Post B6fr1fzKAOM08LQczY by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
(DIR) More posts by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
(DIR) Post #B6fo36J9UoOEBqgs4W by lianna@micro.webgarden.click
0 likes, 0 repeats
@oddtail I made quite similar experiences actually.Most clueless cis people I met sure weren't very sensible about word choices and reading the room ("so i was wondering, ehh, are you a boy or a girl??"), but once you gave them an answer to whatever they were wondering, they just would shrug, accept it and move on with our activity at hand.They'd then include me in gendered activities and spaces without any awkwardness or second thoughts at all, they'd be super relaxed about it, they'd clearly just take my gender as truth, and they'd get irate on my behalf if people misgendered or excluded me because they were genuinely baffled why people would mistreat me that way. It was as natural to them as anything else that I was a woman, it didn't even occur to them that it could be "wrong".It took my middle-aged, cranky, Yugoslavian coworker who never heard of trans people exactly two days to completely understand my womanhood. When I eventually talked to her about the whole thing, she was surprised I brought it up, but said something that stuck to me ever since:That she met a lot of unique and surprising people in her life, and that you learn things about the world and other people every day. And that it was just an interesting medical fun fact about me. And that's all. She said that to her, it was no different than when she met a black guy in our village and then found out he and his family are actually natively German. She compared me to her grandma, who apparently had a lot of facial hair, which ran in her family. It was just a fun fact about me that I'm trans, nothing more.The validity of my womanhood was never in question to her, just whether I was a woman at all. That's the main thing really.You really hit the nail on the head: transphobes really, really want to make us think that we're alone. That everyone naturally sees us as freaks by default, except those we have successfully 'convinced of our ideology'.It's actually the same mechanic at play as with conspiracy types, crazy conservatives or elderly people refusing to go with the times.They want to use "common sense" as a backup to try to convince you that their irrational fears are actually normal and how everyone else thinks. They're super afraid of having to change their world view, of being wrong about something. They want to make us feel like we have no support, not necessarily to hurt us directly, but because they themselves secretly feel ashamed and insecure about the world moving past them or judging them for something they don't understand. (Ideological transphobes who know what they're doing nonwithstanding, they're doing it on purpose).That's also why allies can sometimes be insidiously worse than clueless folks. Allies might just as well have the same thought patterns as transphobes, but end the thought process on "...but it would be mean to misgender them, I should be nice and supportive."They still fundamentally think we're freaks, they just think it's ethically good to be nice to freaks.Before my coworker experience, I always felt that even if cis people accept us, they at best mentally create a third category: women, men and "trans". Or that they'd always see me as a guy who wants to be a woman and who they needed to be respectful of not to hurt their feelings. But that isn't the case. They just see me as a woman with a medical history.Transphobes are the only ones questioning people's genders' validity. Normal people don't even have that thought process, because validity isn't an idea they associate with gender.
(DIR) Post #B6fo36eQDjP5FodrE0 by light@noc.social
0 likes, 0 repeats
@liannaGender isn't real. And the more you force us to accept it, the less we'll give in (h/t @Gnomeshatecheese for that turn of phrase)@oddtail @lxo
(DIR) Post #B6fo36w99pa88mw0qu by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
interesting thought that "gender isn't real". it seems to contradict scientific evidence about gendered brain development that suggests that it's as real as it gets. now, the opposite to acknowledging its measurable, objective reality would be taking it as an arbitrary choice, at which point ISTM you're the one trying to impose your unscientific, oversimplified, and self-inconsistent views onto others, no matter whom it hurts. you could do betterCC: @lianna@micro.webgarden.click @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz @oddtail@meow.social
(DIR) Post #B6fo37GLwhkF9SO9Lc by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @light @Gnomeshatecheese @oddtail you're thinking of "sex" not gender
(DIR) Post #B6fr1fzKAOM08LQczY by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
nope, the differences in brain development associated with gender are present even when it's misaligned with assigned sex and with genetic profile. believing that one can guess someone else's gender by just looking at the person is about as silly as believing that one can guess someone's sexual orientation by just looking at the person. or guessing the person's underwear color, for that matter. some of these are somewhat correlated, but nature is more diverse than our narrow minds can guess. we need better measurement instruments and willingness to use them to be able to perceive more detailed realities.CC: @oddtail@meow.social @light@noc.social @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6fr1gHP5Aod2Pt4Ai by meowski@fluf.club
2 likes, 1 repeats
@lxo @oddtail @light @Gnomeshatecheese just because your hormones got messed up or you were molested and you're gay that doesn't make you the opposite sexlook into the child abusing pervert john money who coined the term "gender" gender is fake and gay. humans are sexually dimorphic in 99+% of cases, although there are sex linked genetic defects and hormone related developmental disorders that can cause things to deviate from that, but those are diseases, it's not just "whatever gender i feel like picking cause i want to act like a fag"
(DIR) Post #B6fr9qrjbkX8BcmE3E by quasi@peister.org
2 likes, 0 repeats
@lxoWhat do you mean by gendered brain development? Do you have an example? A citation?Most people don't try to guess someone's gender (whatever it means). They infer a person's sex by the look with extremely high precision@meowski @oddtail @light @Gnomeshatecheese
(DIR) Post #B6fr9r5CnfJCrP4z32 by quasi@peister.org
2 likes, 0 repeats
@lxoAlso I have yet to see a coherent, noncircular definition of "gender" that means something different from sex or sex stereotype@Gnomeshatecheese @light @meowski @oddtail
(DIR) Post #B6frpG5IkXeUH3ro5Q by AxT9lBKpKuSEXNXtce.jeff@mk.magicka.org
1 likes, 0 repeats
@meowski@fluf.club @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br @oddtail@meow.social @light@noc.social @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz gender is a term synthesized by the cia that was meant to be used on the soviets but had huge domestic blow back
(DIR) Post #B6frpGKtoY833RAGOm by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@jeff @lxo @oddtail @Gnomeshatecheese i believe john money was australian. check out matt walsh's "what is a woman" video, if you want to go down this tired old gender faggotry rabbit hole again. honestly i shouldn't have replied to the thread. i have ascended past gender, all these people are just fags and i do not care about 1000 different genders
(DIR) Post #B6fsBbs6QUdCDULpwG by AxT9lBKpKuSEXNXtce.jeff@mk.magicka.org
1 likes, 0 repeats
@meowski@fluf.club @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br @oddtail@meow.social @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz that the thing, no one cares about the 1000 genders not even them, they just use it to signal thier virtue and prove ideological purity tests.
