/lit/ - Literature

>>22071529
Neoliberalism bought it. Wake up sheeple

>>22071529
Because people are tired of women’s wrongs

>>22071541
Is that even something most people need to wake up to? That's pretty common knowledge

>>22071529
Here comes 2016mong…

>>22071529
All their spaces got taken over by trannies lol. It can only exist in a context where men can't utterly dominate discussion with aggression.

>>22071541
Created it*

Feminism was designed from the get go to systematically castrate and emasculate men. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_purity_movement
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellice_Hopkins

It got eclipsed by the transgender thing, in strictly SJW circles. Plus leftoids had quite a bit more to get upset about that year...

>>22071529
Because “feminist philosophy” is an oxymoron. This femcel embodied masculine traits while calling for the death of men (herself). That said, shooting Any Warhol was based.

>>22071566
Gloria Steinem gladly worked with the CIA on spreading feminism, she actually is on public record talking about how she was glad to find out how “liberal” they were.

>In my experience The Agency was completely different from its image; it was liberal, nonviolent and honorable.

Not a schizopost, it’s one Google search away.

>>22071597
https://youtu.be/4HRUEqyZ7p8

Forgot the link

>>22071529
It still exists anon. You just aren't in the spaces where they talk about it, also a lot of it is mixed with other stuff, not only the dynamic between men and women, but also incorporating how race affects women, how sexuality, class, etc affects women so it isn't necessarily as recognizable as before or as distinct from other movements like lgbt or blm.
The reason people talk about feminists less is bc the current thing to be mad about is queers and drag queens so lefties respond by talking about lgbt stuff more and that is the only thing that you see now.

>>22071529
Much of feminism was based on the argument that the so-called oppression of women was caused, among other things, by the difference in physical strength and aggressiveness between men and women. This is obviously not compatible with the new privileged class, so it can't go anymore.

You can see that this is happening to pretty much most of feminism's talking points that revolved around men's interaction with the female body. Nobody talks anymore about the "male gaze", for example, because everyone knows what the "male gaze" targeted - tits, ass, and their particular female form. Again, incompatible with modern gender ideology, so it's downplayed.

So what's left is claptrap about the oppression of women considered as some sort of vague, definition-less umbrella, because it needs to be broad enough to encompass the so-called "trans women". There are some real dynamics between men and women that originate from the physical differences between the sexes and how society was built around these differences, but feminism can no longer use that as its framework under pain of excluding our precious trannies.

>>22071597
>nonviolent

This is why you don't give much credibility to statements that start with "in my experience"

>>22071653
>This is obviously not compatible with the new privileged class, so it can't go anymore.
How so?

eventually normies collectively got bored of the dopamine hit of feeling like a good person by fighting the patriarchy

>>22071653
>Much of feminism was based on the argument that the so-called oppression of women was caused, among other things, by the difference in physical strength and aggressiveness between men and women. This is obviously not compatible with the new privileged class, so it can't go anymore
Feminism evolves, and it has evolved to take stuff like class into consideration. This doesn't rntirely dismiss agressiveness as a component. It just becomes more nuanced. For example if you dismiss class you would say that someone like Terry Crews could not be sexually assaulted due to his dominating physical strenght. Yet it did happen because of the possition of power the man had over him.

>Nobody talks anymore about the "male gaze", for example, because everyone knows what the "male gaze" targeted - tits, ass, and their particular female form. Again, incompatible with modern gender ideology, so it's downplayed.
You have to be living under a rock if you dont think the male gaze is talked about anymore. Just because it says male doesn't mean it is "incompatible with ""gender ideology"". Why would it be If a lot of trans people have or had tits, ass, etc.? Also with your logic homisexuals would be "incompatible" with the male gaze, since gay men don't look at women's breasts and ass but lesbians do.
> There are some real dynamics between men and women that originate from the physical differences between the sexes and how society was built around these differences, but feminism can no longer use that as its framework under pain of excluding our precious trannies.
Again, it has just evolved to encompas more than just sex differences, without forgetting the existance of sex and the dynamics it creates in society. Feminism is not just 2nd wave feminism, focused only on sex and blind to race/queer/class issues.
I know 4chan likes 2nd wave feminist more because it validates their view of a battle of the sexes, and they like to see their female counterparts be misandrists like how they are misoginysts.

>>22071653
Acknowledging the historical origins of patriarchy and women's oppression in the distinction of sex does not preclude acknowledging that trans people (in either direction) are also harmed by patriarchy or thinking they should have equal rights.

>>22071715
Die late

>>22071749
If you're just going to hurl insults rather than actually participate in the discussion please go do it somewhere else.

>>22071529
I only know one woman who ever read feminist literature, and if was Andrea dworkin. She is very short, fat and ugly. She has the face of a man who took HGH. Balding slightly. I think she maybe took t when she was younger because she fell for the ftm meme. Not a bright bulb. Too conceited and womanly in the worst possible ways. If you read these people there's something wrong with you. Same with any extremist philosophy that isn't centre right

>>22071761
You are a retarded faggot that just repeated some gay blurb that could be on an intro to women's studies course syllabus. Does your programming job pay for your gender affirming healthcare?

>>22071780
What, in particular, do you object to in what I said?

>>22071691
Because it tacitly defines the female experience of oppression as originating from an oppression to the female BODY. The woman is oppressed, in one last analysis, because the male can overpower her, can rape her, can get her pregnant, and up to very recently the only way the woman could find to defend herself would be to submit to another less cruel male. Culture developed as a way of legitimizing and naturalizing this arrangement.

The so-called "trans woman" did not, does not and will not ever experience anything like this. The socialization of the so-called "trans woman", in general, is not anything like this. A "trans woman" is a male who either failed to live up to male standards (gay, sexually abused, effeminate, incel, whatever) and adopted female presentation as a way to cope or to acknowledge his subordinate place (and thus plays a role in the perpetuation of the symbolics of feminine = submission), or an actual predator. Sometimes both.

But even when the "trans women" is a victim, his victim experience is the victimhood of a male, a victimhood due to failing malehood somehow. It's a situation that occurs as a consequence of his own particular circumstances, not due to him having a generally weaker body that can be impregnated.

But to acknowledge this fundamental difference in how our bodies shape and influence our social roles, in other words, how being a woman is even politically relevant, is also to acknowledge that being a woman is tied to having a woman's body. And that entails having to give a definite answer to the dreaded question "what is a woman?", an answer that's bound to deny the mantra that "trans women are women."

>>22071786
This part
>Acknowledging the historical origins of patriarchy and women's oppression in the distinction of sex does not preclude acknowledging that trans people (in either direction) are also harmed by patriarchy or thinking they should have equal rights.

>>22071836
>The woman is oppressed, in one last analysis, because the male can overpower her, can rape her, can get her pregnant
And yet despite the fact that women's oppression originates in that, infertile women are no less oppressed for it, are they? So it's not quite so simple.
>A "trans woman" is a male who either failed to live up to male standards (gay, sexually abused, effeminate, incel, whatever) and adopted female presentation as a way to cope or to acknowledge his subordinate place (and thus plays a role in the perpetuation of the symbolics of feminine = submission), or an actual predator.
What about, you know, the medical condition of gender dysphoria? What about what brain scans have shown?
>But even when the "trans women" is a victim, his victim experience is the victimhood of a male, a victimhood due to failing malehood somehow.
Due to failing malehood? As if males who successfully perform malehood can't be vicitimized?
>not due to him having a generally weaker body that can be impregnated.
Impregnated no- but as I said, infertile women are no less oppressed for it. But weaker absolutely, hormone replacement therapy changes muscle and a hundred other things.
>But to acknowledge this fundamental difference in how our bodies shape and influence our social roles, in other words, how being a woman is even politically relevant, is also to acknowledge that being a woman is tied to having a woman's body. And that entails having to give a definite answer to the dreaded question "what is a woman?", an answer that's bound to deny the mantra that "trans women are women."
How would you define 'female'?
>>22071854
What about it is objectionable?

>>22071856
>And yet despite the fact that women's oppression originates in that, infertile women are no less oppressed for it, are they? So it's not quite so simple.
Oh she can't get pregnant? Guess it's okay to rape her and permanently disfigure her pussy!
>le brain scan
>le hormone replacement therapy
Nigger I could literally kill every woman I see on a daily basis. This is obviously an uncivilized statement, but every woman is aware of the fact that they are in extreme danger when they're out and about by themselves and a strange and potentially uncivilized man is around. No amount of pharmacist alchemy will ever change that. Estrogen lowers IQ btw, so if you want to make a coherent point you should cancel your prescription.

>>22071529
It wasn't very competitive in the progressive stack anymore. The race focused parts of intersectionality thought the focus on crimes against women were racist (since "white women's tears lynched Emmett Till") while the transgender part thought its biological determinism was crypto-fascism.

>>22071836
>(and thus plays a role in the perpetuation of the symbolics of feminine = submission
ok so you think that a sexually abused male submitting to men is perpetuating the fem submission. but here
The woman is oppressed, in one last analysis, because the male can overpower her, can rape her, can get her pregnant, and up to very recently the only way the woman could find to defend herself would be to submit to another less cruel male
you also claim that the very thing that defines the female experience is to be sexually abused and to submit to men. you should realize that both instances of men's aggression on women, and effeminate men stem from the same issue and that victims of aggression are not at fault for perpetuating the aggression.

>or an actual predator
yeah, what does this have to do with this anyway? you are a 4chan user or a predator, maybe both. everyone is either a victim or a predator or sometimes both. what does this have to do with anything? especially taking into account that trans people regardless of gender are victims more frequently than cis people regardless of gender

>a victimhood due to failing malehood somehow
yeah and that is still wrong. but guess what, there are many different ways that trans people get victimized, some may be due to failing malehood, some may be due to being trans specifically, some may be due to being a woman and many others. all of these are bad things, and they all come from the same oppressive system, the thing system that opresses women, teh system that opresses gay men and lesbians, the system that opresses gnc people or trans people, they are not disconnected issues, they are the same system, that puts cis heterosexual men above those who are not

>
But to acknowledge this fundamental difference in how our bodies shape and influence our social roles, in other words, how being a woman is even politically relevant, is also to acknowledge that being a woman is tied to having a woman's body.
there are issues that are tied to having a female body yes, but not all females are women, not all women are females either, not even just trannies, but intersex women too.
the problems that females face are talked about and are important to be talked about. picrel is a trans man, he probably has faced a lot of discrimination due to his body, but has not faced other forms of discrimination a woman would face. he for example does not have "a generally weaker body that can be impregnated". some trans men may be able to get impreganted and be strong, trans women may have a generally weaker body and not be able to get impregnated. these are all particular issues that all come from the same source, being able to see more than just one female archetype struggling against one male archetype is part of evolving the way we see the problems people face and how we learn to adapt to the nuances of oppression.

