/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13996468]

I want to have some real talk about the philosophy of LGBTQ+ and so on. The main problem that I've always identified with this movement is that it feels like it tries to box in certain identities. Like, why do I have to identify as "non-binary" because I happen to like something strange or feel different from other guys? Why can't you just be a man/woman and act in whatever way you find pleasing? I feel that rather than expanding the concept of man/woman in a healthy way, what they're doing instead is trying to limit it to the exact standards they supposedly hate. Like, in the end, would there even be any "straight" people left if we come up with all sorts of names for different sexual attitudes? It's even more confusing when you take into consideration that the main problem of transgender people is being accepted as the opposite gender of what they were born. On one hand this movement is saying that you should be yourself and find the shitty Tumblr label that best applies to you, but then it's also telling the people left behind and transgender people that they have to fit into the straight female/male mold and find acceptance, despite going out of their way to limit that mold to the most traditional conception imaginable.
Even though this shit is as sold as some "WOAH, I AM SO OPEN!!" attitude, these people seem anything but. Like try telling a super gay guy that's really into LGBTQ that he might be a little bi, he's going to explode in the same way as some insecure 30 yo lumberjack would. How is that helpful? Like instead of pushing for "yeah, bi and straight are pretty relative, and your tastes may expand or even change over time" they went for this JUST BORN THAT WAY MAN bullshit. Why the fuck would you make that appeal when that was exact argument people used against you to force you to be straight? Why not just say it's what you want, regardless of what you were "born as"?
Is it just me, or is it getting crazier out there?

[Anonymous No.13996475]

i think the issue you touch on here is that most of the lgbtq+ political discourse comes from people who are ultimately very liberal (not in terms of american politics, but the ideology of liberalism) and thus have to re-capitulate their ideas in terms of essential individuals. these people misread and misattribute ideas to thoroughly anti-essentialist thinkers like judith butler. since lgbtq+ activism became a palatable and mainstream position, a lot of the coherence of the philosophy has fallen away. you can't have your cake as a protected class and eat it as a radical abolitionist of the very concept of gender too. but you can certainly whine loudly enough to produce a reactionary movement, which is about all the gays have managed

[Anonymous No.13996536]

>>13996468
All the LGBT stuff is a lot less uniform than people believe, and is in fact fraught with bitter conflict and gigantic differences in worldview.

One interesting thing to note is the divide between gay activists and "queer theory" academicians. Whereas the former are strict essentialists, viewing homosexuality as innate, unchangeable, genetic, the latter are dogmatic social constructionists; homosexuality is socially determined, a construct, a phenomena—they argue against presupposing that a "gay man" in 21st century America is the same thing as a pederast in 3rd century BC Athens. They point to the newness of the notions of "heterosexual" and "homosexual": sodomy in medieval Europe was a sinful sexual behaviour that, theoretically, anyone could fall prey to rather than the strict reserve of a particular innately wired breed of people, etc.

Sexual minorities like gays and transsexuals recognise the political and social value of society at large perceiving their condition as natural and irrevocable (the feeling is also widespread and genuine, "I can't change, this is who I am")—which has often put them into conflict with feminists, whose political goal is precisely to try and extract themselves from the status quo of "womanhood", "femininity", etc. Hence their metaphysical aspirations differ...

MtFs believe there is something "innately feminine" about themselves that validates their transition, but radical feminists reject the notion of gender essentialism as an oppressive construct, and question whether someone raised as a man could really be somehow female, since femininity is conditioned. Since they reject the MtFs claim to womanhood, they reject and stigmatise these "male imposters", "women in drag"—they see transsexuality as an opportunity for man, an inherently dangerous creature, to infiltrate female spaces AS WELL AS reinforce, via "progressive politics", the gender status quo they had hoped to extricate themselves from.

Pic related is a book you might find interesting, OP. Speaking as someone with some conservative sympathies, sometimes I'd get a bit annoyed with her representation of different arguments and stances, but overall there's a lot of insight and nuance and charity. Fausto-Sterling has a background in microbiology and basically advocates a kind of unification of the essentialist and social constructivist perspectives through "systems theory". The general thesis is that the long-standing dualism between nature and nurture is a false dichotomy.

[Anonymous No.13996568]

>>13996468
The bottom line is you're gross and your sexuality is probably a manifestation of psychological derangement.

[Anonymous No.13996594]

What philosophy? I just want to get fisted in the arse.

[Anonymous No.13996611]

>>13996568
Based

[Anonymous No.13996628]

>>13996468
If you want to have a real discussion about the epistemology about gender identity, I would consider myself an advocate of Bloom's canon, as well as a socialist, and non-binary, to give you a general idea of how my thoughts intersect.