(DIR) Post #B6fsBcQ8Nxqxv2H0z2 by meowski@fluf.club
1 likes, 0 repeats
@jeff @lxo @oddtail @Gnomeshatecheese it's a way to get attention and be special by claiming some new identity and demand you use their pronouns. gender is honestly so 2025. it's over now
(DIR) Post #B6fsEaoGpYUPnAyt9M by AxT9lBKpKuSEXNXtce.jeff@mk.magicka.org
1 likes, 0 repeats
@meowski@fluf.club @lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br @oddtail@meow.social @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz more like 2015
(DIR) Post #B6fsKA96sZ9UpiNu1w by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@jeff @lxo @oddtail @Gnomeshatecheese i think the kids have moved past gender and now they quit doing drugs, started going to church and getting married
(DIR) Post #B6fwgnZVNL3PIUmPBI by nicholas@aklp.club
2 likes, 0 repeats
There is a huge amount of research going back decades showing that male and female brains have differences on average, but have no distinct sexually dimorphic features that can be used to identify any particular brain as belonging to either sex.But of course decades ago research showing no difference between male and female brains was fashionable as 3rd wave feminism was ascendant in academia. Now with the rise of 4th wave, the opposite has come into vogue. So who can say, it's Lysenkoism all the way down 🤷‍♀️Science advances one funeral at a time.In a generation or two, we should know something about it.
(DIR) Post #B6fwgnyJt4u4XSODrM by meowski@fluf.club
2 likes, 1 repeats
@nicholas @oddtail @light @lxo @Gnomeshatecheese male brains are ~10% larger than female. many other significant sex differences "on average" of course but how that distribution actually looks, i don't know. brain development happens for a long time after sex determination and although sex which is determined at conception is not a spectrum, hormones that influence secondary sex characteristics can vary. one thing we can say for sure is that women and trannies are retarded
(DIR) Post #B6gqFToqImsZeMVJ2G by light@noc.social
0 likes, 0 repeats
@meowskiGender is fake, but so are "sex-conformant" gender (stereotypes/roles).People can do wtf they want so long as they don't hurt anyone, even if it means "acting like a fag" in your eyes.Both 'progressives' and conservatives are wrong here.@lxo @Gnomeshatecheese
(DIR) Post #B6gqFUJgS7Y7C0vw6i by meowski@fluf.club
1 likes, 0 repeats
@light @lxo @Gnomeshatecheese i don't care if people want to dress like the opposite sex but they still need to use the correct bathrooms, locker rooms prisons, and other spaces that are segregated for women and girls' protection.trannies have a strong tendency to be sex perverts and we can't pretend otherwise
(DIR) Post #B6lmNVUUXfzL7pMApU by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
IIRC I had the link handy last time we talked about this. or maybe I'd only just read it. it didn't seem to make a difference to you then, so it's not like it would nowas for the ability to infer a person's assigned sex by the looks, I challenge you to a gamedo you want to play it?I'll show you five pictures of brazilian models, all femaleyou're to tell me your guess as to their assigned sex and genotype, along with your rationale, without looking them uphttps://busca.pcdomanual.com/image_proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F1%2F18%2FLet%25C3%25ADcia_Colin_2026.jpg%2F330px-Let%25C3%25ADcia_Colin_2026.jpg&h=477658bef4ac47a51b6f6b5e89977803ae1021ff27481b15a7a64b560ee15b43https://busca.pcdomanual.com/image_proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F6%2F66%2FArezzo_Fim_de_Ano_2018_com_Gisele_B%25C3%25BCndchen_05.jpg%2F330px-Arezzo_Fim_de_Ano_2018_com_Gisele_B%25C3%25BCndchen_05.jpg&h=1166f352a0a981213126e57acd13db4bbf004c7358a8be28bb647a1c32f37f69I hope the links work, standalone, because I'd rather not risk downloading and posting them without clarity as to their copyrightsCC: @meowski@fluf.club @oddtail@meow.social @light@noc.social @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6lmPQDx5wSxMzX94S by quasi@peister.org
1 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo> IIRC I had the link handy last time we talked about this.  or maybe I'd only just read it.  it didn't seem to make a difference to you then, so it's not like it would nowThat's pretty convenient> I'll show you five pictures of brazilian models, all female> you're to tell me your guess as to their assigned sex and genotype, along with your rationale, without looking them upAre you telling me these are not edge cases, but rather people you are likely to meet in daily lives in Brazil?Are you telling me that looking at a picture (possibly with filters) is equivalent to looking at the person in proximity in real life?@oddtail @light @Gnomeshatecheese
(DIR) Post #B6lmPQgfNBR0o2y4pM by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
all of these are actual people; nearly all of them were multiple times on TV. you said it was easy, so I figured pictures wouldn't make it mission: impossible and cause you to chicken out. I'm afraid I can't arrange face-to-face meetings, there are famous people, not people I've met personally, or that I could get ahold of.I'm honest enough to admit I'd probably have got some of them wrong. I don't delude myself with a belief that it's easy for me, not that I care much about that. but maybe I just suck at it, and you, caring so much about it, have learned about features that I'm not even aware of. here's your chance to show off, and reaffirm your belief. or not. are you having doubts already? 🙂CC: @oddtail@meow.social @light@noc.social @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6lmPR43yC9LybulIO by quasi@peister.org
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxoSorry schoolyard taunting ain't gonna work here@oddtail @light @Gnomeshatecheese
(DIR) Post #B6lmPRGpCkMGcBsxBg by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