>>22071888
>Oh she can't get pregnant? Guess it's okay to rape her and permanently disfigure her pussy!
you just disproved that pregnancy is the defining characteristic that makes women pressed. guess what, trans women can't get pregnant either and it is also wrong to rape them,
>Estrogen lowers IQ btw
you literally aren't even a feminist wtf is this shit. why are you even arguing about feminism and say shit like this.

>>22071933
It was never the defining point of that guy's post. It was a note on the main point, which was the fact that women are weak and can be forced into things against their will by pretty much any man, no matter how much smarter or richer she is than him.
>you literally aren't even a feminist wtf is this shit
No shit, retard? And that isn't even an anti-woman statement. Estrogen literally lowers IQ in males when they take it as hormone therapy. For evidence read your posts.

>>22071921
Nah that niggas probably 5'3 with weak ass woman bones I could snap that niggas head smoov off

>>22071529
Women realized they benefit from the patriarchy. They hushed up and snuck back to reap the benefits. They started LARPing as trad women to hook poor dumb simps. It's just too profitable to abandon it for some idealistic equality.

>>22071715
Well every living thing on the planet is harmed by the patriarchy by definition, including men, so that's saying fuck all. Also shows how "the patriarchy" is a conspiracy theory in the worst way, essentially ignoring nature for nurture by nonsensically trying to place the onus of human sexual dimorphism on the ill intentions of men.

You contradict yourself by wavering on the difference between women and trannies. So says progressive culture, they are women - period. Hence they would be harmed by historical oppression, except that's impossible.
Hmm okay. Well if they were men they would BE the patriarchy, so that's ruled out.

If they are something in-between or a separate class as you seem to be suggesting (and I argue in fact they are, see below), then they were not present for the historical origins of patriarchal oppression. Because trannies aren't two-spirits or transvestites or fags, or one in a million congenital medical aberrations, or any marginalized group that has existed in history before now with the advent of sex hormone therapy.

What trannies are, are a revolutionary 'biopunk' cult of sorts that syncretizes cultural marxist gender theory with bio-medical engineering.
Like all branches of cultural marxism, their goal is simply to seize as much power as they can within western society (which necessarily entails doing so at the expense of white people, power being zero sum).
In hindsight it could be argued that trannies were the logical conclusion of feminism. If it doesn't make sense now, well feminism didn't make sense back then either, but if you view feminism (correctly) as cultural marxism then it makes sense and always did: feminism was cultural marxism applied to WHITE women specifically as the 'bourgeois' in this paradigm has always been white men. In their effort to elevate Women (themselves) above Men, they necessarily universalized Woman because to do otherwise would be racism.
Now, Woman as a universalized concept, because of the advent of sex hormones, has made "Woman" attainable by - the only other group who could or would want to attain it, Men.

But which men? Of course white men, because non-white men already have cultural marxist leverage as part of the "progressive stack" against white men. And of course low-status white men, because they have the most to gain vis-a-vis sexual contact, as well as the resentimental motivation to step on white women in order to pull down white men.

And now white women find they have no other progressive allies except 'patriarchal' white men, who are not feminist (although they gladly adopt the term with qualifications), hence why feminism is less popular now. Feminists have been attacked by trannies and forced to ally with men.
Also, women now have access to easier and safer sex work than ever before (onlyfans), so all whores who are feminist in the sense of sex-positiveness are not particularly bothered by any of this because they are all wealthy and comfortable.

>>22071551
I know! Why doesn't OP (or this guy below) know this already?

>>22071555
NO. It was a legit thing that grew after the Enlightenment. It's part of the freedom project and some liberals will say they're feminists, but they're actually for women compromising themselves, becoming proud sluts, masculine war criminals, anything but reach true equality. Genuine feminism exists only in the socialist (anarchist) camp. Not the liberal, and certainly not the neoliberal

>>22071529
Feminist philosophy is alive and well. Real feminists have dicks now, bigot.

The radfem online presence is growing. It's just not big enough to eclipse tranny lovers yet.

>>22071715
What rights do trannies not have that real people do?

>>22071551
its not common to those who are possessed by it, who see their cause as being just, no matter the context.

Completely destroyed by trannies. Feminists got split on whether or not they counted, and in the midst of it their strongest soldier (straight white women) fell out of favor with the establishment.

>>22071554
The tranny issue is important but not for the reasons you mention. It fractured second wave feminists which was the dominant group back when they were making a lot of noise. They then had a purity spiral problem and TERF wars where anyone not onboard the retooled feminisms circlejerk was ostracized for wrongthink.
It parallels how capitalism criticism has a period of cross spectrum appeal, the anti bank bailout era, OWS, anti globalism, anti G8/20. From the 90s to the bank crisis about. Then, coinciding with a measurable switch toward race and sexism focus in newspaper ngram searches, this was completely demolished in favour of race and sexism grievances that completely demolished the old left. Sexism grievances morph into tranny woes over 10 years and never shut up.

>>22071529
>on the modern internet
Feminsts online exist to help the 'good people' party win. Now trannies do it much better.

>>22071529
It's not but it's a topic mostly dealt with in academic circles and not mainstream media which is mainly focused on taking academic thought and turning it into catchphrases for dissemination on social media (i.e. toxic masculinity, mansplaining).

>>22071529
Because they're fucking annoying, self-righteous virtue signalers who lack integrity. Their movement is but a trend and to imply it is in any way philosophical is a mockery of thought itself.

>>22071775
>Andrea dworkin
The embodiment of feminist ego: a female with intensely repressed masculine energy; a rapist without a penis.

I genuinely believe that individuals who hate the other gender project how they would behave as that gender.
For example
>all women are sluts
The perspective from a male who, if a woman, would be a slut
>all men are rapists
The perspective from a female who, if a male, would be a rapist.

>>22071529
I orderd dialectic of sex and intercourse a few days ago.

>>22073342
Is a slut a danger to you? You could just not sleep with her.

All men should be assumed to be sexual predators. You'd understand if you had kids. Feminist "paranoia" seems a lot more reasonable when your kid starts asking to go to slumber parties.

>>22073361
>Is a slut a danger to you?
No, I enjoy fucking them. Anyway, where did you get the idea to mention sluts? Are you insecure about being a slut or something?

>All men should be assumed to be sexual predators. You'd understand if you had kids.
Women should also be assumed to be sexual predators.

I've been sexually assaulted by multiple women, and so has my friend. I don't need to have kids to realise that I would not leave any of them alone in a room almost everyone I know. As a matter of fact, I would probably train them in combat from an early age.

>>22071541
Relevant:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ted-kaczynski-the-system-s-neatest-trick

>But the activists don't act only as the System's enforcers. They also serve as a kind of lightning rod that protects the System by drawing public resentment away from the System and its institutions. For example, there were several reasons why it was to the System's advantage to get women out of the home and into the workplace. Fifty years ago, if the System, as represented by the government or the media, had begun out of the blue a propaganda campaign designed to make it socially acceptable for women to center their lives on careers rather than on the home, the natural human resistance to change would have caused widespread public resentment. What actually happened was that the changes were spearheaded by radical feminists, behind whom the System's institutions trailed at a safe distance. The resentment of the more conservative members of society was directed primarily against the radical feminists rather than against the System and its institutions, because the changes sponsored by the System seemed slow and moderate in comparison with the more radical solutions advocated by feminists, and even these relatively slow changes were seen as having been forced on the System by pressure from the radicals.

>When the same editor looks at radical feminism he sees that some of its more extreme solutions would be dangerous to the System, but he also sees that feminism holds much that is useful to the System. Women's participation in the business and technical world integrates them and their families better into the System. Their talents are of service to the System in business and technical matters. Feminist emphasis on ending domestic abuse and rape also serves the System's needs, since rape and abuse, like other forms of violence, are dangerous to the System. Perhaps most important, the editor recognizes that the pettiness and meaninglessness of modern housework and the social isolation of the modern housewife can lead to serious frustration for many women; frustration that will cause problems for the System unless women are allowed an outlet through careers in the business and technical world.

>Even if this editor is a macho type who personally feels more comfortable with women in a subordinate position, he knows that feminism, at least in a relatively moderate form, is good for the System. He knows that his editorial posture must be favorable toward moderate feminism, otherwise he will face the disapproval of his advertisers and other powerful people. This is why the mainstream media's attitude has been generally supportive of moderate feminism, mixed toward radical feminism, and consistently hostile only toward the most extreme feminist positions.

>>22073361
Sluts, male and female, are a danger to everyone because of stds.

>>22073395
STD's are easily treated these days

>>22071529
trans are more oppressed sorry biofems

>>22073496
So true. They are literally oppressed by X/Y chromosomes.

>>22073399
Even AIDS and Hepatitis B?

>>22073553
Yes

>>22071888
>Oh she can't get pregnant? Guess it's okay to rape her and permanently disfigure her pussy!
What? What does this have to do with what I said?
>No amount of pharmacist alchemy will ever change that.
Then why is it that even though trans women have been allowed to compete in women's events at the Olympics for almost 20 years not one has won a single medal? If what you say is true they ought to have claimed at least one record by now.
>Estrogen lowers IQ btw, so if you want to make a coherent point you should cancel your prescription.
Women have higher mean/median IQ, though the male distribution has longer tails.