The first thing which disagreement upon will leave us with very different perspectives, is the fundamental notion that gender is socially constructed, and sex is biological, and the two are not related. Because gender is the assumptions of how people behave, I reject those assumptions due to the fact that they reinforce cultural attitudes I don't subscribe to.

I see it more as a culturally inforced "ought" statement, the way Hume would describe his is/ought divide. The only "is", is much more hazy than people think. The science of gender identity is more of a social science because it deals with cultural attitudes, whereas sex is not a strictly defined binary, and many of the major medical institutions, like the world health organization, and the American psychological institute, and the dictionary recognize it as such, because the science of sex does not tell us that a person's gender expression has an innate link to their genitalia. To think otherwise is to draw an arbitrary link between genitalia and what a person thinks, based on an arbitrary conformity to cultural attitudes.

The biggest issue with this is that people see gender expression as a sort of cultural ideology. There are more words for it to identify the phenomena than ever before, as information is increasingly globalized due to the explosion of information known as the internet. Therefor we now recognize phenomena more than we ever have before, and therefor we have names for things like transgender, which means crossing from one gender to another. Or non-binary, which means rejecting the binary gender construct. Or genderfluid, which means alternating between gender expressions, and so on. Most of the gender identities which have been created are just combinations of masculine or feminine, or a rejection of that dichotomy, although I'm sure there's more that invent new types of expression not in that dichotomy.

[Anonymous No.13996640]

>>13996628
>socialist
>non-binary
Get the fuck off my Tahitian woodcarving forum

[Anonymous No.13996649]

>>13996475
Well put, anon. A lot of the LGBTQ folk I've stumbled across are as shallow as the "communists" on Twitter talking about new products they can't wait to buy or retweeting Wendy's and other insidious capitalist bullshit.
>>13996536
That sounds very nice, I'll get the book, thank you anon. I wasn't expecting such thoughtful replies from both of you, I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to this topic but I want to learn more.

[Anonymous No.13996658]

>>13996640
Don't get so triggered snowflake

[Anonymous No.13996664]

>>13996468
You're hitting on a common femininist criticism of, well, the feminism we see in practice - that the principle of destroying oppressive structures, in this case identities, has been subverted in favour of instead creating myriad new ones and demanding that they be recognises as equal by some authoritian Big Other.

[Anonymous No.13996669]

>>13996468
Cult of Cybele comeback
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r8iJO7NkAM

[Anonymous No.13996673]

>>13996468
The whole movement was born from the erroneous idea that one's sexual attractions are worth elevating to a primary identity. Most people have their own kinks and fetishes, but by introducing categories like homosexual and heterosexual, they achieved a state where there is no "normative state" from which people differ to smaller or larger extents, instead we play a game of categories which makes no sense whatsoever because most people have appetites that would differ from the standards that they impose upon themselves by identifying with a label. As such, the label game mustbe crushed completely and we must bring back the idea of "normal" and do away with all other labels as if they are equivalent and valid identities. Male to female PIV sex is superior to all others because it's not only pleasurable, and an expression of love, but also a source of human life.
Does the above statement neccessarily mean that other forms of sexual expression are wrong? No, but it is a fact that other forms of sexual expression are inferior by nature, because they only fullfill a single function.
People who are not normal are okay, they just have to acknowledge their place in the world,and understand that their sexual preferences are not central to who they are.

[Anonymous No.13996675]

>>13996628
I'm having a little difficulty understanding what you're trying to say. What I got is that you think sex itself is pretty vague, and that maybe there's more to the male/female elements than social constructions? Like male/female on some metaphysical level?
For the record, what you said here
>Most of the gender identities which have been created are just combinations of masculine or feminine
Rings incredibly true to me. I have changed a lot over time as a person, and gotten a lot weirder and simpler as well in different cases, but I've never felt like anything less than a typical male. I'm actually wondering if these standard males/females that we are supposed to take as the default even exist.
As someone that knows nothing about these fields, I'm also confused as to what exactly separates a fetish from pure attraction. What is the difference between being attracted to a type of person "genuinely" and being attracted to them because you fetishize them? For example, let's say you have a genuinely gay man that's into other dudes, but then a "straight" guy that gets off to fucking guys because his primary drive is humiliation. Can that even be called straight? And what if the others are just fetishizing maledom in general? I am just confused about where and how one is supposed to draw the lines between sexuality and fetishes.