you seem to take that as a pastime, but it's dead seriousboth cis and trans women are suffering physical violence because people misguidedly believe to be able to tell cis from trans by looks, and feel entitled to hurt women they identify or misidentify as trans in women's restrooms. that's not acceptable, and it follows from two layers of ignorance and intolerance.CC: @oddtail@meow.social @light@noc.social @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6lmPRXUCngZRrgG9o by taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @quasi @oddtail @light @Gnomeshatecheese It's incorrect to say that women, and men who identify as women, suffer physical violence because of people's belief that they can tell female from male (which is generally true) and ask males to not use women's spaces. To the contrary, this sentiment generally helps to protect women from predatory men, like in the following example:https://fedi.feministwiki.org/notice/B6hD3oKp2NecUQSZKSIf a male person makes women feel uneasy in a female-only space, and is asked to leave, it logically follows that the women were able to correctly identify him as male. Had the women not been able to tell that he's male, then they wouldn't have noticed him anyway, and nothing would have happened.The claim that actual women are being erroneously identified as male and kicked out of female-only spaces is a myth. It could happen, of course, under extremely unusual circumstances. But no such general problem exists.The logical conclusion is that women are perfectly justified in asking anyone they can identify as male to leave female-only spaces. To claim that this leads to too much mis-identification is simply a myth invented to normalize the phenomenon of obviously male people entering female-only spaces because they disregard women's comfort.
(DIR) Post #B6lmPS2gKodh0cHAmW by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
I guess you just couldn't read the reports in which cis women got physically assaulted for being misidentified as trans by self-entitled and violent bigots? I posted those, in Portuguese, because I know such violence has been an ongoing problem in Brazil, but I'd be surprised if it weren't so elsewhere.CC: @oddtail@meow.social @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6lmPSPMySms8ytI92 by taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org
1 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @oddtail @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese I can't read Portuguese but maybe I'll use a translator later when I'm at my desktop PC.What I know about Brazil is that the trans rights movement has been an utter catastrophe for women's rights. Women get physically threatened, have their spaces vandalized, and face potential imprisonment if they speak out and openly identify males as males.Following are some links. Attached are some photos of men involved in such cases, who have threatened and sued women.https://reduxx.info/exclusive-brazilian-woman-granted-refugee-status-in-europe-after-facing-25-year-sentence-for-misgendering-trans-politician/https://reduxx.info/female-university-student-in-brazil-arrested-and-held-without-bail-after-telling-non-binary-man-to-leave-womens-restroom/https://reduxx.info/brazilian-university-workers-facing-up-to-five-years-in-prison-for-social-racism-after-misgendering-transgender-student/https://reduxx.info/brazil-woman-under-investigation-for-criminal-transphobia-after-posting-a-joke-online-faces-up-to-three-years-in-prison/https://reduxx.info/brazil-female-student-assaulted-by-trans-identified-male-over-washroom-access-says-she-was-afraid-of-dying/As such, I suspect that cases of women being misidentified as men, and asked to leave women's spaces, are most likely a recent phenomenon that's caused not by bigotry, but by the fear that Brazilian women are now constantly subjected to. If men were not routinely allowed into female only spaces, women would presumably be less on edge, and less likely to question the presence of a woman who looks a bit like she might be a man.
(DIR) Post #B6lmPSjDmefP8YB95U by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
part of the problem is the very existence of such exclusive spaces that force an artificial categorization. most people are not harassers, even among so-called men. I'd like to believe that most people would stand for the most vulnerable. I pose that their presence in spaces where the most vulnerable exist makes the most vulnerable safer, not at higher risk. whereas the artificial attempt to force a separation makes it so that attempts to bypass it are more likely to be carried out by abusers for ill intent.I still recall a scene from Asimov's Robots of Dawn in which the earthling protagonist is surprised upon finding out that on Aurora (another planet long-before colonized by humans) restrooms were unisex. that stayed with me. years later, I was surprised myself in public restrooms in another country, that were separated, but a cleaning lady often got into men's restrooms to do her work. in Brazil, either a cleaning gentleman is hired to do that job, or the restroom is closed for the cleaning. so this is all up to culture, and it varies across different cultures, so there's little reason to take any such cultural artifacts for granted or for "that's how it has to be". a lot of our current problems follow from past mistakes.CC: @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6lmPTEltLu6iOwLGS by taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese As much as I love fantasizing about science fiction and a post-patriarchal utopia, this is not the reality we're living in. There is no country on the planet in which the problem of male violence against women and girls is a solved issue, such that it would be acceptable to abolish single-sex spaces.The categorization is not artificial, and not arbitrary: Statistics routinely show that physical and especially sexual violence is predominantly committed by men. Most men are sexually attracted to women, as well as being heavier and stronger on average -- usually enough to make a big difference in case of a physical altercation. This is why female-only spaces can be a simple and effective measure to increase public safety. There are statistics to confirm this:https://fairplayforwomen.com/unisex-changing-rooms-put-women-in-danger/
(DIR) Post #B6lmPTboVgKrrrikBE by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