>>22072380
>Also shows how "the patriarchy" is a conspiracy theory in the worst way, essentially ignoring nature for nurture by nonsensically trying to place the onus of human sexual dimorphism on the ill intentions of men.
Maybe there are some stripes of pop-feminism that frame it that way, but that's not what I'm going for, and I don't think it's what the more sophisticated sort of feminists say argue. I'm well aware that patriarchy has its origins in material historical causes, not in any conscious conspiracy.
>You contradict yourself by wavering on the difference between women and trannies. So says progressive culture, they are women - period. Hence they would be harmed by historical oppression, except that's impossible.
Sure they are. Insofar as they pass, they're treated much like any other woman. Insofar as they don't pass, they're treated not with the respect afforded men but as laughable freaks.
>Because trannies aren't two-spirits or transvestites or fags, or one in a million congenital medical aberrations, or any marginalized group that has existed in history before now with the advent of sex hormone therapy.
The medical condition of gender dysphoria has existed for probably as long as humans have and maybe longer, even if the treatment for it was only discovered recently (horse piss-drinking Scythian shamans aside). Being trans is defined by wishing to change one's sex or sexual characteristics, not by actually being able to.
>But which men? Of course white men, because non-white men already have cultural marxist leverage as part of the "progressive stack" against white men. And of course low-status white men, because they have the most to gain vis-a-vis sexual contact, as well as the resentimental motivation to step on white women in order to pull down white men.
So how do you explain all the non-white trans women? And how do trans men figure into this?

>>22072739
Depending on where you are: access to needed medical treatment, protection against discrimination, even the right to live openly at all.

>>22073371
>Anyway, where did you get the idea to mention sluts?
The message she is responding to literally mentions sluts, she is responding to that.

>>22074241
Lol you trannies are such disengenous idiots. East German "women" dominated track and field.

>>22074272
Can you elaborate?

>>22074267
>needed medical treatment
"Transition" is not "needed medical treatment," "transition" is medical abuse and doctors who do it should be in jail.

>discrimination
>right to live openly
What this actually means is "lack of positive enforcement of transgender ideology." A gay man is gay even if he lives in the most homophobic community in the world, but a "transwoman" is only a woman if every person around him says so. "Trans people" can live openly, what they cannot do is coerce others to enable their wrong view of themselves. Wear a dress if you wish, but you do not have the right to expect others to call you a woman if you are not one.

>>22071529

Overdosed on their own memes, i.e. trannies. Also the "me too" fiasco didn't help.

>>22074293
>"Transition" is not "needed medical treatment," "transition" is medical abuse and doctors who do it should be in jail.
Literally the entire medical field disagrees with you, why should I believe you over them? What do you know about medicine?
>"Trans people" can live openly, what they cannot do is coerce others to enable their wrong view of themselves. Wear a dress if you wish, but you do not have the right to expect others to call you a woman if you are not one.
I don't think people should be arrested for misgendering, but I don't think it's unreasonable that it should be faced with social censure, in the same way that calling people racial slurs is faced with social censure.

>>22074293
>Transition" is not "needed medical treatment," "transition" is medical abuse and doctors who do it should be in jail.

You cant make claims like this with no actual understanding of the medicine behind it and expect people to take your opinion seriously.

>I refuse to use the pronouns you woke moralists
Anon you got stuck in your peterson phase? You can misgender them the same way you can call someone the n word. You are free to do it. But people won't like to be with you if you do, thats your choice anon. And your respect for trans people or lack there of should not influence if you think they should have rights or not

>>22074304
>Literally the entire medical field disagrees with you
What a meme. Countries in Europe are increasingly restricting or even outright banning "transitioning" procedures, including blockers, especially for young people. Only America and a few of its satellites are still going all in on this insanity. Who could have known that removing healthy body parts and altering healthy biochemistry didn't solve any problems and only made them worse for the most part.

>I don't think people should be arrested for misgendering, but I don't think it's unreasonable that it should be faced with social censure, in the same way that calling people racial slurs is faced with social censure.
There should be social censure alright - against the "trans person" trying to coerce others into playing along with their delusion, or their enablers. It should not be socially acceptable. It should result in firings and ostracism.

>>22074325
Here are some studies that show you are wrong and transition empirically works:
https://old.reddit.com/r/musicotic/comments/8ttud4/a_comprehensive_defense_of_trans_people/
https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-well-being-of-transgender-people/

>>22074325
>Right wing goverments are against trannies. Therefore tranny bad
No shit anon. Are you going to argue homosexuality is bad because they ban it in russia too?
> altering healthy biochemistry didn't solve any problems and only made them worse for the most part.
Literally any modern study on this disproves this. The regret rates for transition are in the single digits
>It should not be socially acceptable. It should result in firings and ostracism.
If you can't handle seeing ppl dress in ways you don't like you can just stay home anon.
You turned the feminism thread into a tranny thread with your obsession. If you ignored trannies you may have a much clearer mindset with all the vacant rent free space thy have in your head

>>22074337
>here's a linkdump that I have never read in their entirety and have never critically assessed, but vaguely support my worldview so that's good enough and I'm just gonna go dump them and wait for the other person to go through every one, also I will not address opposing studies at all and disigenuously pretend they don't exist

TRAs, every single time.

>>22074346
Yeah thats why half of you ugly freaks kill yourselves after getting your cock and balls cut off.

>>22074366
fr these trannies need to learn to accept themselves

>>22074352
>science is fake and jewish
chuds never change
>>22074366
>we should discriminate and shun trans people for existing in public
>wtf they are depressed??? it must be them that's the problem

>>22074382
Yes you are the problem. You are lucky we live in a civilized society that puts up with you agp monsters.

>>22074352
If you have opposing studies go ahead. I doubt their methodology is above reproach.

>>22074404
AGP is way overblown. I won't say no one in the history of the world has ever transitioned for a fetish, but it's not very common.

>>22074346
>>Right wing goverments are against trannies. Therefore tranny bad
You're arguing in bad faith and you know it.

>If you can't handle seeing ppl dress in ways you don't like you can just stay home anon.
Again, bad faith, when the comment expressely says that the problem is not with what the person wears, but with their harmful and entitled expectations that they either yield institutional power to coerce others to fulfill, or benefit from said institutional power.

>You turned the feminism thread into a tranny thread with your obsession.
Any discussion of feminism that does not involve a critique of the transgender question is delusional. Transgenderism reinforces gender stereotypes, directs critique away from the rightful objects, and, if consistently applied, allows for men in women's sports and women's prisons, and other spaces that are sex segregated for a reason, as is already beginning to happen. Except for abortion and pornography, the transgender question is the biggest feminist issue in the west and anyone who tells you otherwise is lying.

>>22074382
Trans people shouldn't be shunned, they simply shouldn't exist.

>>22074410
discord and leftypol arent sending us their best.

>>22074415
>Transgenderism reinforces gender stereotypes
Some approaches to the transgender issue do. The existence of gender dysphoria is a brute medical fact.
>>22074416
Well unfortunately you cannot cause them to stop existing.

>>22074426
>you cannot cause them to stop existing
It's not any individual's place to decide the fate of another, including a trannie. However, for their own sakes, for the sake of humanity, and for the sake of progressive civilisation and the ability to accept ourselves, I hope transgenderism becomes a horrible, self-destructive cancer of the past very soon, just like emos cutting themselves.

>>22074436
Transgenderism is more akin to the anorexia fad except it was somehow elevated to the status of human rights issue.

>>22074436
It is not going to become a thing of the past, human biology does not allow for that. Have you not noticed the historical records of it going back for millennia?

>>22074439
>Transgenderism is more akin to the anorexia fad
Transgenderism is simply another form of self-destruction as a result of identity issues due to childhood traumas.

Transgenderism is to be slotted with other self-destructive behaviours like anorexia, self-harm, suicide, drug addiction, abusive relationships, etc. If it were not for corporate greed and market inclusivity, there would be no platform encouraging this self-rejecting behaviour.

>>22074453
Factually speaking, this simply is not true.

>>22074415
>You're arguing in bad faith and you know it
how so anon? are the countries that argue against trans healthcare not currently under conservative party rule? are the tories not in power in the UK?
>but with their harmful and entitled expectations that they either yield institutional power to coerce others to fulfill
anon you can't just start fights at work, you can't just go around disrespecting people at work and expect everyone to put up with it. the whole bill peterson was arguing against was about not being able to insult coworkers on the basis of them being trans. this is normal, this happens with other groups, you can't catcall your coworkers, you can't say pejorative terms to your coworkers, etc.
>Any discussion of feminism that does not involve a critique of the transgender question is delusional.
you are focusing on people you most likely will never meet, there are 100 cis people for every trans person
>Transgenderism reinforces gender stereotypes,
no it doesn't, transphobia does, feminine trans men are men, masculine trans women are women, it's transphobes who deny the gender identity of people who don't fit their gender stereotypes that reinforce them. see for example transvestigators.
>allows for men in women's sports and women's prisons
you're the one doing that anon, refer to this post >>22071921 and tell me if that man should go into the women's bathroom. that does not go well for either women or the trans men involved, see this for example https://www.fox19.com/2022/07/08/transgender-butler-county-man-says-group-beat-him-up-using-wrong-restroom/
> Except for abortion and pornography, the transgender question is the biggest feminist issue in the west and anyone who tells you otherwise is lying.
you aren't a feminist anon, you can't tell feminists what their priorities are. you don't even understand the issues women face. you focus on trannies because that's what the republicans are focusing on and you, as a nonfeminist, want to weigh in against trans people under the guise of helping feminism

>>22074457
Factually speaking you will never be a woman. No amount of dicks taken in your ass will ever change that reality.

>>22074457
Factually speaking, you provided no facts against my reason.

Transgenderism is inherently self-rejecting, because the individual experiencing it attempts to replace their material or superficial identity. Therefore, it is not self-accepting, and it is self-destructive because it quite literally destroys the self in order to replace it with one that is not true to the nature of their being.

>>22074469
Categories are a feature of the map, not the territory. Categories are useful or unuseful, not true or false, and an alternate categorization system is not a factual error.

>>22074448
>It is not going to become a thing of the past, human biology does not allow for that.
Is this an argument you're going to use in court after being charged with molesting a child?

>>22074480
I linked a bunch of empirical studies that show that transition is, in many cases, the only thing that actually works to alleviate people's distress.
>>22074466
>there are 100 cis people for every trans person
More like 300 but yeah.

>>22074487
No, because that causes harm and therefore I will not do it. People doing as they like with their own bodies does not cause harm to anyone and in fact preventing them from doing so will only cause harm to them.

>>22074489
>the only thing that actually works to alleviate people's distress.
That's ridiculous. For example, Ted Kacynzki was going to become a trannie, but ended up becoming a terrorist instead. You see, there are alternatives. You are simply so determined to reinforce your delusions that you cannot see outside of them. I remember I was like that when I used /pol/

>>22074480
>replace it with one that is not true to the nature of their being.
the nature of trans people is to be trans. if it was in the nature of trans people to be ok with their sex they would be cis people and not trans. would you say gay men's nature is to be attracted to women and dating men goes against the nature of their being?
repression is self-rejecting because they are rejecting their gender to fit into society, despite their best interest

>>22074481
Yawn, postmodernist trash that completely misses the point of Borges and Baudrillard.

