Going from their website, everybody knew precisely what they signed up for, also, you never heard of this event before and you never cared, you just use it for your transphobia.
It isn't a good look
It isn't a good look
Equality
Started by DedeSiregar [2430598] on in Politics & Law.
Posts archived: 38 / 38 posts (100%) · the total is Torn's reply count + the opening post at the last fetch
Guess you don't have daughters that do sports
Guess you don't care aboutg being a positive role model to your children. Your hero Alex Jones loves trans women, why can't you?
Your hero Alex Jones loves trans women, why can't you?
lol oh shit
Shots fired!!
lol oh shit
Shots fired!!
The organisation is very clear what categories they have, just check their website, I'm sure there are many other races who do it differently, so just stop bitching and go for one of them, or better, make your own race so you can decide how you do it, nobody is stopping you.
You are so easily triggered you must be pretty fragile
You are so easily triggered you must be pretty fragile
You will generally never hear of a women's competition in the news or on social media, because no one cares about the boring things, until a trans woman has won one.
And what about women that don't get scholarships because they came in 4th place because a guy became a girl to win a sporting event its pretty selfish,I don't care what they do but when they infringe on someone else it's a problem I don't know maybe?
The poors having to do hunger games to get into college is the problem there. Fix America.
Never heard Limp complaining about people being better at sports getting a privileged arrangement, seems he doesn't care about things being fair at all.
In Canada there is still gender bias in the criminal and family courts.
Limpd in here trying his ass off to catch a forum ban
This is a bad take.
"Intersectionality" and it's application to social group theory and hierarchy is an assumption - a very questionable one. It's a particular pair of glasses you can put on to view the world and the clashes of interest and culture, but it's exactly that: Just another pair and one ladden with bad very Foucault influenced presuppositions to say the least.
I'm not telling some dude getting beat by his girlfriend and unable to do anything to protect himself that people shouldn't pay as much attention to his plight because other groups are apparently more oppressed in the progressive stack.
Furthermore the majority of "men" in most populations are heretosexual.
[background color=var(--bbc-body-bg-color)](Assuming Kinsey is incorrect which I believe he is.) It simply impacts more of a given population. To focus on an issue that impacts so many men isn't blowing it out of proportion.
[/background]
If the various activist arms of the LGBTq community want "allies" they better become valuable allies themselves. Allies are supposed to be a symbiotic relationship not, "focus your time and money on these issues causes of oppression olympics or you're a bigot."
Now maybe I'm putting words in your mouth and creating a strawman, but actual equality for men won't come from telling them to instead focus on other intersectional parts of men as a whole because they aren't disproportionately oppressed enough.
That shit creates enemies rather than allies and when you constantly eat your own, you end up with tons of enemies.
Also I identify as queer for this thread.
"Intersectionality" and it's application to social group theory and hierarchy is an assumption - a very questionable one. It's a particular pair of glasses you can put on to view the world and the clashes of interest and culture, but it's exactly that: Just another pair and one ladden with bad very Foucault influenced presuppositions to say the least.
I'm not telling some dude getting beat by his girlfriend and unable to do anything to protect himself that people shouldn't pay as much attention to his plight because other groups are apparently more oppressed in the progressive stack.
Furthermore the majority of "men" in most populations are heretosexual.
[background color=var(--bbc-body-bg-color)](Assuming Kinsey is incorrect which I believe he is.) It simply impacts more of a given population. To focus on an issue that impacts so many men isn't blowing it out of proportion.
[/background]
If the various activist arms of the LGBTq community want "allies" they better become valuable allies themselves. Allies are supposed to be a symbiotic relationship not, "focus your time and money on these issues causes of oppression olympics or you're a bigot."
Now maybe I'm putting words in your mouth and creating a strawman, but actual equality for men won't come from telling them to instead focus on other intersectional parts of men as a whole because they aren't disproportionately oppressed enough.
That shit creates enemies rather than allies and when you constantly eat your own, you end up with tons of enemies.
Also I identify as queer for this thread.
Intersectionality is a perspective on fighting persecution, yes. Nothing to do with Foucault, though.
Intersectional feminists by and large aren't trying to brush victims of domestic abuse under the rug. Not sure where you're getting that from, though guessing from your use of the term "oppression olympics" I'd guess conservative propaganda.