I can't really argue with a piece of propaganda that probably doesn't even realize the biases in the cited statistics, but I can talk to you about it.it would be informative to contrast with statistics about sexual assault in other spaces in which nudity is present, also without a sexual connotation, and potential victims are not prevented from asking for help, such as nudist communities, and other human societies that don't make clothing mandatory, or that don't segregate naked people into hiding their bodies. it would also be interesting to contrast with statistics about sexual assaults in male-only spaces, where victims could be cis men, trans women, or trans men, depending on regulations.I suppose you'd then conclude that what makes potential victims vulnerable in such spaces is the walls that enable aggressors to hide and make it more difficult for victims to ask for help. it's the mandated separation of the potential victims from others who could help protect them, separation by rules that won't stop someone who's out to break rules. it's the culture of body shaming, of misassigning sexual connotations to nudity, that drives people away from e.g. changing in public spaces where they could be actually safer, and forces them to enter and use the unsafe traps that attract aggressors and offers them safe hiding space. it's almost as if aggressors designed this social structure to benefit themselves, if you really think about it. safety arises from numbers, from transparency, from solidarity, not from shaming and segregation and walls.also allow me to point out the category error in your statistics. while violence is often associated with individuals with higher levels of testosterone, a large number of such individuals don't really fit your description: at least some 10% are attracted to other men, some 20% are too young to be a threat, some aren't heavier or stronger, most are far more likely to defend a potential victim from an aggressor than to be an aggressor, and some 5% you'd mistake for women and force them to share the female-only spaces. you're basically bundling up the wrong category, segregating some threats and allies alike, while forcing some threats into the safe spaces and forcing some potential victims to share space with potential aggressors.should trans women and small, weak and young men not be deserving of the safety from the risks of locker room violence due to the presence of strong, violent men just as much as cis women? even more so, because they're on average more vulnerable minorities?CC: @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6lmPU8QYQQJV0yn0y by taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese I have to redirect your claim of "no interest in pursuing the truth, only in pursuing a point of view" right back at you, because I think your entire reasoning is based on abstract ideas that are unproven and misaligned with reality. Let me address the key points.> it would be informative to contrast with statistics about sexual assault in other spaces in which nudity is present, also without a sexual connotation, and potential victims are not prevented from asking for help, such as nudist communities, and other human societies that don't make clothing mandatory, or that don't segregate naked people into hiding their bodiesWhy? This is not the society we live in. Are you more interested in preventing harm and improving women's lives right here and now, or are you interested in chasing some theoretical utopian ideal, putting women under risk of physical and sexual assault in the pursuit of that ideal, which may or may not be reached one day? Do you intend to force nudist culture on women who feel uncomfortable with it? What do you intend to do if a woman says "I simply don't consent to male strangers seeing my naked body, period"?> I suppose you'd then conclude that what makes potential victims vulnerable in such spaces is the walls that enable aggressors to hide and make it more difficult for victims to ask for help.No, men also sexually harass women in broad daylight. There have even been cases where a woman cries for help while assaulted by multiple men, only for more men passing by to join in on the assault.> it's the mandated separation of the potential victims from others who could help protect themThis sounds like you're asking for women to be chaperoned by "good men" to keep the "bad men" at bay. Women want to be able to go out and about independently. The availability of female-only locker rooms etc. is of great importance to enable this. What you're suggesting would set women's rights back by a century in actual effect, because it's based on naive ideals and not reality.> rules that won't stop someone who's out to break rulesThe rules work, as proven by the statistics. Predatory men are often opportunistic. They don't go out of the house thinking "today I will enter a women's locker room to assault women." They enter a unisex locker room, see a woman that makes them feel lustful, and then they act on base instincts because they're immoral.By the way, this line of yours is such a common talking point ("men who want to assault women won't obey the rules anyway") that it feels like someone sat down with you and coached you on what to think and say about this topic. I urge you to apply some skepticism to these "pro-trans" talking points that completely disregard women's well being.> it's the culture of body shaming, of misassigning sexual connotations to nudity, that drives people away from e.g. changing in public spaces where they could be actually safer, and forces them to enter and use the unsafe traps that attract aggressors and offers them safe hiding space.Again, it sounds like you want to force women into nudism. And again, as the statistics show, it's the unisex changing rooms in which around 90% of changing room related assaults happen. Sex segregation *evidently* makes women more safe, not less.> while violence is often associated with individuals with higher levels of testosterone, a large number of such individuals don't really fit your description:(I'll address each separately)> at least some 10% are attracted to other menWomen have no way of easily assessing whether a man is gay or not. Expecting them to detect gay men and allow them to use women's locker rooms is not practical.> some 20% are too young to be a threatMothers often take young boys into women's locker rooms, bathrooms, etc. and that is of course not a problem. This isn't really relevant.> some aren't heavier or strongerThe difference in the *ranges* of strength and size means that for any male you pick, there will almost certainly be some females who are smaller than him. A man could be merely 160cm and 60kg, yet he might be encountered by a woman who's merely 150cm and 50kg, so he could still be an intimidating presence to her.> most are far more likely to defend a potential victim from an aggressor than to be an aggressorAgain, do you expect women to be chaperoned by men? Or should they hope for some "good man" to be around coincidentally, and protect them while they're using a locker room? We want to enable women to be independent, not needing constant chaperoning like it's the middle ages.> and some 5% you'd mistake for women and force them to share the female-only spacesProbably under 1%, and no, I didn't say female-looking individuals should be forced into female-only spaces. The question is who is *allowed* to enter female-only spaces, which are reserved for women.