[Anonymous No.13996685]

>>13996673
>but also a source of human life
That makes it the most sinful and immoral

[Anonymous No.13996702]

>>13996675
>maybe there's more to the male/female elements than social constructions?
Yes. The current consensus is that gender is mostly cultural assumptions. Some people take this a step further, such as myself, and choose not to be defined by cultural assumptions.
>As someone that knows nothing about these fields, I'm also confused as to what exactly separates a fetish from pure attraction.
I'll answer the rest of your question in a moment, but just to be clear, sexual attraction and gender expression are two different fields. Gender expression is how one identifies, whereas attraction is what one is what one is attracted to.
>For example, let's say you have a genuinely gay man that's into other dudes, but then a "straight" guy that gets off to fucking guys because his primary drive is humiliation.
To me, gay is a nebulous term, which is loaded with cultural assumptions as well. You can have sex with a guy, decide you don't like it, or have sex with a guy and say it's for a fetish, and if you are not in love with them then it is not "gay", in a specific sense.

One can be homoromantic, meaning attracted to guys romantically, and not homosexual, which would mean they are asexual, but attracted to the same sex, just as one could be homosexual and not homoromantic. That is aside from differences in taste, etc. Sexuality is a much more complex dichotomy than simply "gay" can account for.

[Anonymous No.13996705]

>>13996685
Based.
>>13996673
I would actually say that because male & female is all about reproduction in most cases is maybe why we developed a taste for homosexuality and other deviant behavior in the first place. I don't want to have babies, and certainly not without finding the right partner for it first and committing to it. I assume humans in the past that didn't even have protection could have felt very similar. I'm not fond of reductive materialist arguments, but I do think it's worth pointing out that vanilla sex being the most dangerous is what might've created 'safer' alternatives that are seen as degenerate in an age where you can control when you want a baby.
But I'll echo Zizek in saying that acts that are completely removed from reproduction are interesting precisely because that's where we are at our most human. Like imagine jacking off into a pair of high heels because they're still warm from your waifu's feet or something, that's some real useless shit that no animal except a human would rationalize and do.

[Anonymous No.13996707]

>>13996669
>Galli, singular Gallus, priests, often temple attendants or wandering mendicants, of the ancient Asiatic deity, the Great Mother of the Gods, known as Cybele, or Agdistis, in Greek and Latin literature. The Galli were eunuchs attired in female garb, with long hair fragrant with ointment. Together with priestesses, they celebrated the Great Mother’s rites with wild music and dancing until their frenzied excitement found its culmination in self-scourging, self-laceration, or exhaustion. Self-emasculation by candidates for the priesthood sometimes accompanied this delirium of worship.

[Anonymous No.13996716]

>>13996707
>The 1st-century BCE poet, Catullus, dramatized the scene in prose, with Attis stating:

>“A woman now, I have been man, youth, and boy;
>I was athlete, the wrestler.
>There were crowds round my door, my fans slept on the doorstep;
>There were flowers all over the house
>When I left my bed at sunrise.
>Shall I be a waiting maid to the gods, the slave of Cybele?”
>(Catullus. Poem 63, trans. Marvin W. Meyer).

[Anonymous No.13996721]

>>13996716
>ANOTHER of those gods whose supposed death and resurrection struck such deep roots into the faith and ritual of Western Asia is Attis. He was to Phrygia what Adonis was to Syria. Like Adonis, he appears to have been a god of vegetation, and his death and resurrection were annually mourned and rejoiced over at a festival in spring. The legends and rites of the two gods were so much alike that the ancients themselves sometimes identified them. Attis was said to have been a fair young shepherd or herdsman beloved by Cybele, the Mother of the Gods, a great Asiatic goddess of fertility, who had her chief home in Phrygia. Some held that Attis was her son. His birth, like that of many other heroes, is said to have been miraculous. His mother, Nana, was a virgin, who conceived by putting a ripe almond or a pomegranate in her bosom. Indeed in the Phrygian cosmogony an almond figured as the father of all things, perhaps because its delicate lilac blossom is one of the first heralds of the spring, appearing on the bare boughs before the leaves have opened. Such tales of virgin mothers are relics of an age of childish ignorance when men had not yet recognized the intercourse of the sexes as the true cause of offspring. Two different accounts of the death of Attis were current. According to the one he was killed by a boar, like Adonis. According to the other he unmanned himself under a pine-tree, and bled to death on the spot. The latter is said to have been the local story told by the people of Pessinus, a great seat of the worship of Cybele, and the whole legend of which the story forms a part is stamped with a character of rudeness and savagery that speaks strongly for its antiquity. Both tales might claim the support of custom, or rather both were probably invented to explain certain customs observed by the worshippers. The story of the self-mutilation of Attis is clearly an attempt to account for the self-mutilation of his priests, who regularly castrated themselves on entering the service of the goddess. The story of his death by the boar may have been told to explain why his worshippers, especially the people of Pessinus, abstained from eating swine. In like manner the worshippers of Adonis abstained from pork, because a boar had killed their god. After his death Attis is said to have been changed into a pine-tree.