>>22074491
>People doing as they like with their own bodies does not cause harm to anyone
Do you mean to imply that suicide, self-harm, anorexia, etc. do "not cause harm to anyone" because it is simply "people doing as they like with their own bodies"?

>>22074492
There are some people who successfully repress their gender dysphoria (at least for a time). That doesn't mean it's not there, or that they wouldn't be better off if they transitioned.
>>22074498
Borges? Baudrillard? Postmodernist? I'm quoting Scott Alexander:
https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-made-for-man-not-man-for-the-categories/
>>22074502
Well, no, because those harm the person doing it and are things they wouldn't do if they were in their right mind. That's not the case for transition.

>>22074491
They should put you troons in straightjackets and padded rooms just like we used to do to self harming schizos.

>>22074508
Why, if transition is empirically the only thing that actually alleviates their distress? If they can live as happy productive members of society once they transition- and many do, especially if their communities are accepting- why shouldn't that be encouraged?

>>22074493
>the nature of trans people is to be trans
The nature of "trans people" is something which exists within the culture of "human people", I am sure you can agree. However, according to human biology, there are two chromosomes which define gender: the X and Y chromosome.

>would you say gay men's nature is to be attracted to women and dating men goes against the nature of their being?
Homosexuality is a result of environmental upbringing, just like transgenderism. And I do believe that any form of "sexual identity" goes against the nature of the human being. As a matter of fact, I find it absurd how it has become a trend in culture to define one's self over what sexually arouses them.

>>22074506
Not only are you a braindead tranny coomer but you dont even read literature. Where do you think that brainlet alexander copped the idea of the map and territory.

>>22074518
It's seen in several places, I'm not sure where it first cropped up. One of his most direct influences would be Yudkowsky.

>>22074506
>There are some people who successfully repress their gender dysphoria (at least for a time). That doesn't mean it's not there, or that they wouldn't be better off if they transitioned.
>That doesn't mean it's not there, or that they wouldn't be better off if they transitioned
Suicide statistics beg to differ.

>those harm the person doing it and are things they wouldn't do if they were in their right mind. That's not the case for transition.
Many would disagree. Not to mention, you have entirely neglected the support groups of the individual acting in self-destructive ways. Perhaps your self-centred perception is why you obsess over your identity to the point you feel as if you need to become a completely different person. Of course, I am only presuming you are a trannie because the only people who support transgenderism are those who are integrated in the culture, or afraid of the consequences of speaking against it in this era.

>>22074524
Man trolling used to be an art. You basic /lgbt/ sissies dont even have nigger tier level of brain cells. Chris-chan is an intellectual giant compared to you goofs.

>>22074516
>However, according to human biology, there are two chromosomes which define gender: the X and Y chromosome.
So if someone has CAIS and has an externally female phenotype but XY chromosomes but may not even know they have XY chromosomes themself and has lived all their life as a woman, is that person really a man? Or in the converse case, is that person really a woman?
>Homosexuality is a result of environmental upbringing, just like transgenderism.
Environment and upbringing probably has some influence. But if it were purely a result of environment and upbringing, then why is ratio of ring finger to index finger correlated to sexual orientation (just to give one example)?
>>22074528
>Suicide statistics beg to differ.
Are you saying that the suicide statistics say people with gender dysphoria are worse off if they do transition? How is that determined?
>Many would disagree.
Many would also disagree the Earth is round. Doesn't mean it isn't.

>>22074516
>there are two chromosomes that define gender: the X and Y chromosome.
those are not the things that define gender, they define sex, and they are not always correct. gender is cultural. that's why there are cultures with more than 2 genders. for example in India or in native American cultures.
>Homosexuality is a result of environmental upbringing,
except that there are biological factor that predispose one to be homosexual/transexual.
>And I do believe that any form of "sexual identity" goes against the nature of the human being.
sexual identity is also a social construct, however sexual preferences would exist even without culture, what you would have is men and women having sex with men and women, and some people opting to have sex with women only or men only. like what you see in the animal kingdom where animals have homosexual intercourse without having a sexual identity

>>22074513
>transition is empirically the only thing that actually alleviates their distress?
Because empiricism is a limiting worldview. Ie. flat earth, the sky being a vault of water (according to the bible), lead not being poisonous... I can go on, but you should learn that empirical evidence is not a replacement for reason or genuine intellect.

I guarantee that there is a superior alternative to going through surgery in order to have different genitals. We are more than our flesh, and especially so when it comes to cock and balls and pussy, my dear interlocutor

>>22074528
>Suicide statistics beg to differ.
except they don't. and you didn't cite any because they don't say that

>>22074466
>anon you can't just start fights at work, you can't just go around disrespecting people at work and expect everyone to put up with it.
I agree! Except that in this case it is the trans-identified person who is being disrespectful. Stating, even tacitly, that people are expected to enable their cosplaying is disrespectful, doubly so when what is to be enabled is a harmful ideology like transgenderism. There should be social consequences to it, as most likely would be, were there not a huge deal of institutional power backing trans ideology.

>no it doesn't, transphobia does, feminine trans men are men, masculine trans women are women, it's transphobes who deny the gender identity of people who don't fit their gender stereotypes that reinforce them. see for example transvestigators
What is a woman? What is a man? If Jordan Peterson, who's your personal boogeyman for whatever reason, decided to call himself a woman without altering anything about his presentation of himself, would he be one?

Why did someone like Elliot Page cut off her breasts if not under the desire to conform to her image of a man, which obviously includes "doesn't have breasts"? If transgenderism is so liberating from gender reinforcement, why not keep being exactly as they are, instead of getting hormones and surgeries and clothes marketed at the opposite sex? Why are there so few - if any! - trans-identified person who act like my hypothetical Jordan Peterson?

The answer is obvious. They alter themselves consciously seeking to fit the stereotype of the other sex.

"Transphobia" is 99% of the time a slur to avoid engaging arguments, btw. Not many people actually start physical violence against trans-identified people for the sake of them being trans-identified.

>muh republicans
Stop arguing in bad faith.

>>22074545
>Ie. flat earth, the sky being a vault of water (according to the bible), lead not being poisonous...
How are those empirical? By 'empirical' I don't mean 'whatever you naively conclude from your sense-data after five seconds of thinking', I mean that beliefs about the world must be checked against actual observations. You can't draw an accurate map of the city by sitting in your armchair and not looking.
>I guarantee that there is a superior alternative to going through surgery in order to have different genitals.
Then say what it is, and provide evidence that it actually works.

>>22074516
>However, according to human biology, there are two chromosomes which define gender: the X and Y chromosome.
It's actually gametes.

>>22074545
except that those are things that can be measured, whereas stuff like depression, wellbeing, and happiness, can only be measured empirically.you can test if the sky is a vault of water, you can't test if a person is happy or not. you are comparing apples to oranges here anon
>We are more than our flesh, and especially so when it comes to cock and balls and pussy,
yes we are, and some people opt to change those because they realize they are more than their genitals and have full control over their body

>>22074556
>Except that in this case it is the trans-identified person who is being disrespectful. Stating, even tacitly, that people are expected to enable their cosplaying is disrespectful, doubly so when what is to be enabled is a harmful ideology like transgenderism.
There are various ideologies you can build up around it, but again the existence of gender dysphoria is a brute medical fact, much like the existence of diabetes or autism.
>If Jordan Peterson, who's your personal boogeyman for whatever reason, decided to call himself a woman without altering anything about his presentation of himself, would he be one?
No, because his self-identification would be very obviously insincere, knowing what we know about him.
>Why did someone like Elliot Page cut off her breasts if not under the desire to conform to her image of a man, which obviously includes "doesn't have breasts"?
Because something in how his brain is arranged, probably connected to prenatal hormone exposure, causes him to want to not have breasts as a terminal value. Probably it's something to do with the part of the brain associated with perception and recognition of one's own body- kind of like phantom limb syndrome.
>If transgenderism is so liberating from gender reinforcement, why not keep being exactly as they are, instead of getting hormones and surgeries and clothes marketed at the opposite sex?
Because some people have dysphoria about their sex qua their sex.

>>22074502
There are trannies on /tttt/ that defend people with body integrity disoder.

>>22074563
So are congenitally infertile people neither sex?

>>22074537
>if someone has CAIS
Then they have CAIS - simple. Individuals should not base their identities on their gender, but how they create, innovate, or exploit.

>is that person really a man? Or in the converse case, is that person really a woman?
I suppose that will depend on other physiological factors.

>Are you saying that the suicide statistics say people with gender dysphoria are worse off if they do transition?
No, just lots of them kill themselves. Probably because they are so heavily determined on creating an identity on something so superficial as their genitals.

>>22074543
>that's why there are cultures with more than 2 genders. for example in India or in native American cultures.
Gender is sex lmao. Even then, trying to project the gender ideologist conception of gender onto ancient cultures as a means of legitimizing itself is ridiculous.

>>22074573
>I suppose that will depend on other physiological factors.
So what exactly constitutes being male or female?
>No, just lots of them kill themselves. Probably because they are so heavily determined on creating an identity on something so superficial as their genitals.
I'm sure it has nothing whatsoever to do with how people like you treat them.

>>22074543
>gender is cultural
Ah, well I was not aware we are talking about the theoretical world. My mistake - I was under the impression this discussion was about the nature of the human being rather than the nature of human culture.

