oppressors with our spiritual wellbeing. And I’d have to say that because I know, especially in this day and age where everyone wanna act like they woke, that would get more a reaction and thought than anything I could say about the idiocy of the religion.

And if a Black person IS using their religion to justify bigoted views, imma call that out too. Not just let it go because whites would prefer I don’t challenge it or some shit.

Also, I’m not a fucking sheep. I see black ppl doing shit I don’t like I call it out. I see women doing shit I don’t like I call it out. I see btiq+alphabet soup brigade doing some shit I don’t like, guess what? I’m a call that shit out too.

Your identity doesn’t protect you from criticism, and you’re not owed community especially when your behavior and actions are harmful to said community. I don’t care if the homophobes see me calling you out; they’ll appreciate the call out then zone out when I go into details because they won’t agree with my reasoning. Because I’m still left leaning and the WHY when it comes to these call outs is much different than a conservative’s why.

Malcolm X wasn’t a fan of Christianity either. There was a whole movement of Black ppl in the 70s -90s converting to Islam because Christianity was the white man’s religion that was forced on us during slavery (which is true; though converting to Islam wasn’t the right answer to that but whatever). This is why a lot of millennial Black ppl have Arabic/Arabic-adjacent names, myself included. Does this mean criticizing the religion makes me anti black? Am I not standing with the community because I think religion is toxic and does Black folk more harm than good? Of course not.

So don’t act like it’s the same when gays and lesbians call y’all “queers” out on your shit. It’s not about throwing y’all under the bus or whatever. When conservatives get to starting I’m still standing with y’all over them any fucking day. But I’m still gonna call y’all out when y’all pushing ideas and policies and behaviors that literally hurt someone like me. That’s called holding your community accountable, something everyone from every belief and ideological group should be able to do to make sure it doesn’t get overtaken by bad faith actors. It keeps our side, and our conscience, clean. If y’all making this statement weren’t so toxic and egregious with your beliefs, you wouldn’t have to be getting called out all the time, bruv.

[darkmarxsoul]

(I suggest reading this entire ask in the calmest manner possible, since I'm not here trying to aggravate anyone. However...) There are people who get horny at the sight of feet; okay hmm, should we ban bare feet from public places then, like beaches? There are people who see women's chests bounce while they walk and get aroused; alright, should we ban women's boobs from public spaces? How about smells? Since some get aroused from those too... Then there are individuals who see naked people and don't feel anything. In some cultures public nudity can even be expected and completely normal (a certain African one with women having their boobs out comes to mind) Are these other cultures wrong for being that way, just because someone in another country might see boobs and think of sex? If no, then why should kinksters change their way of self-expression and culture, just because other people can't see past the possible sexual connotations of their clothes? (again, should we ban feet...?) Then, at around the 2000s (if i remember correctly), there were mainstream fashion trends that included vintage cock-rings in them because straight folks didn't know what they were. No one was hurt by a couple metal rings on clothing. No one has been actually hurt by seeing leather clothes, just like no one has been hurt by seeing things like cosplay. Sure, people can- and do get uncomfortable at times, but I get uncomfortable and nauseous around certain perfumes and I certainly can't tell other people what they should smell like. I can deal with my slight discomfort. I can just walk away from the person or put up with the displeasure for a moment, depending on how bad I feel. All of this is to say: the kind of arguments you're talking on don't tend to make sense when they're broken down into what is really happening. Kink isn't inherently about sex, and even then sexual feelings aren't inherently bad, or wrong, or "sinful", and kink at pride is really just about dressing up a bit weird for the mainstream culture. People aren't advocating for having literal sex in the middle of a rally, and I'm afraid that if anyone says that that is happening, then they're lying to try and prove a point about "gay people can't be trusted". Gay people just existing in whatever way they want aren't "sinful" and "wrong", even if it involves leather clothing or doggy masks... It's just clothing in the end, outfits, like cosplay, no matter what that clothing's private-time use is. Just like people can have sex in daily work-wear when they get home. People participating in pride aren't hurting anyone by showing up in similar outfits straight folks at coachella wear every year. I saw lingerie and panties and bras almost daily when coachella came on. No one batted an eye, even when those clothes can be considered to have sexual connotations. And I certainly don't want to force people to cover up more... Perhaps we, especially in the west, just need to re-frame how we see these kinds of things, how we see nudity, or kink, or sex itself. With that said, it seems that underneath it all, there is a lot of conservative ideology you're pushing. Maybe you don't truly realize it, maybe it doesn't feel like it, but it is there and it's kinda... not good from another lgbt+ viewpoint... However, I'm not trying to shame you. You're allowed to feel uncomfortable around these topics, just like I'm allowed to be uncomfortable next to awful smelling perfume, no-one's feelings are invalid, but what you do with those feelings can incredibly harmful to people's livelihoods and rights to simply exist. No one is trying to say that *you* yourself have to become a kinkster or get really into sex or anything. But how you're trying to police and control what other lgbt+ people are doing because *you* or some others feel uncomfortable is giving increasing authoritarian, christian-conservative talking points. Otherwise have a nice day. Again. This is just talking across the internet, just some dialogue. But I hope it can give some food for thought.