Patriarchy hurts heterosexual men just as it hurts everybody else. It's a collection of social expectations and biases based on gender, so it includes things like straight guys feeling they can't be open about being beaten by their girlfriends for fear of looking weak. It's only conservatives trying to convince you that feminism is about hating men and only caring about women's rights.
Nice helicopter meme though, definitely a new joke nobody's heard before.
Intersectional feminists by and large aren't trying to brush victims of domestic abuse under the rug. Not sure where you're getting that from, though guessing from your use of the term "oppression olympics" I'd guess conservative propaganda.
Patriarchy hurts heterosexual men just as it hurts everybody else. It's a collection of social expectations and biases based on gender, so it includes things like straight guys feeling they can't be open about being beaten by their girlfriends for fear of looking weak. It's only conservatives trying to convince you that feminism is about hating men and only caring about women's rights.
Nice helicopter meme though, definitely a new joke nobody's heard before.
Intersectionality is something McIntosh theorized in "Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack" attempted to tie together various groups of "oppressed" for the sake of creating activist blocs that actually don't have much in common with their particular struggles. (A queer 3rd generation Asian trans man in San Fransisco making 250k a year has almost nothing in common with a gay Saudi man living in Saudi Arabia and insinuate otherwise via "Intersectionality" is pretty offensive.)
The idea of the "Patriarchy" being something with systematic power and influence is a worldview assumption I don't make.
It's rather a new concept specific to the Western World in the last 40 years that makes insane assumptions about historical practices, cultures, and practices across peoples over thousand of years with almost no regard for the realities of the time.
"Conservatives " whatever that even means in 2022, don't have to convince us of anything when trust-fund 18 year olds from wealthy backgrounds and white collar costal elites demanding we check our privileges and dictate our thoughts and acceptable speech are there to do it for us.
But hey, we in the working class are ready to bend over and take it for our cultural overlords that reign over us from academia and corporations to insanely rich and powerful non profits and governments.
We will continue to collect your garbage, do your plumbing, stock your shelves, work on your roads and electric lines while making sure to only focus on the right approved causes.
The idea of the "Patriarchy" being something with systematic power and influence is a worldview assumption I don't make.
It's rather a new concept specific to the Western World in the last 40 years that makes insane assumptions about historical practices, cultures, and practices across peoples over thousand of years with almost no regard for the realities of the time.
"Conservatives " whatever that even means in 2022, don't have to convince us of anything when trust-fund 18 year olds from wealthy backgrounds and white collar costal elites demanding we check our privileges and dictate our thoughts and acceptable speech are there to do it for us.
But hey, we in the working class are ready to bend over and take it for our cultural overlords that reign over us from academia and corporations to insanely rich and powerful non profits and governments.
We will continue to collect your garbage, do your plumbing, stock your shelves, work on your roads and electric lines while making sure to only focus on the right approved causes.
The point of intersectionality is to recognise the common struggle between different groups and how different aspects of one person's identity impact their treatment at the hands of society in different ways. It's not about creating activist blocks. A better example would be recognising that a gay man in San Francisco is going to have a different experience to a gay man in Saudi Arabia due to the cultural attitudes towards homosexuality. Before intersectionality, you had bodies of theory about being gay, female, trans, black, etc. Intersectionality just looks at how these categories interact.
Patriarchy is just an aspect of culture, it's kinda the same thing as gender roles and their downwind implications. In patriarchal societies, men socially dominate women and this is justified in various ways. Given that it comes from academic sociology, anthropology and history, I'd say that it's actually explicitly derived from "historical practices, cultures, and practices across peoples over thousand of years".
I get hating on libs, I do it too. Just, don't make the mistake of thinking that just because many libs are stupid and annoying, that that means the theory that they're poorly applying has no merit. Usually it just means they learned about their favourite topics from twitter.
Economic class is a dimension in intersectionality. Also, the fact that "the elites" are willing to half-assedly assert LGBT+ rights via rainbow logos doesn't mean they actually give a shit about them. It's just a ploy. They care only about maintaining dominance over the working class and oppressed groups. The working class should be working hand-in-hand with minority groups to bring them down.
If it helps, I'm working class too. Or, I don't know if you'd call me working class as I do OK nowadays, but that's more through the luck of having interests that happened to align with a decent paying career. I grew up fairly poor and continued to be until at least my mid 20s.