[Anonymous No.13996724]

>>13996468
>the philosophy of LGBTQ+
There's no philosophy about it Anon. It's gay science.
Daily reminder that the right-wing can't science.

[Eris Omniquery No.13996755]

>>13996568
Then why don't you listen to what actual psychologists and mental health professional say about LGBTQ+ people? Oh that's right, you don't really care, you'll just call anyone who doesn't call for the hatred of others to be jewcucked and fake news, and cherry-pick whatever sources you can find to support your preexisting views. Why? Because you're fucking retarded, and the source of your retardation is nothing but your own fear and arrogance.

You're a hate-filled miserable fucking degenerate who thrives off of trying to make others feel miserable. Like all psychos you choose the weakest and most vulnerable targets you perceive as weak to direct your rage at. Your ilk are the Last Men Nietzsche spoke about; you care only for your own comfort, taking no risk in questioning yourself and your understanding of the world and others. Your only ideology is hateocracy: rule by whatever can make you hate the strongest, and easily led by your ignorance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipg4EL_JUyE

You and people like you are about to be exposed to the eyes of the world in full. You reap what you sow, hatemonger, don't be surprised when the harvest comes.

[Anonymous No.13996757]

>>13996702
But is it a dichotomy? I thought what you were pointing at was the fact that sex and the male/female dichotomy is in a sense a lot less radical than the division between male and female that isn't as much of a construct as people make it out to be. But I feel that I've probably misunderstood you - you're against the whole dichotomy of female/male altogether, then?
>You can have sex with a guy, decide you don't like it, or have sex with a guy and say it's for a fetish, and if you are not in love with them then it is not "gay", in a specific sense.
I get what you mean, but my question was meant in a different kind of way. Let's take a more extreme case for example: a person that's into bestiality. If a guy is getting off to fucking a dog or whatever, is that a fetish, or attraction? What is the difference between a fetish and an attraction?
Like, for example, I would say I am attracted to women. But generally speaking, unless a woman is either incredibly hot or into the same fetishes, I have zero sexual interest in her. So maybe someone might say I am not attracted to women at all, even though that's undeniably the case considering it's only women that I find attractive when combined with certain fetishes. But a random, normal female by itself does nothing for me. So does that mean it's the fetish that pulls me in and not the attraction towards women? This is what I am confused about, how do you separate the two?

[Anonymous No.13996760]

>>13996755
Shut up fag

[Anonymous No.13996771]

Gender and queer theory is ideology/religion and not science.

[Anonymous No.13996776]

>>13996755
>You and people like you are about to be exposed to the eyes of the world in full. You reap what you sow, hatemonger, don't be surprised when the harvest comes.
Very based.

[Eris Omniquery No.13996781]

>>13996760
Keep digging your own grave, you're the one who will end up shooting yourself out of realization of who you really are. You're already waist-deep anyways.

[Anonymous No.13996791]

>>13996755
>Your only ideology is hateocracy:
where can I sign up and join

[Anonymous No.13996793]

Modern comfort, access to porn, sexual frustration due womens rights, societal stress, other LGBT groups trying to make ppl gay: all contribute to the rise of gayness. The philosophy can be inaccurate, it's only an excuse to behave certain way, but with the rise of LGBT you can see more art entertainment and better rethoric created by such movements.

>>13996475
A lot of trannies are openly racist.
>>13996536
Based post.
>>13996673
Errenous how? There are less rich fields than the wealth of pornography and sexual expression that people identified themselves with. Clearly a lot of people don't see it so and think it is worth it. The gay state becomes the normative state and art and discourse comes from that point.
>>13996705
Trying to pull a rethoric how normative is the right way if living won't convince any people because you start to sound like some luddite or a quacker. Pursuing science is not normative behaviour, much less pursuing any of the obstract depths.

[Anonymous No.13996803]

>>13996781
Cope

[Anonymous No.13996807]

>>13996755
>>13996781
Everything you say is immediately rendered void by your namefaggotry. But there's no point wasting my breath--you don't care. You get off on the negative attention.

Although I don't particularly disagree with your post, your impotent portends of your enemy's doom reeks of the vengeful slave morality Nietzsche talks about (the same pathetic mentality behind "the day of the rope" fantasy).

[Anonymous No.13996816]

>>13996757
>But I feel that I've probably misunderstood you - you're against the whole dichotomy of female/male altogether, then?
Most people are not against keeping the dichotomy of male and female, as well as acknowledging that gender is cultural assumptions.