I think the difference from the things you specified is that feet, smells, and the breasts of those assigned female at birth, are all just things in the world that exist on their own. Things like harnesses, pup masks, gimp suits, stuff like that, were created and emerged out of a culture that was intrinsically linked to sex. Some people integrate them into their everyday life based on some kind of mode of living they find comfortable, but the community and the source of that behaviour is undeniably based in sex. Trying to split hairs here is not doing anybody any favours. I don't see them as being the same thing.

Basically, I would disagree that kink is not about sex. Some INDIVIDUALS may perform kink in non-sexual contexts, but the OVERALL cultures and communities of pretty much every kink are irrevocably linked with sex. Literally if you look up "pup mask" one of the first sites you get is a BDSM site with material that is clearly intended to be used for sex. At that point it doesn't matter if SOME of the stuff is not used for sex. It is CONNECTED to stuff that is, it is part of a CULTURE that is about sex. That is enough.

Like you're right, nobody is "hurt" by seeing blatantly sexual things in public, but it's totally reasonable to feel uncomfortable and alienated by seeing somebody broadcast their sexual preferences and/or alignment with a kink community in public, because it just IS something sexually strange and kind of alarming. I don't think it is unreasonable for people to WANT sex to be something that kept to the bedroom, or to communities' own private spheres. And, I also think it's reasonable for people who aren't into KINK specifically, to not want to see kink stuff. I think people who are into kink should exercise a bit of self-awareness that the stuff they're into is naturally going to put some people off due to how strange and unsettling it is in the context of sex. Just because YOU are okay with your kink stuff doesn't mean that EVERYBODY should be. It's kink BECAUSE a minority of people are into it.

It's weird. You should respect that it's weird and let the rest of society have its boundaries respected, provided it also acknowledges that it's your right to do it within your spheres.

I also believe that it is not unthinkable that minors who are exposed to those things might want to explore those things too. And that's fair enough, minors are allowed to have fetishes, but things like BDSM and stuff like that involve a whole swath of behavioural nuance that is necessary to ensure people don't wind up literally traumatized by people going across their boundaries, whether intentionally or not. I don't necessarily believe that teenagers are well enough equipped to navigate that sphere of things responsibly or safely. And if you just throw a bunch of ignorant, unaware people into a community like that, quite frankly bizarre and unsettling cultural norms and behaviour results. I've seen enough weirdoes on online communities to know that.

And, even without all of these considerations, that's not even really the main issue. The main issue at least for me is, I don't agree that being gay is a kink. Being gay runs the entire gamut of romantic and sexual pairbonding experiences, it just limits the genders of the partners you can possibly have the same way being straight does. When you integrate kink into pride, what you're doing is you're making Being Sexually Aberrant into an aspect of being gay. When you do that, that makes ALL GAY PEOPLE irreocably connected to fetishes simply by existing. It is literally impossible for a gay person to engage with their own LGBT community while also not wanting to be associated with kink because they just want to be a normal-ass person the same as any normal-ass person.

