thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
No bio...
User ID: 1081
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1d ago
because the Taliban will give those men the power over women that the former society could or would not and every soldier or potential soldier knew it.
I think they probably cared less about power over women and more about power over their abusers. Ending the practice of bacha bazi was a prominent selling point for the Taliban the last two times it took power in Afghanistan. Maybe we should have considered not covering up such practices by our "allies", but ensuring first-world LGBT people aren't smeared as pedophiles is apparently more important than preventing child sexual abuse.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
30d ago
Yeah, it's not the works themselves but the surrounding culture which the works are an escape from.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
30d ago
They are quite pro-trans and also quite anti-anime. Even if they acknowledge that anime is a major contributing factor to trans identification, they are still extremely hostile to it and regularly push governments to censor it.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
30d ago
How can you be pro-trans without also being pro-anime?
Be a feminist who is convinced that anime objectifies and sexualizes women. Eg, see UN Women's regular attempts to crack down on anime and manga.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
30d ago
Partial severing of every muscle in the body is just another way of saying "we should kill them" due to the combination of the hazards of the necessary surgeries and the fragility of a number of extremely important muscles (eg, the heart, diaphragm, and intestines).
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
If you have a {SUBALTERN_QUALITY} and want a security clearance, you pretty much have one option: nonchalant openness when confronted about it without normally drawing attention to it otherwise. Hiding it is evidence you can be blackmailed into revealing secrets. "Out and proud" is an indication that you can't keep your mouth shut and can be tricked into revealing secrets to protect your pride. The latter is just as big (if not bigger) a problem as the former.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
The way he said it is guaranteed to upset both sides (which is why it's so hilarious), but the basic truth behind it is undeniable.
Huh? Why is it guaranteed to upset both sides? It seems obviously directionally correct to me (I'd nitpick that femininity is more prominent than masculinity rather than being hyper-feminine, which implies the near absence of masculinity to me) from the lolicon side and I have pointed to research supporting much the same conclusion in the past:
Recall Kinsella's suggestion that lolicon be understood as men performing the shōjo to come to terms with an unstable gender identity (Kinsella 2006: 81-83). If being a man ceases to promise power, potency and pleasure, it is no longer the privileged subject position. Akagi explains that lolicon is a form of self-expression for those oppressed by the principles of masculine competitive society (Akagi 1993: 232).32 Lolicon is a rejection of the need to establish oneself as masculine and an identification with the "kindness and love" of the shōjo (Akagi 1993: 233). This interpretation reverses the standard understanding of lolicon as an expression of masculinity to one of femininity. This is, of course, not the only way to approach the wide range of lolicon images, but it certainly highlights the complexity of "pornographic content" and its uses.
What's there to be upset over?
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
Drug legalization only requires “your body, your choice.”
Not always--see second-hand smoke.
Under the common understanding of consent, CP legalization requires taking that choice away from someone else.
Depends on how the CP was created. Drawn CP doesn't for instance.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
From her campaign website:
Protect Civil Rights and Freedoms
Vice President Harris and Governor Walz believe many fundamental freedoms are at stake in this election. They will fight to ensure that Americans have the opportunity to participate in our democracy by passing the John Lewis Voting Rights and the Freedom to Vote Acts — laws that will enshrine voting rights protections, expand vote-by-mail and early voting, and more. Her Administration will also continue to protect Americans from discrimination, building on her work to secure $2 billion in funding for Offices of Civil Rights across the federal government. And as President, she’ll always defend the freedom to love who you love openly and with pride. In 2004, she officiated some of the nation’s first same-sex marriages and as Attorney General, she refused to defend California’s anti-marriage equality statewide referendum. As President, she’ll fight to pass the Equality Act to enshrine anti-discrimination protections for LGBTQI+ Americans in health care, housing, education, and more into law.
The Equality Act explicitly adds protection against discrimination based on gender identity to existing federal anti-discrimination laws (titles II, III, IV, VI, VII, IX). That hardly seems like "sprinting away as fast as she can".
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
On another note there seems to be a feminist fantasy of men being really passive and girly but being so attractive that women can't resist them despite their behaviour.
I think this is a misunderstanding. The fantasy is not of men actually being passive and girly. It is of men demonstrating their masculinity by being performatively passive and girly in order to amuse the women, when they desire to be so amused. It is no more than a spin on the traditional "He makes me laugh.".
The problem is only solved when we stop treating men like that. Can you give a plausible path to that? I don't see one--one side wants both men and women to be held to the same shitty standard while the other only wants to fix it for women. I refuse to support either. I tolerated the status quo under Roe, and now I tolerate the status quo under Dobbs.
EDIT: Rewrote last sentence for clarity.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
There's a certain pattern I notice where gendered issues affecting men are dismissed by framing any support for fixing them as taking away women's rights. Odd how that seems to be designed to cause the pattern you "noticed" isn't it?