I personally identify as non-binary because I don't find that the cultural assumptions fit me as a person - ie. I am not comfortable being stoic, liking strictly "guy things" or "girl things", or people making assumptions about me in that way. Some people are still comfortable with the general assumption, but not the parts they see as toxic. If you ask me though, I see cultural attitudes as strictly arbitrary, and likely to change. Different cultures have different assumptions of what male and female are, with some common re-occurrences, but yes I reject the dichotomy.

>What is the difference between a fetish and an attraction?
That's an interesting question. I'm not going to look up the definition of fetish and just go off my assumption - a fetish is something aside from sexual intercourse for pro-creation. Someone's fetish could be feet, long socks, acting like a police officer in the bedroom, etc. It's simply non-procreation based sexual fantasy.

Attraction and fetish could very well intersect, but pure attraction, in the Aristotelian sense of true friendship, would be loving a person on the grounds that there is mutual participation in the ideal of friendship itself. Aristotle would say that one could be in a pleasurable relationship with someone, but it is not true friendship because once they pleasure is gone, the friendship is over. So attraction to the person, purely, would be attraction in the pure Aristotelian sense.

[Eris Omniquery No.13996828]

>>13996793
who the fuck are you? I mean seriously, who the fuck are you? You're allowed to be anonymous here, to hide yourself, and comfortably vomit hate at others from a mysterious position of invisibility. Why is this? Why do you choose to engage others on 4chan this way?

You know the answer: because you're rejected anywhere else where the pattern of who you are is exposed. People quickly see through your miserable, hateful bullshit and want nothing to do with you. So of course you feel at home at a place with zero accountability that you can truly be yourself: a miserable little turd.

The hilarious thing is that you believe your wretchedness is obscured here, when such obscurity is the illusion of normalcy by surrounded by many similar man-turds. Anyone with a happy life, who actually loves other people and wants to do good in the world can read your horse shit and immediately see that you are profoundly sick in a way that mental health cannot account for: it's a profound moral failing, you having allowed any ill-fortunate events that you experienced to consume you rather than fight against it. You've joined a cult of hate that has consumed millions, thinking that you are "winning" when all you have done is lost any shred of humanity you had.

You're a sneering little fucking rodent, and deep down YOU KNOW IT.

[Anonymous No.13996837]

>>13996816
>personally identify as non-binary because I don't find that the cultural assumptions fit me as a person - ie. I am not comfortable being stoic, liking strictly "guy things" or "girl things", or people making assumptions about me in that way. Some people are still comfortable with the general assumption, but not the parts they see as toxic. If you ask me though, I see cultural attitudes as strictly arbitrary, and likely to change. Different cultures have different assumptions of what male and female are, with some common re-occurrences, but yes I reject the dichotomy.

I too don't always do and like things that strictly fit my gender identity, but I don't feel the need to identify as non-binary because I don't really care what assumptions people make about me. You understand that by identifying as non-binary people are still going to be making assumptions about you based on that right? You aren't denying categorisation but just recategorising yourself.

[Anonymous No.13996838]

>>13996828
>>13996807
>>13996803
>>13996793
>>13996781
>>13996755
Reminder that discussion is not a WWE match. If you want to discuss stuff discuss it, but leave your ego aside.

[Eris Omniquery No.13996844]

>>13996838
This isn't a discussion, this is me giving back to the hatemongers what they give others, you fucking insincere passive-aggressive piss ant.

[Anonymous No.13996862]

>>13996828
You probably didn't meant my post, but your purple prose of typical trans neuroticism doesn't hide your philosophical gaps. By saying we shouldn't be anonymous you are trying to bully others into accepting your worldmodel by peer pressure and rethoric of hate. It's hypocritical.

[Eris Omniquery No.13996873]

>>13996862
LMAO your intellectualization won't save you. Your memes won't save you. Buckle up butter-cup, because self-awareness is coming to all internet trolls everywhere. You can't run from yourself forever.

[Anonymous No.13996875]

>>13996837
Assumptions are inevitable, yes. But let me try a little harder to explain. Imagine male and female are two ethereal concepts floating in the air.

One pretty and vibrant pink on one side, and on the other a noble and imposing blue. Inside each of these balls you can see the lives and past lives of men and women, and feel their sense of duty and identity.

A common theme will be that men will act a certain way, and women will act a certain way, because that is what is expected of them, because they want to uphold an ideal, and culture expects that of them. So it is like a feedback loop of reinforcement which keeps people behaving a certain way because it is expected of them. The image of gender identity is often sold to us in a strictly male/female department, bathroom, etc. an institutional structure.