I totally understand WHY these communities are connected culturally, but just because they WERE in the past doesn't mean they SHOULD BE forever. I think being gay should be just seen as totally unremarkable. That should be a right they have. But being kink by its very definition will never be, nor should it be expected to be.

And that's the difference between Pride and coachella, as far as I know. Coachella ONLY exists to be a festival where people go around in sexual clothing and do that stuff. If you're going to go to coachella, that is something that you should expect to see because that's the point. The question for Pride is, what is Gay Pride FOR? It's in the name—it's for gay people. It's to profess that being gay is to be accepted and celebrated in the face of those who think it is not. But being gay is not the same as being kink or sexually bizarre. It's not the same as wearing a cock ring or a gimp suit or a pup mask. And it shouldn't be implied to be. It should just be what it is—being attracted to the same sex, whether that be sexually or romantically or whatever.

(Though as a digression I do believe society is too obsessed with sex and I believe it is necessary to chill tf out about it)

However I will fully admit that I understand the argument that by engaging in this discussion I am pushing conservative ideology. I have a similar issue with people who debate trans people's participation in sports. These are complex philosophical ideas that I think are worth talking about, but not if they push fascist ideals. I want to walk the line between engaging in discussion that is worth having, and not giving fascists a platform.

It's been hard to know where that line is. I want to believe that as a random dude on the Internet I don't have the kind of platform wherein I could seriously impact anything, but the things I say here are visible. So maybe I really am just having a negative impact, and now is not the time to even be humoring this kind of thing. I've been thinking a lot about that and I'm not sure where I stand. But it's been good to have the opportunity to reflect on it.

I appreciate the effort you put into typing this and the fact that you extended a proverbial olive branch about it. You have a nice day too.

[straightfromthetorturedpoetsdept]

Let me make something abundantly clear to all terfs and transphobic bigots, your argument comes down to conservatives are right about sex and no matter how much you try and say that your ideology differs from conservative ideology, it doesn't.

Here's why:

There is nothing in our biology that makes names, pronouns, or articles of clothing, length of hair or hormones inherently masculine or feminine. Both sexes have the ability to make both sets of "sexed" items, so really all transition is doing is inverting the balance of the dominant hormone in a person's biology to overcome their final sex chromosome.

If you knew how sex worked in humans, you'd know that it's your last sex chromosome that determines the expression of certain sex organs or features. I think that's how it works in all animals, but don't quote me on that I don't have a special interest in animal biology. But I know for humans, all our "sex" features are found in somatic chromosomes. Testicle production (which is just having external ovaries) is found on chromosome 17 (? I'm highly af right now) which means both males and females have the ability to produce testicles. The X chromosome suppresses the external representation of that gene and makes it internal to make ovaries and the final sex chromosomes determines whether or not gene 17 stays off indefinitely or turns back on to produce the testicle gene.

Evolutionarily speaking, nature tends to evolve in such a way that males have to fight to exist naturally. Like nature really hates having males come into existence and usually if a species is alive long enough, the males become biologically unnecessary. Anyways. Back to basic biology 601.

Nothing in our sex chromosomes is unique to one gender. All our sex chromosomes do is affect the expression of somatic genes in our body. Which means that ALL humans have the ability to present male or female, which is why scientists are classifying humans as sexually monomorphic now. Because they are realizing more and more how our culture affects our sexual expression and how studies show facial dimorphism for ex is location based which means that the only thing that males and females for sure have different in our phenotypical forms is our pelvices and that can be explained by structure function, not mate selection so it's not sexual dimorphism.