(DIR) Post #B6lmPVRFhv4lXgnKzo by light@noc.social
0 likes, 0 repeats
@taylanYou didn't address this point:>it would also be interesting to contrast with statistics about sexual assaults in male-only spaces, where victims could be cis men, trans women, or trans men, depending on regulations.@quasi @lxo @Gnomeshatecheese
(DIR) Post #B6lmPVsY4QuUuLZ8Xg by taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org
0 likes, 0 repeats
@light @quasi @lxo @Gnomeshatecheese I hit my post size limit on the last one so I excluded that bit, especially since I think it's a bit of a distraction. (Whataboutism basically.) But I'll gladly address it:Say we found out that, after ensuring the existence of women's locker rooms, assaults on women using locker rooms are cut by 90% relative to when only unisex locker rooms are available. (This is what the little data we have seems to suggest.)Let's say that assaults on men using locker rooms, however, stays the same.This would mean assaults on women are cut by 90%, and assaults on men unaffected. That's a starting point, and one could then tackle the issue of men assaulting each other, if this is a widespread issue. (I don't know about it being a widespread issue, but maybe it's just not on my radar.)Could assaults on men *increase* due to sex segregation? It's possible to imagine, theoretically, because perhaps the occasional presence of a woman in the unisex space acts as a deterrent. (Less chance of assailant and victim being alone.) It's an interesting thought, but seems like a stretch to me. Absent any data to suggest that there is such an issue, it can't possibly justify abolishing sex segregated locker rooms.IMO the best solution, in general, is two sex segregated regions/rooms, and then within each there should be cubicles for people who prefer not to be seen nude one way or another. There could also be a smaller set of individual cubicles in a more open unisex room or area, as a third choice.This kind of arrangement would massively decrease issues no matter what choice society makes w.r.t. trans people's use of locker rooms: A transwoman could use one of the cubicles in the men's region, and be relatively safe, or they could use a cubicle in the women's region, becoming much less likely to cause distress to women there who don't want to be exposed to a male stranger's naked body.Really the primary issue right now is that it has literally been normalized for male people to expose themselves to women, saying "I'm a transwoman so even if I have a penis I get to use this locker room." That's just not OK. (See YMCA issue linked earlier where exactly this happened. A few years ago I would have never believed that things could get this bad.)
(DIR) Post #B6lmPW7n9l6TfchJIm by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
Really the primary issue right now is that it has literally been normalized for male people to expose themselves to womenlooks like the statistics about violence are just a distraction, then. even more of a dishonest propaganda tool than I could have imagined.anyhow, why is that a problem? why shouldn't that be even more normalized?or should people be encouraged to wear fig leaves when otherwise naked?CC: @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6lmPWKuMzayKIpmkK by taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org
1 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese A male person exposing himself to a woman, who doesn't consent to this, is typically considered a sexual offense, because it's often perceived as threatening, and done as a power move by the man to make the woman feel humiliated. Telling women "just don't feel bad about it" doesn't work. That's a form of victim shaming.I understand that you're neurodivergent, but I would have really hoped that you would already have an understand of this. You are essentially campaigning to normalize sexual offenses. Even if unknowingly so, that's very troubling.
(DIR) Post #B6m6CNJAcfhHe41x0S by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
question: are male people in a locker room supposed to ask around whether anyone else in there is a trans person or a cis woman, and to get any such person's consent before exposing themselves?CC: @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6m6CNsyTYKxR6mXoW by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @taylan @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese isn't that what this always comes down to? tranny pedo perverts want to show their feminine penises to little girls in the locker room.
(DIR) Post #B6nPxPYKBjUmVIDkcy by taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org
1 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese > question: are male people in a locker room supposed to ask around whether anyone else in there is a trans person or a cis woman, and to get any such person's consent before exposing themselves?A men's locker room is a place in which men undress. Any person entering hopefully knows that. How great that these spaces exist, so people who don't want to be exposed to naked male strangers can simply avoid them, and so I as a male don't have to worry about accidentally making some poor woman uncomfortable.
(DIR) Post #B6nPxQ0KVbtfu9K7HM by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
a shared locker room is also a place in which anyone can undress. therefore, no one should have to ask for consent or feel threatened by the mere exposure of certain body parts in there, right? primary problem solved?CC: @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6nPxQJTMRD2rWHP7I by meowski@fluf.club
1 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @taylan @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese never have kids
(DIR) Post #B6nR13zKPFQ0je9mm8 by theblessing@kiwifarms.cc
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @quasi @oddtail @light @Gnomeshatecheese why are brazilians like this
(DIR) Post #B6nR8CFa5P32O3A0TQ by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
I feel for that woman, assuming she's not a made-up propaganda tool. the bystander effect is a thing, but joining in is horrifying. people shouldn't have to endure that sort of violence, or even harassment. not cis women, not trans women, not any men.I'm not arguing that women should depend on chaperones any more than on walls and signs; I'm arguing nobody should be forced to face danger to change clothes. I'm fine with offering choices, from individual private spaces to tolerance for changing in safe public spaces. what I do know is that requiring women to go make themselves more vulnerable in spaces where they're separated from their safe company where aggressors could be hiding is too similar to the way predators separate their targets from the group. it's absurd to make that mandatory. a choice, perhaps, but mandating it is favoring the predators.now let's think of a trans woman who is small and not particularly strong. does such a woman deserve a safe space? or is she not worthy of it? is she under a lower risk of violence in a men'sspace, in a women's space, or in a shared space?how about a trans man? does such a man deserve a safe space? where would he be safer?people have no easy way of assessing one's sexual orientation, just like they have no easy way of assessing one's assigned sex. what can be more evidently noticed is the gender expression, which would be fine for telling men and women apart. but that's not the categorization you're arguing for, is it?maybe there's a reason why the thoughts I came to all by myself keep coming up as "talking points". maybe they make sense, and other people arrive at them independently, out of a sense of empathy and solidarity, instead of one of picking some innocent victims to hurt while using others' vulnerability to pretend to care about them in order to further a prejudiced discriminatory agenda. not cool.CC: @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6nR8DC4ZvptJSWie0 by taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org