>>22074556
>decided to call himself a woman without altering anything about his presentation of himself, would he be one?
he is not trans, he is cis. so no. idk why you think this is a gotcha.
>Why did someone like Elliot Page cut off her breasts if not under the desire to conform to her image of a man
because he wanted to? many trans men don't get surgery and are still men
> If transgenderism is so liberating from gender reinforcement, why not keep being exactly as they are
because you prefer to not be dysphoric rather than being dysphoric. body changes are for the wellbeing of the person, not to validate the gender of the person since thy are already valid. if anything it is transphobes who think you can't be a man and have breasts that pressure trans men into surgery when they may have been fine with them,
>Why are there so few - if any! - trans-identified person who act like my hypothetical Jordan Peterson?
because jordan peterson is cis and has no dysphoria over his body or social role, while trans people do have dysphoria over those usually
>
The answer is obvious. They alter themselves consciously seeking to fit the stereotype of the other sex.
nope, femboy trans men exist, butch trans women exist. you haven't interacted with enough trans people. picrel is a ftm femboy

>>22074582
Oops, meant for >>22074574 (in case it wasn't obvious)

>>22074576
>Gender is sex lmao.
except it isn't
>trying to project the gender ideologist conception of gender onto ancient cultures
that's exactly what you are doing though. you project your modern gender binary based on sex on other cultures that did not have a binary and did not base it on sex

>>22074584
The problem is 'gender' is ambiguous between 'the social categories associated with sex' and 'one's sense of oneself as belonging, or being supposed to belong, to a particular sex category'. The confusion would not have happened if we were having this discussion in (e.g.) Esperanto, in which the former is 'socia sekso' and the latter is 'seksa identeco'. I wouldn't be surprised if most languages that aren't English have separate words for those concepts.

>>22074570
>gender dysphoria
Whether GD exists and the degree of its misdiagnosis is irrelevant to the discussion. GD doesn't change your sex. Even if "transitioning" were the treatment, the discussion would involving treating the GD patient AS IF they were the other sex, instead of the categorical assertion that they ARE the other sex - which has a world of difference.

>No, because his self-identification would be very obviously insincere, knowing what we know about him
Then imagine his doppelganger, whatever. The point isn't contigent on Peterson having an ideological change if heart.

>Because some people have dysphoria about their sex qua their sex.
But WHAT is it about their sex that causes them distress? Is it having a penis? Having breasts? Or is it the social expectations put upon them by virtue of having a penis or breasts?

>>22074557
>How are those empirical?

>flat earth
Because at the time, from the human empirical perspective, the earth would appear flat and there would have been no further evidence to prove otherwise.

>the sky being a vault of water
Because it rains, and at the time, the concept of the cosmos did not exist; so, empirically, the sky was a vault of water.

>I guarantee that there is a superior alternative to going through surgery in order to have different genitals.
>"Then say what it is, and provide evidence that it actually works."
I don't know what it is because I don't care about the issue of transgenderism as much as I do humanity and self-acceptance. However, historically speaking, bodily mutilation (outside of emergency) becomes laughable as we progress.

>>22074585
>because he wanted to?
>what a nice day, what if i cut off my tits for no reason lol

>>22074598
>Even if "transitioning" were the treatment, the discussion would involving treating the GD patient AS IF they were the other sex, instead of the categorical assertion that they ARE the other sex - which has a world of difference.
When someone says "trans men are men" no one means by it that trans men have XY chromosomes and testicles, which would obviously be an absurd statement. They mean that trans men should be placed in the same social category that is primarily associated with male people, i.e. "treated as if they were the other sex" as you put it.
>Then imagine his doppelganger, whatever. The point isn't contigent on Peterson having an ideological change if heart.
If their self-identification seemed to be sincere then I suppose I would go with it, though I'd suspect the nature of their condition is not the same as my own.
>But WHAT is it about their sex that causes them distress? Is it having a penis? Having breasts? Or is it the social expectations put upon them by virtue of having a penis or breasts?
Maybe in some cases it's the latter. But I'm fairly sure that at least in some cases it is the former, in and of itself, that distresses them, that there is something in the part of their brain associated with perceiving one's own body that ended up wired like the other sex, causing them to desire to change their sexual characteristics as a terminal value. I'm pretty sure that's what's going on with me- given the choice between being in a completely female body but being treated socially as a man or being in a completely male body but treated socially as a woman, I think I'd choose the former.
>>22074608
I'm not sure why your "it seems like it must be" guess based on generalizations should be given more value than piles upon piles of scientific studies. It's not inconceivable the latter could be wrong, but the former certainly isn't more likely than the latter to be right.

>>22074564
>you are comparing apples to oranges here anon
You are ignoring the historical contexts of the examples given.

>some people opt to change those because they realize they are more than their genitals and have full control over their body
Ah, so it is a matter of control over oneself. Such a strange method of self-possession. It is becoming more clear to me now that trannies need intense therapy from psychological professionals who do not rely on pandering to succeed. Perhaps when capitalist society evolves, there will be less reason to lie to your clientele, and we can have some genuine progression on the transgender matter. Until then, like your empirical studies suggest, bodily mutilation must be the best alternative. So, let's just consider the entirety of transgenderism an act of natural selection.

>>22074598
How would they even know that JP is being insincere anyway, it's not as if they have an objective criteria to gauge whether a person is the gender they say

If JP had a true revelation, how would they even know

>>22074616
Whats even more hilarious is that Ellen Page cut off her tits because one of the biggest flaming faggots in hollywood called her a dyke. Then her butch lesbian gf divorced her. Clown world is amazing.

>>22074598
you don't treat the patient as if they are the other sex. you treat the patient as the gender they are. That is the difference. trans people don't "believe they are the opposite sex" in fact they are only trans because they are aware of the sex they are and that it does not match their gender identity. why would a trans person transition if they were the correct sex
>But WHAT is it about their sex that causes them distress? Is it having a penis? Having breasts? Or is it the social expectations put upon them by virtue of having a penis or breasts?
it depends on the person but usually both.
>>22074608
> I don't care about the issue of transgenderism as much as I do humanity and self-acceptance.
trans people are part of humanity and transition is part of self acceptance.
However, historically speaking, bodily mutilation (outside of emergency) becomes laughable as we progress.
you are doing a bad argument by calling transitioning body mutilation because mutilation implies harm, meanwhile transition does not harm the person, it makes their quality of life better.
body modification is going to become more common in the future, in fact currently, many people have body modifications, for example, prosthesis, for example, eye surgery. would you say they should also just accept themselves instead of inserting metal in their body or modifying their eyes?

>>22073558
Enjoy you Gonnosyphaherpaids cocktail.

>>22074629
Because based on his previous behavior it would be much more likely to be to make a point than because of actual sincere identity.

>>22074582
>So what exactly constitutes being male or female?
Since "male" and "female" are associated with the binary model of sex, then they XY chromosomes and XX chromosomes. However, there are intersex individuals which exist due to atypical chromosomal patterns, ambiguous genitalia, or differences in reproductive organs or hormone production, etc.

>>22074276
Not him, but do you not remember? It was a running joke.

>>22074582
>how people like you treat them
In person, I treat them kindly, like I would a child or retard. There is no reason to be rude to them directly as it will just cause them unnecessary pain and insecurity. However, I will actively distance myself from that individual and avoid developing any further relationship unless it directly benefit me somehow.

>>22074643
So what actually constitutes male and female? How do you determine whether someone is biologically male or female?

>>22074594
>I'm not sure why your "it seems like it must be" guess based on generalizations should be given more value than piles upon piles of scientific studies
You are ignoring the historical context, in which case, it would have been empirical at the time because there was no further evidence to disprove it. This is where I think we are with transgenderism.

>>22074304
Literally the entire medical field that disagrees with that bases its beliefs on research from Dr. John Money.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money

>>22074616
>what a nice day, what if i cut off my tits for no reason lol
except it wasn't for no reason anon.
>>22074627
>You are ignoring the historical contexts of the examples given.
no i am calling out the categorical difference between your example and the matter at hand
> It is becoming more clear to me now that trannies need intense therapy from psychological professionals who do not rely on pandering to succeed.
you preach self acceptance but then argue that trans people should completely change their selves. and you also said we are more than our bodies, so why change what we truly are (our mind) to fit what we really aren't (genitals)
>So, let's just consider the entirety of transgenderism an act of natural selection.
trans people usually don't want to reproduce, but and trans people are not a race that will be wiped out if no trans person reproduces, it is cis heterosexuals who birth lgbt people
>>22074647
that's fine. but not all people are like that. trans people suffer from abuse from a lot of people.

>>22074659
What exactly do you think it is we're missing here? What evidence do you think we're not able to observe, and under what circumstances do you think we would be able to observe it? Please make specific predictions such that your theory can be compared against future evidence.
>>22074661
John Money literally tried to reassign David Reimer as a girl because he thought gender identity was completely malleable. The fact that he failed is evidence for the contrary- that there is such a thing as innate gender identity.

>>22074661
except Dr. Jhon Money believed in what this anon >>22074627 proposed. that you can just change the mental gender of a person by forcing them to act in a way that betrays their gender identity. he was attempting conversion therapy, not trying to affirm the gender of his victim.
if anything it just goes to show that dysphoria is a real thing that can happen even to cis people, and that it is better to let people decide their gender for themselves

>>22074637
>transition is part of self acceptance
It is literally not, because self-acceptance cannot be with transition. In this case, transition means "change" and self-acceptance means "be".

>mutilation implies harm
Transgender transition eliminates the reproductive functions; therefore, the human body is harmed. It is simply ego that decides that such harm is worthwhile.

>in fact currently, many people have body modifications, for example, prosthesis, for example, eye surgery
Prosthesis is the replacement for a lost limb, eye surgery is to ail a dysfunctional eye. Having your genitals turned inside out, thus losing one of your human capabilities is nowhere near the same. However, you could argue that it is the ego which matters more than the body, and then I would agree, but only while also supporting self-destructive behaviour as a form of catharsis to connect with the internal self rather than base an identity on the external self.

>>22074656
>So what actually constitutes male and female?
XX and XY chromosome. I already mentioned that. If you are going to refer to cases in which that does not define the binary genders, then they would be referred to as "intersex". Read the post you responded to again, or let me know if you would like me to explain it in simpler terms for your sake.

>>22074676
>Transgender transition eliminates the reproductive functions; therefore, the human body is harmed. It is simply ego that decides that such harm is worthwhile.
Is it also harm if a woman with ovarian or uterine cancer has the organs in question removed to prevent the cancer from spreading and killing her?

>>22074671
Thats a lot of words just to say "fags beget fags." And you wonder why normal people want to keep fags and hons away from children.

>>22074679
So you're saying that someone with CAIS who was born with a female phenotype and doesn't even know they have XY chromosomes is actually male? Should they go in the men's room?

>>22074663
>i am calling out the categorical difference between your example and the matter at hand
I'll reiterate then;

>flat earth
Before it was scientifically proven that the Earth was not flat, everyone believed it was due to the empirical evidence.