Theoretically, all species should have pelvic differences between the sex that carries vs the sex that impregnates because duh that makes sense why it'd be different if u hold a baby versus not. It doesn't mean it was selected by the opposite sex because it's physically appealing ? That doesn't make any sense which is what sexual dimorphism describes btw. PHENOTYPICAL differences between sexes selected through mating.

So, anyways, males are also only 15% bigger on average and many studies show that women can outperform men in gaining muscle mass, especially because of cultural history. Like black women were enslaved and forced to work manually, so they naturally have higher testosterone levels then both white men and women do because there was a genetic need for their sex hormones to naturally deviate from the white genetic needs of hormone levels between sexes. So black women have a greater ability to gain muscle mass than white men do in america especially. But even if we look through a fatphobic lens, black women were sexually selected by their mates to naturally have bigger ass and breasts and so in order to gain a lot of mass in your gluteus maximus muscles, you'd need to have more testosterone available since we know that the two are linked. So yeah, there are many different cultural lens that affect the expression of sex chromosomes because we know epigenetics is real and verifable by the science. And we know colonization was a huge environmental threat to black people but also to poor and uneducated white folks since they get exploited as through via capitalism and the side effects of harmful and restrictful narratives and ideals is that everybody has to adhere to them because we lead by example as a species and these ideas wouldn't have gained traction if people didn't think they were good ideas to spread.

But I've gone too far into sex production and I probably lost a lot of people but oh well, my point is this: nothing in those genes say that a human has to abide by certain group of names, pronouns, words or adjectives, nor do they have to present themselves in a certain way by dressing or not dressing in certain garments. Like, you can pinpoint on what gene testicle production is located (gene 17) but nowhere does that gene say that these testicle must use the name "Mitchell" instead of "Vanessa," or must use the word "man" to describe themselves.

Like, language is inherently abstract and is thought to be the reason for human dominance in the global ecosystem of nature. Often, our ability to self determine is linked to our ability to create sounds that make up words that are stand ins for not only concrete concepts like "grass" but abstract concepts like "atoms" or "sex chromosomes" or "love" or "quantum physics" or "money" or "names". Even clothing is a social construct, animals do not wear clothes and if they did they wouldn't fucking care about the genitals inside the article if clothing lmfao.

But you see where I'm getting at, in order to claim a person with a penis cannot go by feminine names, use feminine nouns to describe themselves or wear feminine things and participate in feminine culture, you are saying that there is something inherently feminine about all of these things, something in our biology that requires us to do these things and ONLY us to do these things.

This is why you agree with conservatives on sex, no matter how much you complain that "actually we believe women can do whatever they want, except for [insert traditionally masculine thing here] because that goes against her biology but other than that, women can do whatever they want."

Except for use the name Michael, use man to describe themselves, or cut off their boobs because they don't want them apparently? Like WHY can't a person with a vagina do these things? What makes it off limits for them to do these things?

This is why nobody but bigots agree with you, because your gender ideology isn't radical AT ALL but more of the old regurgitated bullshit we've heard for decades. You're not radical and you don't wish to "abolish" gender because if you did, you wouldn't give a fuck if a vagina calls himself Kyle.

This is why real gender abolitionists hate you, because nothing you're advocating for is radical or progressive. It's more of the same old shit, yall can't give me a reason for why a vagina having person must go by feminine names or feminine pronouns because there is no reason other than "I want them to" if there is truly nothing women can't do that men can, then that includes using the word man to describe themselves.

Like, why do yall care so fucking much about making sure people with penises use penis approved things and people with vaginas use vagina approved things? Why can't all bathrooms be gender neutral? Why can't all sports be divided by weight class instead of gender? Why can't locker rooms be gender neutral? What is so wrong with being naked or pressed up platonically against members of the opposite sex?

Maybe if you stop treating penises like dirty, loaded guns that could go off at any given time and who must be isolated and cut off from the rest of society, then maybe we could actually get rid of rape culture. If you normalize this belief, why would expect little penis havers to grow up and not fulfill the societal expectations set for them?