Each of these two ephemeral structures are arbitrarily upheld. If one decides that they do not conform to these assumptions, then this ethereal dichotomy of cultural feedback loops will disappear, because it was never an a-priori form, it was only an empirical, arbitrarily reinforced social construct.

[Anonymous No.13996889]

>>13996875
The biology itself started this feedback loop. You can't deny hormones doesn't change your behaviour, or that female brain is wired differently than male counterpart. Denying it quickly reveals you being disingenuous or outright wacko.

[Anonymous No.13996911]

>>13996889
>The biology itself started this feedback loop. You can't deny hormones doesn't change your behaviour, or that female brain is wired differently than male counterpart.
You're operating under an assumption. Furthermore, while I believe some people may be inherently more stereotypically the way gender assumes based on inherent biological preconditions, I think there are plenty of people who meet the opposite assumptions based on inherent biological preconditions. I've seen enough cute femboys to know this.

But the funny thing is, many of the "gender realists" as one might call them, operate under the assumption that gender is arbitrary expression, because they would say that behaving a way "contrary" to gender identity is a matter of choice, or mental illness. That's a contradiction, to say that it's both a choice, and not a choice.

Either way, if someone arbitrarily decides they no longer feel like acting like a man, people will say "no, you're still a man". I don't see why.

I don't really care to continue a discussion if this is just going to become a disingenuous shit flinging contest though. That really doesn't go well with my coffee, Beethoven, and Columbus day holiday, or should I say, massacre of indigenous peoples day.

[Anonymous No.13996921]

>>13996911
>or should I say, massacre of indigenous peoples day
Woah..

[Eris Omniquery No.13996980]

>>13996776
I'm not even joking, either.
http://andersaamodt.com/whitepapers/%23sotscorp_gangstalking.pdf
We're going to fucking troll the bigots right off the goddamned internet! We will use every tool of psychological manipulation at our disposal to make these cowards pay for their crimes against humanity. We will do so without mercy until the trolls either destroy their computers and phones to get away from the constant hatred spewed at them, or kill themselves.

Now THIS is fucking psychological warfare!

[Anonymous No.13996988]

Think of it this way. Some traits of gender are informed by culture, some are formed by biology. But which ones are culturally reinforced, and which are biologically reinforced?

It's no surprise that right wingers will typically defend the gender binary (and reject global warming), because it goes against their ideal image of man and woman. Conservatives tend to appreciate familiarity. It is no surprise then, that the further left you go, with people who have a personality trait higher in openness, you will find that there is no attachment to familiarity. So seeing that people have nuanced behaviors which are not informed by a subjective ideal of "man or woman" would typically be more left wing, gender identity is seen as a left wing issue.

That is why it becomes difficult to see eye to eye on the issue. It's essentially a textbook case of freudian projection when right wingers say leftists are "driven by ideology", because the very ideology they want to uphold is the one which reinforces their traditional values, while leftists typically say "no, we don't want that ideology anymore." It's not inconceivable that right wingers and left wingers could see eye to eye - I happen to reject the dichotomy of right wing and left wing, because there's only one uniform metaphysical reality - but this is prevented precisely because right wingers have an agenda of denying every concept which is unfamiliar.

Regardless of if consensus, scientific opinion, or even thoughts from independent thinkers, nothing can convince someone otherwise unless they are able to introspect and look past their political biases.

[Anonymous No.13996995]

>>13996980
cringe

[Anonymous No.13996998]

Think of it this way. Some traits of gender are informed by culture, some are formed by biology. But which ones are culturally reinforced, and which are biologically reinforced?

It's no surprise that right wingers will typically defend concept of socially constructed gender (and reject global warming), because it goes against their ideal image of man and woman. Conservatives tend to appreciate familiarity. It is no surprise then, that the further left you go, with people who have a personality trait higher in openness, you will find that there is no attachment to familiarity. So seeing that people have nuanced behaviors which are not informed by a subjective ideal of "man or woman" would typically be more left wing, gender identity is seen as a left wing issue.

That is why it becomes difficult to see eye to eye on the issue. It's essentially a textbook case of freudian projection when right wingers say leftists are "driven by ideology", because the very ideology they want to uphold is the one which reinforces their traditional values, while leftists typically say "no, we don't want that ideology anymore." It's not inconceivable that right wingers and left wingers could see eye to eye - I happen to reject the dichotomy of right wing and left wing, because there's only one uniform metaphysical reality - but this is prevented precisely because right wingers have an agenda of denying every concept which is unfamiliar.