>vault of water in the sky
Before it was scientifically proven that the sky was not a vault of water and was actually a cosmos, everyone believed it was due to the empirical evidence.

>argue that trans people should completely change their selves
"Trans people" are the changed self. It is the idealistic sense of self one creates when they refuse to accept their true natural selves.

>it is cis heterosexuals who birth lgbt people
LGBT people aren't born, they adapt to their environment and become homosexual.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-53925-2_3

>>22071529
The online leftoid sphere was taken over by pasty white nerds hoping to get laid by virtue signaling, without actually having to follow the unpleasant parts of their ideology. Same reason why media analysis went from "this piece of media is sexist, racist, etc" to "this piece of media is leftist and chuds are too stupid to understand it". Ultimately, online feminism ironically became patriarchal, as men hoping for status and sex rose to replace the women who originally founded the movement

>>22074699
>LGBT people aren't born, they adapt to their environment and become homosexual.
Perhaps it's not 100% determined at birth, but it can't be pure environment or else again, why is ratio of ring finger to index finger correlated to sexual orientation?

>>22074666
>What exactly do you think it is we're missing here?
The environment to contemplate due to the superficial demands of human civilisation at present.

What evidence do you think we're not able to observe, and under what circumstances do you think we would be able to observe it?
I think humans, when under less demand, stress, and external influence, would be able to internally balance their masculine and feminine intuitions. I genuinely believe that transgenderism is simply a miserable balance of masculine/feminine identity, and that both are redundant in the greater scheme.

We ought to identify ourselves based on what we create, innovate, or exploit.

>>22074676
it is more akin to fulfilling your potential. self-acceptance can and does often involve change. if you are depressed. instead of accepting being depressed you change to be happier.
>Transgender transition eliminates the reproductive functions
not always, you can always keep your genitals and it does happen that trans people reproduce, look at all the pregnant trans men that go viral, they simply opt not to reproduce.
>It is simply ego that decides that such harm is worthwhile.
cis people get their tubes tied or get vasectomies all the time, are you also against that? it's just their choice.
>Prosthesis is the replacement for a lost limb,
there are penis prostheses for trans men who don't want to have the surgery, would you be ok with that? and genital surgery is not the end of transition for a lot of trans people.
all trans surgery was once surgery done for cis people who had issues with their genitals. for example women who had unfinished vaginas, men who lost their penis at war. so they exist for men and women to have a vagina or have a penis. and this is true no matter if they are cis or if they are trans

>>22074708
I don't see why I should believe your speculation over the available evidence.

Uh... I know this may sound controversial, but I just don't think men and women are equal. And I'm not saying it like "hahah we all have equally important qualities that balance out" but more like "men are literally physically and mentally superior to women" kind of way.
Ugh, I know, I know it sounds kinda crazy but I think our rights in a society should reflect these uh... tiny differences, you know, like granting them suffrage, for example. Am I crazy or something? lol

>>22074666
>>22074671
You guys are really grasping at straws to legitimize John Money. His methods were demonic. He should never have been allowed around children. Using him to justify troonism is absurd.

>>22074681
>Is it also harm if a woman with ovarian or uterine cancer has the organs in question removed to prevent the cancer from spreading and killing her?
No, because that would cause further harm. I already openly supported prosthesis, so of course, I support amputation. However, that is not comparable to internal identity issues. I mean, one is a life-threatening illness that will spread if the other is amputated; the other is an egoistic response in an attempt for one to identify themselves differently.

>>22074721
This is all tossed out of the window now that women have dicks.

>>22074685
>So you're saying that someone with CAIS who was born with a female phenotype and doesn't even know they have XY chromosomes is actually male?
No, they are intersex. Did you not read my responses?

>Should they go in the men's room?
They should go into the intersex disabled toilets.

>>22074723
The fact he FAILED and what he believed was proven WRONG is evidence for the existence of gender identity.
>>22074726
The brain is a physical organ of the body too. The question is what outcomes are actually possible. For some people, accepting their physical sex traits as they are is simply not possible.
>>22074736
So XY or XX defines sex except when it doesn't?
>They should go into the intersex disabled toilets.
What should they do the majority of the time that there isn't one?

>>22074707
>why is ratio of ring finger to index finger correlated to sexual orientation?
Lower digit ratio is associated with higher levels of prenatal testosterone exposure, while a higher digit ratio is associated with lower levels of prenatal testosterone exposure. Therefore, it could have something to do with the prenatal hormone; however, the digit ratio theory is but a theory.

>>22074751
>just a theory
like gravity and evolution hon

>>22074751
The reasons why are uncertain, but the correlation is an empirical observation. What possible explanation for it would be consistent with sexual orientation being entirely environmental?

>>22074711
>fulfilling your potential
One's potential should not be based on their gender or any other physiological elements for that matter. Like I've said earlier, one ought to be identified by what they create, innovate, or exploit.

>cis people get their tubes tied or get vasectomies all the time, are you also against that? it's just their choice.
Yes. Pull out and cum on your partner's body, or do anal.

Of course, free will exists, and I think that natural selection is a good thing.

Anti-natalists lack the individual integrity to cultivate life; therefore, they are not fit to reproduce. They choose not to, but if they were to have a child, their lack of responsibility, integrity, and ability to fulfil themselves beyond self-indulgent means would likely make them a bad parent anyway.

>penis prostheses for trans men who don't want to have the surgery, would you be ok with that?
Hell yes permanent strap-on that is fucking hilarious. After all, in the end once they feel their masculinity physically, they might finally be able to accept their masculinity internally and chop the thing off.

>>22074713
Well, of course. You're an empiricist and my reasoning goes against yours. I don't expect you to believe anything, nor am I trying to convince you. I entertain myself with these in-depth discussions to challenge myself and be mentally stimulated. You're a great subject because you are persistent and introduced me to CAIS, which further reinforced my understanding of gender: male, female, intersex.

>>22074744
>For some people, accepting their physical sex traits as they are is simply not possible.
Tragic, really. I wish them all to eventually be capable of seeing and understanding themselves beyond such superficiality.

>So XY or XX defines sex except when it doesn't?
XY and XX defines male and female, but anything else is intersex because it is in between the sexes.

>What should they do the majority of the time that there isn't one?
Go into whichever bathroom they feel more comfortable going in. It would be dependent on the individual and whether their physiology was more masculine or feminine, as that would likely influence their psychology. But, if I was forced to settle on whether people with CAIS were to strictly go into a male or female bathroom, I would say female, because their brains are not influenced by the lack of response to androgens.

Feminism won in the 90s. It became like catholicism where you could have a vagina and be feminist be default. No one can name a third wave “philosopher” because you don’t even need to.

Internet-wise, the Tumblrina disney princess feminists fought apolitical hot e-girls and lost. How ironic that they lost to fully liberated women they once celebrated and envied. Anti-sex movements about consent and sexual assault barely made a dent outside their respective echo chambers. Intersectional radicalism took over what was left and now we have state enforced troondom and Juneteenth. Thanks, ladies. Radfems and trad larper women are outliers, by the way. They would sooner kill each other.

>>22074768
>What possible explanation for it would be consistent with sexual orientation being entirely environmental?
Social and cultural influences, early childhood experiences, upbringing, socialization, and interpersonal relationships have always affected humanity, and that includes sexual orientation. I'm quite certain that heterosexuality was only deemed "normal" due to the reproductive ability it fostered (which was once more valued, because life itself was harsher); but ultimately, nobody should identify themselves based on what makes them horny.

>>22071529
You should go on Tumblr and Twitter some time. Radfems are slowly growing

>>22074835
At least you admit that fags molesting kids is how they reproduce.

>>22074838
I once had a vision that there was a militant feminist revolt which was essentially a massacre, but then one of the girls became hysterically emotional because she saw a man she liked or admired and couldn't commit to her radicalism anymore. It was supposed to be some kind of male genocide; but I am not sure when it is supposed to happen, or even if it will still happen on this fractal in the universe.

>>22074841
>fags molesting kids is how they reproduce
I am absolutely certain that abuse is a distribution similar to snow melting from the peak of a mountain and going downstream. The less withheld, the more spread.

>>22074838
*nothing happens*

>>22074785
>what they create, innovate, or exploit.
we also create our bodies anon. bettering our bodies is also a worthy pursuit.
and yes people who don't want to be parents having children anyway usually end up being bad parents.

>>22074855
Our bodies are the vessel in which we enact those three mentioned things.

The trifecta of a human being is emotion, intellect, power.

>>22074270
>she

lol
why ask here?

>>22075052
Most other places would deny it has disappeared.

>>22074838
Sounds like a personal problem. Good thing the growing amount of sexless men will take of them through mass rape. One can only hope.

>>22071529
I don't think it's extinct, it just isn't being promoted because that isn't the Democrat's current strategy.

Feminism like Marxism was based on the fusion of
>Enlightenment rationalism: clear away the oppressive dogmatic stupidity of "priestcraft" (the Voltairean term for it) and let man think and feel freely, and he'll figure things out out on his own, i.e., let 18th century respectably rich bourgeois and lower nobility drunk on politesse who all read the same books and have a total population of a few dozens of thousands and an entire culture of cultivating the proper "sensibility" think and feel freely, and they'll figure things out on their own, on the constant background assumption that the plebs cannot and should not ever be "liberated" because plebs gonna pleb
>post-Enlightenment Rousseauist utopianism: William Godwin's anarcho-utopian plans, incidentally William Godwin was the first official cuck, married to Mary Wollstonecraft, the first official "loose woman" (which is a shame because she was a good Rousseauist feminist)
>19th century anti-bourgeois agitation for a "social state": bourgeois is the new priestcraft! just sweep them aside and everything will sort itself out! we don't have to worry about practicality, everything bad is the bourgeoisie's fault

Liberal states were still self-avowedly bourgeois and what we would now call libertarian, but then the "social question" was monopolized by revolutionary communists and right of center revolutionary political movements (fascism, national socialism, Catholic social teaching, Catholic integralism / "non-conformism," other forms of third positionism etc.), and the countries with right-wing movements basically pioneered the modern welfare state that had been struggling to be born since Bismarck's first negotations with Lassalle.

After these movements and countries were all defeated physically, and liberalism had a clear and empty battlefield to rebuild in its own image again, despite being a dead ideology filled with nothing but propaganda-peddling bankers since the financial collapses of the 1870s (which is why the battles happened in the first place, to unseat this decrepit elite everybody knew was decrepit), it was decided that elements of the "organic/total" welfare state of the fascist countries had to be coopted, and a new and happy face had to be put on liberalism to convince people that we're not just reverting to dominance by the same 1890s goldbugs.