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
And at least in the entire US, underage boys are responsible for their children even when raped. What's your point? Forced fatherhood isn't seen as a problem in the slightest. "That sucks, but you're still responsible for the child." is the response we give men who are raped. Why should we treat motherhood differently?
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
If you don't want to accept the consequences, don't take the action.
How much of the "forced motherhood" narrative revolves around the idea that she didn't take the action--her male partner did and she was just a passive participant who now has to deal with the consequences?
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
fails to explain the FAANG people
A lot of them probably expect to be on the receiving end of transfers of social status rather than economic status.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
I'm still not sure why penises are uniquely traumatizing to teenage girls, but have no harmful effect on teenage boys. I'm still not sure why only penises have this uniquely traumatizing effect, but men can handle vaginas just fine. Again, there's plenty of cultures where nudity is common, and everyone seems to do just fine seeing a penis there. But if you think seeing a penis is this horrifying traumatizing event, why do you keep inflicting it on little boys?
I don't think the concern is trauma. Exposing a male sex organ to a girl/woman is seen as defiling her due to women being traditionally considered sexually "pure". There's no need to worry about defiling boys as they are inherently defiled.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
We dropped it in favor of the more concise "they" because the singular/plural distinction wasn't important enough to maintain for many people compared to the convenience of having a single word. It also nicely dodges the complaints some people had about prioritizing one gender over another in language due to the ordering of "he or she", which was a rather obnoxious part of the gender war a few decades back.
If there is any hope for preserving female-only spaces (in public) then it must be by re-asserting that the legal protections for women are for members of the female sex, and not anyone who identifies as a woman. There really is no other way out.
There should be no hope for preserving female-only spaces or legal protections. The west has adopted "equality of the sexes" as foundational and women should have to bear the cost of that as much as men do. They shouldn't get to simultaneously claim equality and special treatment as it suits them.
EDIT: Grammar.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
Organizations often have privileges beyond those granted to individual members. Why should we be able to grant such privileges to organizations but not set restrictions on them?
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
I do think in the very near future child porn will be naturally significantly reduced in scope if not largely eliminated by the general proliferation of deep fakes that are indistinguishable from actual CP and that society should not try to get in the way of this via regulating them (or requiring registration to view them, since that'll put them behind a gate that makes it clear they're fake, which eliminates their subversive effect of acting as counterfeit goods that drive the real goods out). Of course many if not most pedos will still prefer "the real thing", but if it's impossible to tell the real thing from the fake thing then what can you do? Are you gonna look through every clip of every single adult Chaturbate or MFC camgirl that's ever existed to find out if what you're looking at is an authentic webcam capture or a transformed version of an adult clip?
Basically, the "market" (which is actually, contrary to what most non-pedos believe, mostly a reputational and attentional market more than a financial one as most CP producers do it for kudos and prestige rather than to make cash) will be flooded by so many counterfeits that it will collapse. It will be so "bad" (or I guess good) that if most pedos knew it was coming I think many would try to stop it (as opposed to working toward it), treating it as an existential crisis for a significant sphere of pedo activity, but I don't think they can.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
1mo ago
Abortion:
Woman: legally allowed to make a decision on her own
Man: legally allowed to argue
From the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women:
Article 16
1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in all matters relating to marriage and family relations and in particular shall ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women:
...
(e) The same rights to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children and to have access to the information, education and means to enable them to exercise these rights;
If a woman can unilaterally decide to abort or carry her baby to term, can men truly be said to have the same right to "to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children" if all he can do is try to persuade her?
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
2mo ago
Oh, so when we make Felons a class of people who can't own guns, are we doing something unfair?
If only it were just felons. The various red flag laws gun control advocates keep pushing don't even require a criminal conviction.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
2mo ago
Will never, ever happen, for non-immigration related reasons, in the US.
I don't think the resistance is as strong as you think. We're already moving that direction with REAL ID which originally faced stiff opposition for fear of it turning into a national ID card, including states passing laws preventing its implementation, but eventually everyone caved.
I really don't think you want to establish a precedent of labeling message t-shirts "harassment" because you think they are meant to annoy you.
That's already the precedent for men with message t-shirts. EDIT: Or rather, the harassment isn't in the message itself, it's in the fact that simply looking at where the message is written is a social faux pas.
And how exactly would you like women who wear it to be "punished"?
I already said above, they shouldn't be granted the additional protections against "sexual" harassment that women are typically given. They are giving shit, they should expect to deal with it given in return. EDIT: Importantly in this case, if you don't want people staring at your chest, don't put words there.
Yes and no. Not raising a stink about it when we encountered it was "maintaining coalition politics". Classifying the investigation into the practice and the resulting report on it was for domestic politics.
More options
Context Copy link