1 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese > assuming she's not a made-up propaganda toolNo, victims of male violence are not "made up propaganda tools." This is an awful thing to say.> I'm arguing nobody should be forced to face danger to change clothesAs confirmed by statistics from the UK, the changes you propose do as a matter of fact force women to face higher risk of sexual assault.> requiring women to go make themselves more vulnerable in spaces where they're separated from their safe company where aggressors could be hidingThis is a nonsensical fantasy situation.There is no such thing as men secretly sneaking into female-only spaces to wait for an individual woman to enter alone so he can pounce on her, which would be thwarted if only men were allowed into there as well.Maybe such a thing has happened before in extremely rare cases, but even then, how would unisex rooms even solve this? Even such a psychopathic plan would be easier to commit with unisex rooms: The man can walk in freely and doesn't have to sneak around. Then he just needs to wait for a moment where a woman enters and nobody else is around. And the woman won't even be immediately alerted by his presence because it's a unisex space.Had it been a female only space, then not only would the man need to sneak in unnoticed to begin with; women entering would also be immediately on alert as they see or hear him, since it's a female only space.I think you're tying yourself into knots trying to come up with a reason why unisex spaces are safer, when it is simply not so.> now let's think of a trans woman who is small and not particularly strong. does such a woman deserve a safe space? or is she not worthy of it? is she under a lower risk of violence in a men's space, in a women's space, or in a shared space?Small and feminine men (some of whom might "identify as a woman") deserve safety as well, yes. Is their safety improved by abolishing female-only spaces? How?> how about a trans man? does such a man deserve a safe space? where would he be safer?Women who identify as men deserve safety as well, yes. Is their safety improved by abolishing female-only spaces?> people have no easy way of assessing one's sexual orientation, just like they have no easy way of assessing one's assigned sex.We can easily assess the sex of around 99% of everyone, by looks and voice.And as I've already explained before: If a man genuinely passes as a woman, then no women would be bothered by him using the women's room anyway. The problem solves itself. What you're campaigning for is that men who look obviously like men should be allowed into women's spaces and that women should have no right to complain.> what can be more evidently noticed is the gender expression, which would be fine for telling men and women apart. but that's not the categorization you're arguing for, is it?No, a man putting on a dress and makeup is still easy to tell apart from a woman with the same style. Look at the photos I sent earlier. A woman wearing trousers, having a buzz cut, and not using makeup doesn't make her look like a man.The "gender expression" of a person has no relevance to this topic at all, really.
(DIR) Post #B6pXkdpqxhsWzAlGsa by quasi@peister.org
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo> now let's think of a trans woman who is small and not particularly strong.  does such a woman deserve a safe space?  or is she not worthy of it?  is she under a lower risk of violence in a men's space, in a women's space, or in a shared space?Following this logic, if a man is small and not particularly strong, the only way for him to feel safe is to identify as a woman (become a transwoman) and use women's space@taylan @light @Gnomeshatecheese
(DIR) Post #B6pXkecQ38j7PnU3Zw by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
that is a violent misrepresentation of reasons people have to transition. yet, even after a better-reasoned transition, she would probably still get violence for using that space, just like cis women mistaken for trans do. why/how does your conclusion follow?CC: @taylan@feministwiki.org @light@noc.social @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6pXkf0WbW0ccYlJ9U by light@noc.social
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @quasi @taylan @Gnomeshatecheese How is it "violent"? What do you understand by "violence"?
(DIR) Post #B6pXkfHXaFcVTKitfs by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
violence has to do with causing injury or aggression, often by forceful and sudden means. tangent: in my mind, I tend to conceive of violence as associated with willful actions, but I've seen the term used to refer to destruction caused by storms and injuries from car accidents, and it feels odd to me but I've learned to deal with it.back to the topic, violence doesn't have to be physical, it can be moral, psychological, and that's what the use of a disparaging term can amount to.CC: @quasi@peister.org @taylan@feministwiki.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6pXkfXUcwNeGoBdXU by light@noc.social
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @quasi @taylan @Gnomeshatecheese I don't think arguments should be considered to be violence. If a particular argument or viewpoint causes psychological injury to one person, it doesn't follow that it will hurt everyone's feelings. Therefore IMO it doesn't make sense to morally condemn certain views that don't directly promote (physical) violence.Relevant: https://isought.info.
(DIR) Post #B6pXkfn5gwrD3BU5qq by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
I can agree with:I don't think arguments should be considered to be violenceone cay say that it's not the argument per se that amounts to violence. but if the argument encompasses an injurious attitude of dehumanization, of disrespect, that is violence. it's the attitude, not the argument.it doesn't matter if it hurts one person or everyone. murder doesn't cease to be violence just because it's not genocide.cutting violence off at the physical boundary is too limiting. there are various other kinds of harms and injuries that are not physical, but that are even more hurtful and damaging.CC: @quasi@peister.org @taylan@feministwiki.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6pYJrNgaj2f8GNcBs by light@noc.social
0 likes, 0 repeats
@taylan @quasi @lxo @Gnomeshatecheese >There is no such thing as men secretly sneaking into female-only spaces to wait for an individual woman to enter alone so he can pounce on her, which would be thwarted if only men were allowed into there as well.I think he meant female predators
(DIR) Post #B6pYJsJp6ZXw2Za2oC by taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org
0 likes, 0 repeats
@light @quasi @lxo @Gnomeshatecheese If so, I'm not aware of that being a real problem either. His whole argument of "sex segregation causes potential victims to be separated from the flock, so they become more vulnerable" frankly sounds like BS to me.By the way, I'm almost certain that this isn't a solved issue, or non-issue, in most indigenous populations either. Which indigenous population are we talking about anyway? There are many on the planet and they are all different. Some are horribly sexist and violent.Some indigenous cultures used to be idolized as bastions of sexual enlightenment by sex liberal activists, like Peter Thatchell, who in 1997 wrote favorably of the work of an anthropologist (Prof. Gilbert Herdt) who portrayed the Sambia tribe of Papua New Guinea as a positive example. Upon closer examination, it comes out that older men ("warriors") in this tribe practice a sadistic abuse ritual to initiate boys (into "manhood") who often cry and beg to their mothers to be spared of the abuse.https://fxtwitter.com/TwisterFilm/status/1683325404088598528It's a similar deal with ancient Greek pederasty. In recent years it's become a trend to speak of ancient Greece as if they had some kind of enlightened gay accepting culture. In actual fact, they had an extremely patriarchal social hierarchy in which older men could abuse boys without consequence.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cWgoq32_-s (Section from 1:45 to 8:10 deals with the ancient world; only about 6 minutes. His sources are in the video description.)If there's really some indigenous tribes out there which are so free of violence that nudism is the norm and doesn't bother women to the least, then I wish the whole planet could be like that. But that's not going to happen by passing laws that effectively abolish female-only spaces, without addressing the social violence that made women campaign for these spaces in the first place.