Regardless of if consensus, scientific opinion, or even thoughts from independent thinkers, nothing can convince someone otherwise unless they are able to introspect and look past their political biases. This is the way that our assumptions are upheld not by an ideal reality, but in general assumptions are informed by emotional attachments arising through personal bias. That is also why I identify as a nihilist, because no state of reality conforms to what every person objectively desires, because principles of the universe don't involve personal opinion.

[Anonymous No.13996999]

Think of it this way. Some traits of gender are informed by culture, some are formed by biology. But which ones are culturally reinforced, and which are biologically reinforced?

It's no surprise that right wingers will typically defend concept of binary gender (and reject global warming), because socially constructed gender goes against their ideal image of man and woman. Conservatives tend to appreciate familiarity. It is no surprise then, that the further left you go, with people who have a personality trait higher in openness, you will find that there is no attachment to familiarity. So seeing that people have nuanced behaviors which are not informed by a subjective ideal of "man or woman" would typically be more left wing, gender identity is seen as a left wing issue.

That is why it becomes difficult to see eye to eye on the issue. It's essentially a textbook case of freudian projection when right wingers say leftists are "driven by ideology", because the very ideology they want to uphold is the one which reinforces their traditional values, while leftists typically say "no, we don't want that ideology anymore." It's not inconceivable that right wingers and left wingers could see eye to eye - I happen to reject the dichotomy of right wing and left wing, because there's only one uniform metaphysical reality - but this is prevented precisely because right wingers have an agenda of denying every concept which is unfamiliar.

Regardless of if consensus, scientific opinion, or even thoughts from independent thinkers, nothing can convince someone otherwise unless they are able to introspect and look past their political biases. This is the way that our assumptions are upheld not by an ideal reality, but in general assumptions are informed by emotional attachments arising through personal bias. That is also why I identify as a nihilist, because no state of reality conforms to what every person objectively desires, because principles of the universe don't involve personal opinion.

[Anonymous No.13997002]

>>13996911
>You're operating under an assumption
Science is a bunch of assumption.

I don't deny social constructs impacting the way you live, but you are firstly identified by your gender as your biological make up gives you much stronger drive to behave a certain way. Femboys have this even their name. They can't separate themselves from being boys. And they are not easily going into the feminine mindset and they are not as agile elsewhere when they acquire it.

[Anonymous No.13997003]

Think of it this way. Some traits of gender are informed by culture, some are formed by biology. But which ones are culturally reinforced, and which are biologically reinforced?

It's no surprise that right wingers will typically defend concept of binary gender (and reject global warming), because socially constructed gender goes against their ideal image of man and woman. Conservatives tend to appreciate familiarity. It is no surprise then, that the further left you go, with people who have a personality trait higher in openness, you will find that there is no attachment to familiarity. So seeing that the latter people would have nuanced opinions of behavior which are not informed by a subjective idea of "man or woman", which would typically be more left wing, gender identity is seen as a left wing issue.

That is why it becomes difficult to see eye to eye on the issue. It's essentially a textbook case of freudian projection when right wingers say leftists are "driven by ideology", because the very ideology they want to uphold is the one which reinforces their traditional values, while leftists typically say "no, we don't want that ideology anymore." It's not inconceivable that right wingers and left wingers could see eye to eye - I happen to reject the dichotomy of right wing and left wing, because there's only one uniform metaphysical reality - but this is prevented precisely because right wingers have an agenda of denying every concept which is unfamiliar.

Regardless of if consensus, scientific opinion, or even thoughts from independent thinkers, nothing can convince someone otherwise unless they are able to introspect and look past their political biases. This is the way that our assumptions are upheld not by an ideal reality, but in general assumptions are informed by emotional attachments arising through personal bias. That is also why I identify as a nihilist, because no state of reality conforms to what every person objectively desires, because principles of the universe don't involve personal opinion.

[Anonymous No.13997006]

>>13997003
>left-wing = higher in openness
yikes

[Anonymous No.13997010]

It MUST be remembered that the reification of the numerous categories (sex, gender, sexual orientation etc.) and the affirmation of their mutual exclusivity is a very NEW phenomenon. For most of history these categories were coextensive (a man WAS a male WAS a heterosexual WAS a man, and so on). The source of this phenomenon (and other related phenomena) is unstable power. In a in a liberal frame, unstable power cannot not centralize via formal means, and must instead manufacture these identities and mobilise their occupants against intermediate and competing powers. What one must take away from this is that these identities are the product of a historically contingent prrocess; they are not perennial, they are not capital "R" Real.

[Anonymous No.13997012]

Leviticus 18:22: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination". The chickens will come home to roost one day lads.

[Anonymous No.13997016]

>>13996875
I think a main point of contention is that these assumptions don't fully fit anyone as a person. I think by any reasonable definition of the word nonbinary everyone is nonbinary.