Like, it's social psych 101 honestly. If you treat a group like a threat, eventually they will become a fucking threat. Like there is nothing in the terf ideology that differs from conservative ideology, except for the fact that yall are implicit sexists instead of explicit ones.

#gender critical #terfs kys #radfems #yall are losers honestly who remind us more of neoliberals than anything else

[somerandomg33k]

An rambling rant incoming

"How are you today?" Asked by no one so far. Only because I just started my day. Well, since you want to know, I'm Angry. What started this? My friend Johanna Roberts said that she still needs money for food and pills in DMs. As she often said, life on SSDI forces her to beg online for money in order to live. So after checking my credit cards accounts, bank accounts, as well as my past Paypal and Cash App transactions (I'm glad I checked those. I've been burned by that before.) I had only $30 to give Johanna. I won't get any more money until the 28th, my next payday. So unless others are also able to give, check my pinned tweet and Facebook post, it is going to be a tough week for Johanna. The end of the month is always tough on her because she get her full SSDI of only $1400 at the beginning of the month. And this is after I spent money last night to buy Fork Knife skins. I also got skins for my friends, and I don't regret that.

I know I shouldn't feel guilty for spending money on myself. And, of course, I am not blaming Johanna or anyone else who asks for money. But I will always hate it when someone asks for money, and I don't have any to give.

This is why I don't really like it that I can't work weekends like I used to. Coming on Sundays is part of the 'excessive hours' my manager talked to me about. I mentioned my shitty pay for what I do. And I have to work with him to get a raise, essentially. Meaning not work Sunday. Still haven't gotten the raise yet. And I know the importance of relaxing and not overworking myself. Believe me, I am not working hard all 10 to 11 hours of my weekday shifts. Half the time, I am on the PC on Twitter, Twitch, Discord, Facebook, and Youtube. But not getting as much Overtime pay when I did work 70 hours a week is very noticeable for my take-home pay. And I honestly wish I could wake up sooner on the Saturdays I do work so that I can clock in 11 to 12 hours of overtime work instead of just 8 when I sleep in until 10 am. I also dislike it in I sleepin a bit on the weekdays too because that does mean less clocked in hours. And while on the days I don't work, I get to Twitch stream which I do love doing and get to have great conversations there. Twitch streams doesn't make as much money for me as working overtime does.

Anything I hate, Liberals and the Democrats. Liberals mostly because they uphold the State and Capitalism. And especially in the USA, if you tell them that Liberalism is a right-wing ideology, they will get mad. Capitalism is inherently Ablest, and Capitalism requires poverty to function. And my friends are begging online for money because of Capitalism. And I get made fun of for being so vehemently Anti-Capitalism by Liberals. I bet a Liberal would see my rant post and go, "See, this is why we need to vote in the Midterms." I UNDERSTAND HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO VOTE!!! SHUT UP ALREADY!!! But voting is just harm reduction. And it is questionable how much harm reduction it does. That is probably something that Liberals will never understand with me. The only time I will trust and have faith in The Democrats is when all of its members are as progressive as Bernie, Omar, AOC, etc. etc. And Bernie and AOC have their own issues too. And that will never happen to the Dems because the Dems are a conservative Capitalist Right-wing party with leadership that is vehemently Anti-Communist too. They want to means test any and all benefit programs so folks "wouldn't abuse it."

There are even some Liberals that are against an UBI too, agreeing with the Democrats leadership on that. Now I have my criticism for a UBI as well but that is because I am an Anarcho-Syndicalist that says we should learn to live and build a society without relying on the State and Capital. I know that previous statement conflicts with me saying I wishing I can clock in more overtime hours to give money to my friends in need. And that me charging up my credit cards to give to my friends in need is me relying on capital to help them. Well, THEY NEED TO PAY RENT NOW! THEY NEED TO EAT NOW! THEY NEED TO PAY THEIR POWER BILL NOW! Besides, all Socialists, Communists, and Anarchists live in cognitive dissonance because we are forced to live under Capitalism.