(DIR) Post #B6pYJtCloHUymzHvSC by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
I doubt you'll find human societies anywhere that are free of violence, alasmy point is that they don't suffer from this neurosis that associates the view of certain body parts with sexual threats. imposing this neurosis is another kind of violence, and it brings about opportunities for predators to exert further violence, because it removes reasonable safety choices from potential victims, and, for the predators, it turns views and situations that could and should be absolutely unremarkable into ones that feel exciting and could bring about sexual arousal.so you see my solution is far from shared locker rooms, which you appear to be fixated on for some good and some misguided reasons, but about untangling nudity from sexual activity, to make everywhere and everyone safer and healthier. that's not the society I live in either, alas.I still recall a traumatic episode in which I took my then ~4yo daughter to a shopping mall to buy a mothers' day surprise to her mother = my wife. she needed to go to the restroom. what was I to do? get her into the men's restroom was thought to be unacceptable, she had to go into the women's restroom, but I couldn't go there with her. she ended up getting help from another kind lady who found her all by herself in there and offered help, but what if it was an unkind lady? all this followed from these stupid notions that seeing certain body parts can be traumatic (it doesn't have to be this way, it's learned misbehavior) and that therefore there must be segregation. there are strong notes of patriarchy in this sick structure, both in separation of potential victims from the flock, and in the assumption that the mother will always be available to take care of the children. nowadays, shopping malls often offer so-called family restroom facilities, and I feel very favorable to them, and I resent the psychological violence that was forced on me and on my daughter in that episode.CC: @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6pYJtcIHNuo49EJEm by taylan@fedi.feministwiki.org
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese Accusing women of "neurosis" for not wanting to be exposed to random male strangers, while they themselves may be naked, is quite blatant misogyny. I'm not sure that's how you meant it to come across, but there's hardly a different way to interpret what you said. I urge you to talk to some women about this and listen to them empathically instead of projecting "neurosis" onto them.Indeed, based on the story you just told, I have to say the whole thing comes across like a case of projection. If a father is out with a daughter who's so young that she can't use a restroom alone, then there's no problem taking her into the men's restroom. The father is with her after all, which ensures the safety of the child, so there's no problem. Maybe you thought there was some hard set-in-stone rule saying no female human being (even a 4 year-old) is ever allowed to set foot into the men's room, unless the entire concept of single-sex restrooms is abolished? Some flexibility in thinking is warranted here. This isn't "psychological violence" but rather just your own confusion, sorry.
(DIR) Post #B6pYJtqpPLXcnE1utM by light@noc.social
0 likes, 0 repeats
@taylan @quasi @lxo @Gnomeshatecheese I don't think he's being misogynistic. He means society is neurotic, not women specifically.
(DIR) Post #B6pYJu0OplCJGuVYoK by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
I'd be extremely surprised if anyone were to disagree with a claim that our contemporary societies make people neurotic 🙂taboos often make people neurotic. it's a lot easier to find taboos nonsensical and easy to escape from if you haven't developed a neurotic response to them. it doesn't follow that it's easy for those who have. some social changes take generations to achieve because overcoming taboos is so hard. it's hard even to debate them.CC: @taylan@feministwiki.org @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6pdlg1CvjDJlrwuY4 by Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @light @quasi @taylan encompasses an injurious attitude of dehumanization, of disrespect, that is violence. it's the attitude, not the argument. Pardon me for inserting myself here, but are you arguing that words aren't violence, but attitudes, i.e. thoughts, are? Because frankly, that would be even more absurd. As for the "other kinds of harms and injuries" being "even more hurtful and damaging", I'm going to do as the Aussies and go yeah, nah. To a great extent because I've never managed to kill anyone or put them into hospital by saying bad things, or having injurious or disrespecting attitudes towards them. And that's not for the lack of trying.
(DIR) Post #B6pdlgZwqZ0FVcCehM by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
no, that's not what I'm arguing. I'm just being autistic and distinguishing between the argument per se and the implications thereof.you might be surprised by how many people ended up dead as a direct consequence of the spread of nazifascistic thoughts, then words, then attitudes, then actionsCC: @taylan@feministwiki.org @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org
(DIR) Post #B6pdsgZbGYbFWDNVPU by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @light @taylan @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese :sirenred: hard drive check needed over here
(DIR) Post #B6pdzOW6nUzFXqwaiu by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @Gnomeshatecheese @taylan @light @quasi WOrDs aRe ViOLencE
(DIR) Post #B6pe0zFtgpqLmF7XhQ by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @Gnomeshatecheese @light @quasi @taylan your WORDS they're literally killing me. i'm dead
(DIR) Post #B6q19p1xNBARcKmXiK by Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @taylan @light @quasi how many people ended up dead as a direct consequence of the spread of nazifascistic thoughts, then words, then attitudes, then actionsIn that case you're not arguing that attitudes, or words, are violence, you're arguing that actions are violence. Attitudes are not the same thing as words, and neither attitudes nor words are the same as actions. And the two former ones do not automatically lead to the latter, or even reliably so. And even if A did lead to B, which led to C, that would still not mean that A=C. Words mean things and separation of concepts is important. Suggesting that because some thoughts might be aired as words, and someone might take damaging action based on those words, it follows that the thoughts themselves "are violence" or "constitute violence", damages that separation.
