Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
that malelesbian is more worried about a washed up comic than the creeping illegalization of safe abortion is the kind of position that you can only understand when you remember that he professes to have never seen—much less spoken to—a "real, live" woman in his life.

@malelesbian I don't mean this in any kind of derogatory way, but do you lack female friends because all your friends are male, or because you have no friends at all?
 

?!..!?

Well-known member
@malelesbian I don't mean this in any kind of derogatory way, but do you lack female friends because all your friends are male, or because you have no friends at all?
I've had plenty of female friends in my life. I just live in social isolation right now. The few women I talk to have good relationships with me, in my opinion. The reason I haven't argued against beiser's allegation that I have no female friends is that its an ad-hominem attack and I didn't want to validate it with a response. I wouldn't be surprised if I had better relationships with my female friends in the past than most of you, but I don't really care to make baseless judgments about another person's personal life. I want people to engage my theory, so why would I sit here making ad hominem attacks? It's a distraction.
 

?!..!?

Well-known member
im not gonna wade into the phylogistocentrism morass here but malelesbian's theory of change reminds me a lot of a set of science textbooks i had in 6th grade. they had been produced during a culture war in maybe the 80s, and so every scientist in the book was a woman. every single one. the only exceptions were a man repairing a telephone pole and a garbage man. i don't think this is some great crime but I do think it's very silly.
This is a silly way to call me silly. Just one big bizarre metaphor that doesn't add up to a sound argument. I have no interest in doing science. I theorize about culture.

anyway, if you ask me, the primary barriers to the flourishing of women are structural, economic and legal. to the extent they're cultural, it's about the culture inside institutions, not whether public access TV is sufficiently yonic.
And if you don't want public access TV to be yonic, you're part of the problem. We do need better representation of feminine characters in culture and that is a huge part of the culture war.

But please, say more about the "culture inside institutions".

that malelesbian is more worried about a washed up comic than the creeping illegalization of safe abortion
Dude, I'm really worried about the government's efforts to colonize the female body. Yet another baseless assumption on your part that has nothing to do with my actual politics. Do you think the culture war totally insignificant?

that you can only understand when you remember that he professes to have never seen—much less spoken to—a "real, live" woman in his life.
No, I did not profess this. Why did you put scare quotes around the phrase "real, live"? It's obvious you're not quoting me. I never said I never met or spoke to women before. I just said I'm socially isolated. I have problems meeting or speaking to literally anyone. But I've met plenty of women in my life, maybe not as many as you, but it's not a competition. It's really insulting to see you make up lies about my real life.
 

sus

Moderator
Please, we already one @mixed_biscuits around here, and that's quite enough.
Chastity-Belt.jpg
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I've had plenty of female friends in my life. I just live in social isolation right now. The few women I talk to have good relationships with me, in my opinion. The reason I haven't argued against beiser's allegation that I have no female friends is that its an ad-hominem attack and I didn't want to validate it with a response. I wouldn't be surprised if I had better relationships with my female friends in the past than most of you, but I don't really care to make baseless judgments about another person's personal life. I want people to engage my theory, so why would I sit here making ad hominem attacks? It's a distraction.
I don't think it was so much an ad-hominem attack as a serious question about how many women you've really known or spent much time around based on your relentless idealisation of women as inherently cooperative (and never competitive!), unconditionally loving, kind, nurturing, etc. I mean, either that or just happen to have bumped into a lot of women who fit the profile of your average saint.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: sus

?!..!?

Well-known member
I don't think it was so much an ad-hominem attack as a serious question about how many women you've really known or spent much time around based on your relentless idealisation of women as inherently cooperative (and never competitive!), unconditionally loving, kind, nurturing, etc. I mean, either that or just happen to have bumped into a lot of women who fit the profile of your average saint.
I said those were feminine values, not values necessarilily related to women.. Because I'm an anti-essentialist, I believe anyone can embody feminine values, whether man or woman. Stop assuming all knowledge must come from experience, use your imagination.
 

?!..!?

Well-known member
If you use AIs to do your homework for you, you'll get a bad argument everytime.

The notion that anti-essentialism prevents us from understanding any phenomenon as feminine is just wrong. The point of anti-essentialism is a to give a dynamic, changing understanding of gender categories. It never forbids us from using gender categories altogether. Of course our understanding of femininity is historical and malleable. Of course the qualities that define femininity are contingent and open to revision. I never claimed femininity has any "inherent" qualities, I said it has non-essential definitive qualities.

If we agree with you, and refuse to affirm any qualities as definitive of femininity, then we can no longer even identify people as women or even feminine at all. Gender categories, on your view, become useless. To say that we can ascribe no qualities to a gender category is to say that we can't define gender categories, meaning we can't understand them, thus they basically don't exist. But we've already discussed how denying the existence of genders is an obscurantist non-starter. You explain to me how we can understand what femininity is without describing any qualities it has.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I said those were feminine values, not values necessarilily related to women.. Because I'm an anti-essentialist, I believe anyone can embody feminine values, whether man or woman. Stop assuming all knowledge must come from experience, use your imagination.
But then what in God's name makes them "feminine values" in the first place?
 

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
If we agree with you, and refuse to affirm any qualities as definitive of femininity, then we can no longer even identify people as women or even feminine at all. Gender categories, on your view, become useless. To say that we can ascribe no qualities to a gender category is to say that we can't define gender categories, meaning we can't understand them, thus they basically don't exist. But we've already discussed how denying the existence of genders is an obscurantist non-starter. You explain to me how we can understand what femininity is without describing any qualities it has.
This is an ass-backward problem that comes from trying to be anti-essentialist.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
How can you possibly claim to be "anti-essentialist" when your entire ideology is that some ways of thinking, feeling and being are inherently "masculine" (and, in your view, bad), while others are inherently "feminine" (and, in your view, good)?

And if being competitive, for example, is not an inherent behaviour in men, why call it "masculine" at all? If being cooperative is not an inherent behaviour in women, why call it "feminine"?
 
Top