Yes I will vote in the midterms because I do understand how important it is that the Fascist party of the Thuglicans are not in power. But that doesn't mean I believe that change will happen when the Democrats keep power. It has always been proven that the party won't fight with its own members anyway. So the Dems are only as progressive as its most conservative members. This time, it is Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. But there have been many others before like them. And there are many other conservative Dems in the party. It is just Manchin and Sinema that are taking the lime light and attention away from the rest of them. Remember, Joe Biden said to Wall Street, "Nothing will Fundementally change." That is the choice each general election in the USA. Your validable choices are the Conservative Capitalist 'Nothing will Fudnementally change' party or the Fascist party. CAN I SAY I HATE THEM BOTH!??!?!

And it is clear to me that Liberals are fine with Nothing Fundementally changing because it doesn't bother them as much. Or again, their faith that, "We can pull Biden to the Left." No you can't. He refuse to forgiven up to $50,000 dollars of student debt. Only did $10,000 just before the Midterms. Biden has increased the Police budgets way more than the previous president. And Many of the Dems support increased Police budgets. All after one of the world's largest racially charged Anti-Police uprisings in 2020.

Remembers, Liberals, The Dems leadership are the White Moderates that MLK Jr warned about that are far more willing to work with White Collaborators then Anti-Racists. Because the White Moderates can not view White Supremacy in any way that also includes them in the picture. So they choose to view White Supremacy as just a personal failing of someone hurting someone's else feelings base on race instead of a system of power that favors one race over other races. And the White Moderates also hates to see themselves being privileged by said system of power. Hence why they don't challenge it.

And Liberals know that The Dems will break campaign promises. They are used to it by now. Joe Biden did promise $2000 checks if the two Dems win their Senate seats in Georiga. They did. But we only got $1400 checks. "I know we were only getting $1400 checks." Thanks, I hate it. Johanna would love $2000 instead of $1400. Some haven't even gotten that too.

And now the Dems wants our votes agains despite not doing much with the power they have. "Well, yes. The Dems only have a slim majority. That is why we need to vote more. VOTE HARDER!!!" Urg. See why I don't have faith in them. If the Dems lose the midterms, it is their own fault for not passing voting protection at all when they have the slim majority to do so, if they wanted too.

And Liberals even say it is a good thing that this system is as slow as it is. Some Liberals say that even if all of the Senators are as progressive as Bernie Sanders, he still has his flaws, and even if all of the members of the House of Representatives are as progressive as AOC, who still has some Ablesm too, the system in the USA will still be slow. And that is a good thing, apparently. I don't know why. Perhaps it is a good thing for power to be in the hands of the few. Liberals are probably okay with benevolent dictators, so long as it is one that they voted for. "Don't blame me. I voted for Kudos." Because of that tiny bit of participation that they feel like they have influence on the system. Even though there choices are limited to the Conservative Capitalist 'Nothing will Fudnementally change' party or the Fascist party. "It is still a choice and a clear one. Choice for the lesser of two evils." So you do agree that the Dems are evil then, right? Great to see we agree on something, I guess. "If everyone votes, that fixes all of the problems with the system." Really? Really? So if the only options for President was Joe Manchin or Mitt Romney, all of our problems will be fixed if everyone votes? I doubt that.

This I why I don't have love for Electoralism. Electoralism is a dead end. The most you get is harm reduction. Electoralism doesn't fixes Johanna situation with her life on SSDI. At least not until something like 20 years from now. Because UBI is very very far off, according to Liberals. I do agree with that and I hate it. But it is because of that that I don't have a love for voting like they do. It is important but is it just a bit of a stopgap against Fascism, currently.  End of rant, for now.

#capitalism #ssdi #capitalist hell #democrats #politics #money #begging #republicans #republicans vs democrats #representative democracy #voting #midterms #liberalism #neoliberalism #neoliberal #neoliberal capitalism #liberals #election #electoralism