>>22075684
That's when things like Bernays' Propaganda and Lippmann's Public Opinion get new attention, and a new generation of bankers and industrialists and their cliques create the modern merger of "public relations" with state propaganda. At the same time modern advertising and pop culture emerges with television, and with moderate and illusory increases in living standards during the reconstruction bubble (the notorious baby boomer prosperity period), the OSS is transitioning into the CIA and creating the Congress for Cultural Freedom, Encounter magazine, and who knows what else that we haven't even heard about. The Powell Memorandum comes out. None of this should be surprising, as Bernaysian "public relations" (crowd control, mob mentality shaping) originally CAME OUT OF the merger of state and business interests during the war effort in WW1 (pic related, from Quigley), and with a mass taking stock of the conceptual resources available for such an effort (like all the literature emerging around 1900 about the irrationality of masses and the hypnotic character of crowds, e.g. in Gustave le Bon).

When you think OSS and early CIA, you shouldn't think suits trained in government offices, you should think of bankers and industrialists and mobsters with lots of "connections" and "resources" that the government can use in a time when the entire economy is effectively nationalized and Bugs Bunny is already telling you to buy war bonds. It's not that far-fetched to simply maintain this merger in peacetime, especially since it's not peacetime, it's the Cold War. The merger is described in these excerpts from Quigley's masterwork:
https://thirdworldtraveler.com/Banks/Tragedy_Hope_excerpt.html
Pay special attention to everything from pg. 936-937 onward, regarding the Ivy League / government / finance revolving door system, and especially this:
>More than fifty years ago the Morgan firm decided to infiltrate the Left-wing political movements in the United States. This was relatively easy to do, since these groups were starved for funds and eager for a voice to reach the people. Wall Street supplied both. The purpose was not to destroy ... or take over but was really threefold: (1) to keep informed about the thinking of Left-wing or liberal groups; (2) to provide them with a mouthpiece so that they could "blow off steam," and (3) to have a final veto on their publicity and possibly on their actions, if they ever went "radical." There was nothing really new about this decision, since other financiers had talked about it and even attempted it earlier.

>>22075687
Every single piece of mass or pop culture after WW2 is engineered or "steered" in one way or another. The development of "academic leftism" was one of the biggest forms of culture shaping. The early OSS/CIA people were terrified of communist fifth columns and spies, with good reason since McCarthy was basically right (though he is now smeared by the same establishment, showing you how fluid these things are), but after initial blunders, like being scared of pipsqueaks like The Weathermen, who turned out to be a bunch of dumb rich kids, the system smoothed out its excesses and perfected its technique. All-importantly a stable EQUILIBRIUM was reached between all the idiosyncrasies of the above named actors: the financiers' personalities and short-sighted personal greed were suppressed, the old elite WASPs' actual religious convictions and genuine political idealism & genuine hatred for communism were suppressed, the genuine idealism of the leftist movements was obviously suppressed or "trimmed" so that it always coincided with the interests of the universities' bottom line and posed no threat to government, etc.

This EQUILIBRIUM is what you really need to understand about post-WW2 culture because it is what you are living in, it's a cybernetic organism, it's what people mean when they try to gesture at it by saying "late stage capitalism" or "neoliberalism." It's none of these things and all of them.

Feminism was one of the absolute key parts of this cybernetic dialectic, of perfecting the techniques of control was, the cooptation of feminism and (again) the smoothing out and trimming of its idiosyncrasies so that it ONLY supports the long-term aims of the cybernetic system. There are three basic aspects that any discourse, like feminism, can have, from the perspective of the system and its aims:
>1: aspects that overlap with and promote the system's interests
>2: aspects that negate or oppose the system's interests
>3: aspects which do neither, and are merely incidental
Now the system obviously wants to maximize #1 and trim away #2. But #3, the incidental features of a discourse are NOT merely incidental and thus not to be ignored either. That everybody wears blue hats as a traditional symbol in this or that political movement is NOT incidental, it's a major part of the "fun" of being part of that movement. It's blue hat day! I'm a union guy, this is the song we sing on Union Day!! Thus when the system interacts with these discourses, dialectically absorbing them and trimming away the #2 parts, it behaves very intelligently by MAXIMIZING the #3 parts, overrepresenting them. It HANDS OUT free blue hats, it makes commercials celebrating Union Day - as long as Union Day has been actually de-fanged and is no loner a threat to the system, at a deeper level that is very hard to understand and notice, then what better way to make sure nobody re-fangs it than to keep them thinking it still HAS fangs?

>>22075691
Let them have all the songs and hats they want, make it seem like "feminism" is still a thing, make movies for them to celebrate the Battle of the Blue Hats for Union Day, let THEIR organic intellectuals make movies at YOUR studio, so you don't even have to do the work of making propaganda deliberately - the leftists make their own anti-leftist propaganda for you, while trying to be leftists and thinking they're still leftists.

Meanwhile behind the scenes real wages stagnate, the Cloward-Piven strategy is enacted, and the Hart-Celler Act is passed. Within 10-20 years, leftists can't even remember what labor organizing means; and all of their members are wasted-out druggies. (Stuff like McGowan's theories about Laurel Canyon start to look plausible. Do you really know how many "leftists" and "feminists" of this period were being paid by the CIA? Does anyone?) Strange things start to happen, like total inversions of positions previously held by all the blue hat union society, for instance the fact that illegal immigrant labor is scab labor and therefore anti-union suddenly becoming a forbidden thought and everyone being forced to sign an oath saying they support scab labor. Academic leftists are brought in to support the move with their usual casuistry, which they learned in their technocrat finishing schools. An old-timer mentions that they used to hate and distrust the academics; he's kicked out for causing cognitive dissonance.

Feminism was one of the leading vectors of this process since it was, as described above, always a cocktail of Enlightenment rationalist, utopian, and near-sightedly antinomian elements. It always had excesses and idiotic "joiners" who were just there for the free love and nudist bullshit (which goes back 200 years, by the way). And of course sexual relations between men and women are always charged with potential sexual energy. So it had lots of elements that could be maximized while trimming out the core (women's betterment). Like post-labor leftism, it was the main vector for creating liberalism with a happy face, and creating a sense of "mission" for post-WW2 liberal middle class that was increasingly impoverished and didn't understand why the world was dying around it and wanted to feel like it still had a purpose and the world still had meaning. Vote blue and see movies about the first {ethnicity} to {do thing}, and it's just enough to dissipate the incipient feeling that something is wrong at a much deeper level here.

>>22075695
This lasted until the 2000s. By then women entered the position of the white middle class man: boring, dependable, already lulled to sleep so there's no reason to propagandize to him. Now all you do is reheat a minimum of "you go girl! #bossbitch" propaganda for the absolute stupidest ones, to keep them busy now and then. But you don't charge anything with any real energy. Feminism is no longer a "movement," it's a minor quotidian humiliation ritual and shibboleth for office slaves to swear fealty to when they see the Pepsi commercial using its symbols.

What other groups eclipsed women in importance in the 2000s? Gays, transgenders, and above all, racial dynamics become more important, more visible, more "fun" for liberal office drones to performatively care about, they become "available" in Bourdieu's sense. As neoliberal society breaks down, and multicultural shibboleths go from being '90s thing-one-says humiliation rituals to having potentially real content and volatility, which is both dangerous energy to the accumulated structures of society if left unshaped and useful energy if they are channeled into those structures to firm them up (in the way parasitized feminism was), they start to be shaped actively by the state. This is the earliest origin of modern "why does everything have to be 'about' race/gender?" But THIS, how you feel now, is how ordinary thoughtful people felt in the '60s to the '80s about feminism, when parasitized feminism still had enough volatility to be of interest to the state and thus to be weaponized as a main-line distraction and pastime, a subject for movies and media, etc., and thus it was pushed and constantly brought to the fore to a degree that seemed unnatural to people with residual wakefulness.

Actual feminism, in the sense of organic and meaningful discourse on women's lib, has not existed for well over a century, although there were individual intelligent women alive during the Civil Rights era. It's just that they didn't constitute any organic discourse. The only mainstream feminists who were part of organic(ally inorganic, state-coopted) discourse, who actually pushed that discourse to the level of something interesting and authentic, were extremely dedicated ones like Dworkin with masculine levels of autism rendering them capable of pushing idees-fixes to their logical conclusions. But this led them, like the aforementioned interesting idiosyncratic women who couldn't constitute or be accepted by establishment discourse, to be show-pieces, like Dworkin, who is only read by women who otherwise controvert and disobey every single thing she said in the way they live, like a pseudo-leftist liberal academic who makes $167,000 a year writing about settler colonialism making a guillotine joke on Twitter before going to get an $80 haircut with purple highlights as a severely balding 49 year old man in a $200 fitted turtleneck.

>>22075687
>(pic related, from Quigley)

>>22075684
>>22075687
>>22075691
>>22075695
>>22075706
https://odysee.com/@pepjose69:0/Aaron-Russo---Rockefeller-et-F%C3%A9minisme-(480p_30fps_H264-128kbit_AAC):2

>>22074844
Just have the most mindbroken incels let loose on them and it would be over in 3 hours

>>22071529
It merged with the LGBTQ movement.
Hard to be very worried about women, when Woman is just a social construct.
The whole crazy liberal erection is finally collapsing under its own weight.

