What the devil gave you the absurd idea that we are against tyranny? Unlike you, we believe in our cause with no compunctions, no equivocations, no hesitation, no doubts. KILL THE CHAD!
We like tyranny very much!
The Feminine Perspective against the Manosphere
- Thread starter ?!..!?
- Start date
-
- Tags
- a bunch of trolls trolling each other aesthetic jihad chicks dig guys with money cia lesbian david lesbian do you tongue punch the dirt star? dolezal1977 eating pussy without asking everyone on this board is a troll extraterrestrial bisexual feminist travis bickle justified ancients of noncing lesbian separatism luka's crop top malelesbian: english rp boy toy malethespian mansplaining feminism mr tea confirmed pegging freak mrs tea eaten out 24/7 prevent prevent! sarlacc pit taking the filth the art of trolling the feminonce massive the perils of self-publishing the viper of cunnilingus undisciplined lockerroom pussy eating unimaginable anguish version's throbbing penis
What the devil gave you the absurd idea that we are against tyranny? Unlike you, we believe in our cause with no compunctions, no equivocations, no hesitation, no doubts. KILL THE CHAD!
We like tyranny very much!
Well damn, you took your mask off. Perhaps you can atleast understand that tyranny is a non-starter for me. Also tyranny won't bring about socialism. Tyranny begets tyranny
but you are the one focused on socialism. I'm just telling you how to get rid of Andrew Tate. You can do this tyrannically under capitalism. To shy away from this means that you admire Andrew Tate in some regard and want to be him. what the kids call concern trolling.
I agree with you! we don't need socialism to get rid of the manosphere. So take that final step and join us on the dark side. KILL THE CHAD!
I agree with you! we don't need socialism to get rid of the manosphere. So take that final step and join us on the dark side. KILL THE CHAD!
yes, globohomo, woke culture, race mixing, this is all fine and dandy. yes, let's go faster and become even more cosmopolitan. So why do you cling to saving old regressive detritus like Tate? Their lives mean nothing to us, they will be steamrolled by the most impersonal juggernaut, the judge of progress! Progress demands a lot of sacrifices. KILL THE CHAD!
I believe in non-violence. Like Butler!
Clinamenic
Binary & Tweed
But even manly Prigozhin knew how to cook.
For people who argue that masculinity and femininity are equally oppressive, I pose this question: does our dominant system of representation exclude anything? If no, then it includes everything, and so the phallic task of totalization succeeds. Thus the negative answer endorses phallocentrism. If yes, than you accept the phallic system's masculine oppression of feminine culture: for feminine culture just is what the phalli system excludes. What does femininity block out? Femininity, I argue doesn't exclude anything. Feminine culture would allow masculinity to coexist alongside it. There's an asymmetry here: phallocentrist masculine culture oppresses femininity in a way femininity doesn't do to masculine culture. I argue that masculine phallic culture represses femininity explains why masculinity is oppressive.
No one has provided an explanation for why non-phallic femininity is oppressive.
Some have claimed that non-gendered behavior can subvert the gender binary. Again, no one has said how this works. But let's assume it does work. Why would non-gendered behavior subvert the gender binary? Because it represents a phenomenon excluded from the phallic representation system, just like feminine male behavior does. So the proponent of non-gendered behavior is allied with the male lesbian, as long as feminine culture doesn't exclude anything. And by "feminine culture" I just mean non-phallic culture. So anything different from phallic culture allies itself with femininity. So I argue feminine culture doesn't exclude non-gendered behavior, it allows it to coexist as an alternative to phallocentrism, just like feminine behavior is. If non-gendered behavior is non-phallic, then there's no disagreement between me and people who want to perform non-gendered behavior. Feminine culture is non-reductionist because it lets non-feminine phenomena exist, where masculine culture tries to reduce everything different from itself to the same.
Thus, feminine culture supports non-gendered behavior. People who don't want to act feminine or masculine then agree with me, UNLESS they can show that feminine culture is also oppressive. But they can't.
No one has provided an explanation for why non-phallic femininity is oppressive.
Some have claimed that non-gendered behavior can subvert the gender binary. Again, no one has said how this works. But let's assume it does work. Why would non-gendered behavior subvert the gender binary? Because it represents a phenomenon excluded from the phallic representation system, just like feminine male behavior does. So the proponent of non-gendered behavior is allied with the male lesbian, as long as feminine culture doesn't exclude anything. And by "feminine culture" I just mean non-phallic culture. So anything different from phallic culture allies itself with femininity. So I argue feminine culture doesn't exclude non-gendered behavior, it allows it to coexist as an alternative to phallocentrism, just like feminine behavior is. If non-gendered behavior is non-phallic, then there's no disagreement between me and people who want to perform non-gendered behavior. Feminine culture is non-reductionist because it lets non-feminine phenomena exist, where masculine culture tries to reduce everything different from itself to the same.
Thus, feminine culture supports non-gendered behavior. People who don't want to act feminine or masculine then agree with me, UNLESS they can show that feminine culture is also oppressive. But they can't.
ghost
Well-known member
I stumbled recently into a clipping, and it really drove home for me what the central drama of this thread is.
Serano describes the misogyny of seeing the feminine as unnatural or unnecessary or not particularly desirable. On this page, malelesbian is, I believe, with her.
The disjuncture comes when malelesbian believes that he is uniquely poised, as someone who's male, to disrupt this juncture. There's something startlingly egotistical about seeing men's expression of gender as a unique point of leverage against the forces of conformity, without ever according that esteem to women doing similar things. (And this is before we get to malelesbian's obvious butchering of butchness.)
Will come back to see how this thread is progressing in another few months.
This is not the issue. The issue is that femininity is under-represented. Phallic culture hides femininity, it acts like the feminine doesn't exist. The point is to show people what femininity is, to express the femininity inside us all.
Nope, I never said that. Femininity is in all of us. There's nothing unique about my position. Anyone can present femininity, most people just choose not to. I just happen to be a feminine man. That's a contingent fact. But given that I am a feminine man, I make it my goal to present femininity to the trads, who support phallic culture and tend to ignore femininity.
"Men's expression of gender" has nothing to do with me. I'm about expressing femininity. Women can express femininity just as well as I can, if not better. The point is that the gender binary forces men to be masculine, and I'm resisting that. What will it take you to accept that I am feminine?
And the idea that I refuse to praise female gender non-conformists is just wrong. Judith Butler is a female gender non-conformist and I praise her all day.
I never said anything about butchness. Stop putting words words in my mouth. At the end of the day, butches are very much like male lesbians: they are gender non-conformists, masculine women who subvert the gender binary. I don't see where there's any butchery here.
Ghost of Beiser is another depressing example of someone who, lacking any reason to reject my actual arguments, has to misrepresent me and make up things about me to manufacture a disagreement. If you want to disagree with me, why not respond to things I actually said, with quotations and stuff? But you can't because you don't disagree with anything I really said.
trads don't exist on this forum mate. well, biscetto does, but he's trying to invent a secular irreligious trad, which is not really possible. hence he's turned his tits into jelly. you should argue with him and demolish him, will make dissensus nice and peaceful. there should be a thread: malelesbian vs mixed_biscuits showdown. feminin boxing.