Patriarchy is just an aspect of culture, it's kinda the same thing as gender roles and their downwind implications. In patriarchal societies, men socially dominate women and this is justified in various ways. Given that it comes from academic sociology, anthropology and history, I'd say that it's actually explicitly derived from "historical practices, cultures, and practices across peoples over thousand of years".
I get hating on libs, I do it too. Just, don't make the mistake of thinking that just because many libs are stupid and annoying, that that means the theory that they're poorly applying has no merit. Usually it just means they learned about their favourite topics from twitter.
Economic class is a dimension in intersectionality. Also, the fact that "the elites" are willing to half-assedly assert LGBT+ rights via rainbow logos doesn't mean they actually give a shit about them. It's just a ploy. They care only about maintaining dominance over the working class and oppressed groups. The working class should be working hand-in-hand with minority groups to bring them down.
If it helps, I'm working class too. Or, I don't know if you'd call me working class as I do OK nowadays, but that's more through the luck of having interests that happened to align with a decent paying career. I grew up fairly poor and continued to be until at least my mid 20s.
Intersectionality is not an assumption, it's plainly observable; just look at the disadvantages POC trans women face, compared to white trans women, compared to white cis women. They're all discriminated against, but to varying degrees due to their race or transness or both. Noting this down is not playing "oppression Olympics."
The whole men's rights thing is reminiscent of the white racism shtick people like to pull, an attempt to hijack legitimate movements and steal attention from the ones that actually need that spotlight. In this trial alone, it seems that Amber was immediately villainized just because her plaintiff was a famous guy. Yet, we get threads like this celebrating "men's rights" when they already have more rights than anyone while women are actively having their rights stripped away (by men in government) like recently seen in the overturning of Roe v Wade.
Additionally, cishet men being the majority does not make their issues more important than those (more debilitating and inhibiting issues) faced by other gay and/or trans men. That is, blatantly, the opposite of equality.
Just to reiterate, his plight is valid as are the issues other men face. The point is, however, that other groups of men desperately need the spotlight, not rich famous guys like Depp, in an irrelevant case that does not actually move anything forward. This thread is plain and simply, virtue signaling nonsense that doesn't address actual issues and worse, detracts from those issues by (intentionally or not) occupying the space where good discussion could happen.
Re allyship: If someone considers being an ally conditional, I don't want them. Straight up, those people are not helpful and are not true allies at all. Real allies, understand the issues they're supporting, and don't discard the facts they know about said issues on an emotional whim. These claims of driving people away from good causes is respectability politics at best, and fearmongering disingenuous nonsense at worse, I could not care less, frankly.
The whole men's rights thing is reminiscent of the white racism shtick people like to pull, an attempt to hijack legitimate movements and steal attention from the ones that actually need that spotlight. In this trial alone, it seems that Amber was immediately villainized just because her plaintiff was a famous guy. Yet, we get threads like this celebrating "men's rights" when they already have more rights than anyone while women are actively having their rights stripped away (by men in government) like recently seen in the overturning of Roe v Wade.
Additionally, cishet men being the majority does not make their issues more important than those (more debilitating and inhibiting issues) faced by other gay and/or trans men. That is, blatantly, the opposite of equality.
Just to reiterate, his plight is valid as are the issues other men face. The point is, however, that other groups of men desperately need the spotlight, not rich famous guys like Depp, in an irrelevant case that does not actually move anything forward. This thread is plain and simply, virtue signaling nonsense that doesn't address actual issues and worse, detracts from those issues by (intentionally or not) occupying the space where good discussion could happen.
Re allyship: If someone considers being an ally conditional, I don't want them. Straight up, those people are not helpful and are not true allies at all. Real allies, understand the issues they're supporting, and don't discard the facts they know about said issues on an emotional whim. These claims of driving people away from good causes is respectability politics at best, and fearmongering disingenuous nonsense at worse, I could not care less, frankly.
Ha, nice one
I also know a man who was physically abused by his ex wife (a long time ago). He doesn't talk about it, but I think he still struggles with it a lot, since it happened back before it was socially acceptable to even acknowledge that domestic abuse of men is possible. While I don't know a lot about the case, and I'm vaguely under the impression that neither party was particularly innocent, it was nice to see a male public figure coming forward and being open about their situation. I'm glad we have (or are moving towards (slowly)) an environment where people can be more open about legitimately serious problems and get help/protection.