Read these books , feminism is against genetics evolution etc .
https://incels.wiki/w/Category:Books
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Belfort_Bax

>>22071529
if you want to laugh imagine a man hating dyke who became a radical feminist after being raped back in 1967 despairing at the state of the modern feminist movement. feminism outlived its usefulness and is no longer about women at all but about coomer male desire, normalizing transgenderism and prostitution

>>22075706
>In a slick video released on Facebook with over one million views so far, a hyper-feminized/sexualized 8 year old boy (who some have compared to a drag version of JonBenét Ramsey) is featured partying in a hypersexual adult LGBT environment and telling kids watching that if their parents or friends do not support their desire to be drag (or trans), they need to get new parents and friends. As “Lactatia” speaks to his peers, while an all too happy host leers, bold text leaps out at the viewer saying “YOU NEED NEW PARENTS! YOU NEED NEW FRIENDS!” You too can be a drag queen or transgender superstar and perhaps head out on the town to party with the wild LGBT boys and “Lactatia.” If your parents won’t get on board, they can simply be replaced with a new “glitter family.”
https://www.studocu.com/row/document/university-of-nicosia/finance-managerial-accounting/synanon-transgender-this-is-an-essay-about-gender-issues-around-the-world-and-how-we-are-influenced/16420782

>Masked Antifa protesters show up brandishing weapons at Texas 'drag brunch' with kids

https://www.foxnews.com/us/masked-antifa-protesters-show-brandishing-weapons-texas-drag-bunch-kids

https://twitter.com/TaylerUSA/status/1564073099015897089

https://thegrayzone.com/2021/12/24/leaked-files-syria-psyops-astroturfing-breadtube-covid

https://www.city-journal.org/the-real-story-behind-drag-queen-story-hour?wallit_nosession=1

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/07/26/the-german-experiment-that-placed-foster-children-with-pedophiles

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/billionaire-family-pushing-synthetic-sex-identities-ssi-pritzkers

https://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/the-sexual-revolution-and-children-how-the-left-took-things-too-far-a-702679.html

https://thefederalist.com/2021/11/15/transgender-professor-at-old-dominion-university-rebrands-pedophiles-as-minor-attracted-persons/
https://nypost.com/2023/01/20/couple-pimped-their-adopted-sons-out-to-pedophile-ring-report/
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/may/07/scottish-paedophile-ring-guilty-child-abuse

yes we should definitely trust these people, nothing suspicious going on in here, these are just individuals who want to express themselves and be left alone, not brainwashed tools of a totalitarian corporate social engineering agenda /s.

>>22071529
Too bogged down in argument as to whether or not MtFs count as women. Thus always to intersectional movements

>>22075900
When I first heard around 2020 that the "woke" leftists were defending prostitutes (lumpen) and calling it feminism I laughed like King Homer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGM-dY4TzqA#t=19s

It's just so something they would do, I felt like I should have predicted it. Imagine being some conflict-avoidant little woman and not being able to criticize it. Ever watch a woman try to buck any trend or go against the group? They say fifteen concessive "I'm so so sorry for disagreeing" things first, and only then do they start saying the thing, and they encase it in 16 inches of "just, me personally, I.."

>>22075724
I inherited your pic related and, unfortunately, tossed it in the garbage for lack of room to tore it. Can you give a gestalt. I can buy a new copy.

>>22074262
>patriarchy has its origins in material historical causes, not in any conscious conspiracy.
Historio materio blah blah blah it sounds like you're casting a spell. If you want to talk about the material then talk about something fundamental like biology and eugenics, not vague orgone-tier quackery.
>Sure they are. Insofar as they pass, they're treated much like any other woman.
Although I'm not sure what I was thinking when I said trannies are neither men or women, I think I was trying to make a point about how they abandon one gender yet don't attain the other. Obviously, they are sexually men and nothing can change that. They don't pass, and being the object of a male's sexual relief isn't a test for womanhood.
>Being trans is defined by wishing to change one's sex or sexual characteristics, not by actually being able to.
I simply disagree. A person can imagine themselves to be anything they want, it's of no importance. There's worlds of difference between thinking you're something you aren't, and technological intervention to make yourself appear to be so.
Gender dysphoria could be a vanishingly rare birth defect, in the context we're discussing it is a choice one makes. Hence my allusions to a cult; it is essentially faith-based. Again, the only reason it is afforded any traction whatsoever is because of the availability of exogenous sex hormones.
I think any special snowflake ways that people like to cum are comparatively of no profundity at all in proportion to the importance they're afford. I don't believe in basing human rights legislation on paraphilia. Feminism is not exactly this, but a good part of it that is just about cummies was snuck in the back door of the movement, or better yet trojan-horsed, and this is the fruit of that seeding.
So this is all rank decadence, allowed under the cultural marxist paradigm to be used as a lever to dislodge society's order - because it is so effective.
>So how do you explain all the non-white trans women? And how do trans men figure into this?
Stupid questions, you really don't understand anything. Why are non-white people here at all??? Yeah exactly. They are dragged in the wake.

>>22075380
True. Since they're in power, their media moguls will need to project the idea that this is a time of peace.

>Why is feminist philosophy virtually extinct on the modern internet?
>Thread devolves into quibbling about the minutiae of trans women's status vis-a-vis women's rights
There you go
The "what" is lost or taken for granted because the question on everyone's minds is "who". I don't think this was intentional either, unlike some others ITT, trannies are a natural consequence of a female-dominated society, and so are seething virtue-signaling arguments with no concrete positions to be defended

>>22075706
This is a good series of comments and hits on each key point but it does not tie the cybernetic monster of postwar liberalism sufficiently well to the genuine activist or reformist sentiments of all sectors of society.
It isn't that businessmen and gangsters seized control of society from genuine politicians in the postwar state of affairs, it's that WW2 discourse discredited overt jingoism to the extent of eventually discrediting social cohesion itself, while the cold war discredited revolution.
The businessmen and social engineers didn't really scheme their way back into power, the terminally civic society ran back into their arms as a matter of course.

Trump was the avatar of the patriarchy and clinton was the avatar of white women feminism. all that "the future is female" lean in, corporate capitalist feminism. Well trump won and defeated the white female scourge and won the gender war.

So he sent feminism back into hibernation after a massive humiliating failure.

Now you have two forms of feminism fighting for control, the intersecetional open minded feminism or the terfs, i think the terfs will fail as white people become a minority then the face of feminism will get less white and maybe even trans

>>22071655
Not a fan of empiricism are we?

>>22071715
The mere idea that anyone is entitled to rights is completely laughable post-French Revolutionary nonsense and you have to wonder that this entire eradication of “unjust” hierarchies means that by extension if women themselves are entitled to rights on basis of sex, in the grander scheme of everything from reproductive rights to personal safety it should follow that literally means everyone, not just broads or transformers used to be guys. Realistically speaking though, you really cannot give rights to one group of people without retracting rights from another and that’s why women can murder their kids at random but I cannot legally have sexual intercourse with whomever I please without the cops getting involved, irrespective of the rights of the other person in either case.

>>22077436
Aren’t minorities less fond of alphabet people than whites or is the reverse true?

>>22077449
does it matter?

>>22077453
yes it does

>>22074813
>XY and XX defines male and female, but anything else is intersex because it is in between the sexes.
So someone with XY chromosomes but a female phenotype, who doesn't even know they have XY chromosomes, is actually male? That's an unusual definition of 'male' for most practical purposes.

>>22074835
Sure, I'm not saying there's no environmental influences on sexual orientation. But I don't think it's ENTIRELY environmental, because in that case how do you explain things like digit ratio being correlated to sexual orientation?

>>22076577
Why shouldn't prostitutes be defended? By and large they're victims. It's pimps who deserve our anger.

>>22076897
>If you want to talk about the material then talk about something fundamental like biology and eugenics, not vague orgone-tier quackery.
Biology is what I'm talking about (and the interactions of biology and environment, technology, etc).
>Obviously, they are sexually men and nothing can change that.
Is someone with CAIS a man? If not, what actual physical trait distinguishes the two?
>They don't pass
Some do, some don't, some do variably depending on several factors.
>and being the object of a male's sexual relief isn't a test for womanhood.
What is? Clearly it can't be chromosomes, since that would imply someone with CAIS who doesn't even know herself she has XY chromosomes is a man.
>Gender dysphoria could be a vanishingly rare birth defect, in the context we're discussing it is a choice one makes.
Whether to act to treat it is in principle a choice (though sometimes the choice is treatment or suicide), but I don't see how experiencing it is a choice. They can't just choose to not be distressed by the traits of their birth sex.
>Again, the only reason it is afforded any traction whatsoever is because of the availability of exogenous sex hormones.
Not really, there were historical cultures that recognized various forms of transgender or non-binary gender identities (though at least one, the Scythians, did have exogenous sex hormones in the form of pregnant mares' urine; who knows how many other cultures had discovered that and just never wrote it down.)
>I think any special snowflake ways that people like to cum are comparatively of no profundity at all in proportion to the importance they're afford. I don't believe in basing human rights legislation on paraphilia.
I don't think the evidence for the notion that it's a paraphilia (except maybe in a small minority of cases) is particularly good.
>Stupid questions, you really don't understand anything. Why are non-white people here at all??? Yeah exactly. They are dragged in the wake.
And trans men? How do they figure into this?

>>22077447
>Realistically speaking though, you really cannot give rights to one group of people without retracting rights from another
Not really, rights are not a zero-sum game. There are some cases where a certain freedom given to one person may negatively impact another, but that's far from being universally the case.

>>22078034
They defended them alright until they revealed a very common hooker practice: they don't take immigrants (and/or blacks).

>>22074835
It's deemed "normal" due to how common it is, not societal pressures.

>>22078065
I have not heard about this, and I certainly read feminist blogs.

>>22073399
Bacterial STDs are becoming increasingly antibiotic resistant, like many bacterial infections, so this is not really true.

>>22077464
Of course it does

>>22078075
Even nigger whores dont fuck nigger johns.Thats a quick way to get beaten or killed.

>>22078292
>Even nigger whores dont fuck nigger johns.

>>22078034
its not about defending prostitutes but about defending and expanding the industry, so they are not about lying and outright misrrepresenting the outrgiht horrifying working conditions,because its not about improving the lives of prostitutes but about recruiting more prostitutes starting from preschool and normalizing and destigmatizing. its powerful soros NGOs and male feminist coomers a la hassan piker and affiliate marketing MLM schemes like only fans. leftists no longer represent the working class but essentially exist as unpaid pressure groups for the sex industry lobby, the medical lobby the psychiatric lobby, the compulsory education system unions, the media lobby, the progressive security state protecting us from scawwy white supremacist terrorists(aka the selfsame feds in nazi costume)

>>22077464
we can change that.

>>22078047
CAIS is an intersexed condition. They are neither man nor woman and are incapable of the biological function of sex, which is reproduction. Trannyism isn't an intersexed condition, and in fact current activism among intersexed people favors an avoidance of unnecessary procedures just to approximate the appearance of functional reproductive organs, which is the opposite of what trannies seek.

What makes someone male or female is gametes. Did someone produce large cell gametes in utero? Then they are female. If they didn't, they're not.