(DIR) Post #B6q19pG8WSVgKJProe by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
they're not the same thing, yes, but I pose that all of them are violentpsychological harm is violent. certain forms of torture are psychological, and they're violent. verbal abuse, harassment, even isolation can be violent without any physical contact. words that induce someone to engage in self harm are themselves violent; inciting violence in already a form of violence.CC: @taylan@feministwiki.org @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org
(DIR) Post #B6q1VEcLR7kr3T0qAK by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
the pen is mightier than the swordCC: @taylan@feministwiki.org @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6q2CsyDHX6aeu3VwG by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @taylan @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese what you're doing is called emotional extortion. this is manipulative tranny behavior. "let me watch your daughter pee or i'll kms." how about "sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me?" remember that? if you like quips try that one
(DIR) Post #B6q3ng7u65DzUehEuG by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
I am familiar with emotional extortion, and I acknowledge that there are people who engage in that, but it's definitely not what I'm talking about. I wouldn't equate a manipulative (probable) lie to actual psychological harm; that would in itself be harmful to those who've suffered psychological harm."words can never hurt me" is a nice quip, possibly even useful as a defense from certain kinds of violence, but it's ultimately a lie or a mistake. words won't break bones, but they can hurt. even inaction can hurt, such as lack of empathy, lack of emotional support, lack of caring, isolation, disregard...CC: @taylan@feministwiki.org @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6q5UkfTBiZxz6V1ay by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @taylan @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese what's worse, people getting their feelings hurt, or letting mentally ill perverts dictate what other people can say? where does it end?
(DIR) Post #B6q5iPq3QZJnRCxwBc by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
how about neither?CC: @taylan@feministwiki.org @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6q6EIgrXXfGXCs0ps by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @taylan @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese well for the sake of argument, pick one, because we can't have neither. that's not how this world works. people are going to say mean things that you find offensive. and if you let wackos and an authoritarian nanny state (acting ostensibly on their behalf) take away your rights, it'll never end. whatever thing you thought was innocuous and inoffensive that you said, someone will still be offended by. so prepare your butt to apologize and grovel for eternity over every little thing, cause it sounds like that's what you want
(DIR) Post #B6q6UiXVCZ3TKyJua0 by light@noc.social
1 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @meowski @taylan @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese >Satire account. Do not take seriously!
(DIR) Post #B6q73OqIQTa4NreHMu by light@noc.social
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @meowski I still don't quite understand the point of debate as a form of satire. Why make an argument that you don't mean?
(DIR) Post #B6q73P5tUU3dAEwjgG by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@light @lxo don't be daft man. i put that on there for funsies. judge my posts on their merits
(DIR) Post #B6q7BwFQ6t04IyTJTM by light@noc.social
0 likes, 0 repeats
@meowski 🤷‍♂️
(DIR) Post #B6q7BwiUMoFhl84WmW by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@light if someone dressed in a clown outfit comes to you with valuable information are you going to automatically dismiss it cause he's wearing a clown outfit?
(DIR) Post #B6q7wRUgGnEeXAmi1I by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
if we can't avoid hurting someone, it's best to hurt those who earned itI can see reasons for people to conflate feeling offended and hurt. they can be pretty close indeed.but I've long thought about freedom and power, and they're often conflated and confused as well, and probably for similar reasons.nobody has a right to not be offended. when someone offends you, they may very well be acting within their rights, and, more importantly, within their freedom, that is, they're in control of their own lives. if you feel offended about their speaking or acting about aspects of their own lives, that's your problem, not theirs.now, if you tried to force them to give up control over their own lives, for you to not feel offended, that would amount to your exerting power over them.that would probably hurt them. you'd be overstepping your freedom, and taking away their rights and freedoms.now, maybe the distinction I'm making between offend and hurt is a figment of my imagination. maybe people can feel actually hurt, not just offended, when their privileges are challenged, when victims of their prejudice rise up and turn things over, when they lose power because others have regained the freedom they deserve.CC: @taylan@feministwiki.org @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6qAMr0gDwaF6mTR20 by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @taylan @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese i honestly don't know what your point is. words can only hurt you if you let them. this debate seems pointless. if my lizard brain says "that's a male" i'm not using she/her pronouns no matter how hurt or offended someone is. thank you and have a nice day.
(DIR) Post #B6qXBtUuvracaHMNPs by lxo@snac.lx.oliva.nom.br
0 likes, 0 repeats
well, lizards aren't exactly famous for their empathyI suppose words will hurt you whether you let them or not depending on your privilege or vulnerabilitysame goes for burnout, perhaps?guillotines, maybe? hmm, no, that's backwardsCC: @taylan@feministwiki.org @light@noc.social @quasi@peister.org @Gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz
(DIR) Post #B6r1P0GU53EzxgmAim by meowski@fluf.club
0 likes, 0 repeats
@lxo @taylan @light @quasi @Gnomeshatecheese so now it's "use my pronouns or we'll chop your head off" i guess you don't see the hypocrisy of this. typical libtard.