[Anonymous No.13997031]

>>13996755

Have you looked at the CDC stats for STIs among queers? Why would I think such behavior is healthy or equal to heterosexuality?

[Anonymous No.13997075]

>>13997016
They kinda are

[Anonymous No.13997081]

>>13996468
most gays, lesbos and trannies ive met were normal people unless they openly praised lgbt on social media.

[Anonymous No.13997093]

>>13996628
Laughable.
"Gender" is nothing more than a bad faith tactic, it exists to take the place of sex at some times before retreating to an innocuous description of behaviour when challenged, this is the reason that a word that was already being used to refer to literally the same thing as sex, was used instead of a new one.

[Anonymous No.13997100]

>>13996755
You are the establishment

[Anonymous No.13997116]

>>13997012
>le bible quote
There's enough reasons to be against faggotry, some meme book isn't really one of them.

[Anonymous No.13997204]

>>13997116
It's a very good one. Fedora tipping is how you get crap like this in the first place. Return to Reddit, please.

[Anonymous No.13997208]

>>13997204
You are the most Reddit person here, dude.

[Anonymous No.13997211]

>>13997204
Hate to tell you but neo-trads are the real fedora redditors.

[Anonymous No.13997217]

>>13997093
How is it a bad faith tactic when they're different things?

[Anonymous No.13997223]

>>13996793
Its erronous in the sense that its very misleading to reduce anyone including yourself to nothing more than your sexual urges.
People like this are dime a dozen in lgbt, in fact most homosexuals identify first as gay above everything else.

[Anonymous No.13997226]

>>13997217
Literally just explained why.

[Anonymous No.13997229]

>>13997208

[Anonymous No.13997246]

>>13997211
What is a neo trad

[Anonymous No.13997253]

>>13997229
Are you twelve?
>>13997226
Okay, but you realize what you wrote was shallow as fuck, right? I mean it's okay if you dislike trannies, I do as well, but you have to engage with the topic honestly.

[Anonymous No.13997256]

>>13997246
Fat neckbeards that larp as old style catholics, demanding capital punishment for doctors that perform abortions and believing that you'll go to hell for taking a yoga class.

[Anonymous No.13997259]

>>13997253
If you can't keep up then don't reply.

[Anonymous No.13997263]

>>13997246
Neo-traditionalist? Basically, people that watched a few YouTube videos about how cool Aristotle was and now blindly want to follow Catholicism. I know them well, because I spent years being an edgy teen that refused to engage with anything that went past medieval times and thought modernity was all a big mistake.

[Anonymous No.13997264]

>>13997016
All abstractions are imprecise. That doesn't deny their utility or broad applicability. Humans need archetypes, or they end up lost in ennui.

[Anonymous No.13997306]

>>13996468
>philosophy of LG-
they're retarded

[Anonymous No.13997313]

>>13997306
develop.

[Anonymous No.13997315]

>>13997003
>in this moment, I have transcended and I am euphoric
Openness and tradition are two forces that we have group-evolved to use to improve our memetic evolution. It is impossible to know a priori which elements of "progress" improve fitness and which do not, and the perpetual conflict between the two is necessary for effective development.

[Anonymous No.13997360]

>>13997031
Lesbians have less STDs than everyone else. If you are a hetero guy, be careful of what you wish for.

[Anonymous No.13997383]

>>13996468
lgbt and queer theory are a deliberate program of social engineering aimed at reducing humanity to an homogenous herd of pink hair consumer cattle. they are only superficially weird, ie. having funny colored hair and getting fucked in the ass, but just below the surface they are the most agressively normal and conformist people out there, effectively functioning as a counter counter culture, replacing any sense of authentic community with empty HR buzzwords

[Anonymous No.13997390]

>>13997383
What a boring and low-IQ take, you rightwingers literally just repeat the same shit over and over.

[Anonymous No.13997405]

>>13997390
He's correct, though. We were stupud enough to believe you when you said you just want to live out your bourgeois kinks behind closed doors without being persecuted. Now we have trans kids, gay sex scenes in mainstream cinema and naked men in SM gear parading through cities

[Anonymous No.13997407]

>>13996828
Is this a pasta

[Anonymous No.13997413]

>>13997315
ironically leftists are so high in 'openness' they can only end up as puppets of consumerism and social capital chasing, unable to pose a meaningful threat to the status quo or even form coherent views apart from social pressure and ephemeral moral panics. They have effectively abandoned the christian-augustinian conception of the self and human interiority for a very shallow therapeutic and performative conception.

[Anonymous No.13997422]

>>13997390
I've noticed a lot of leftists trying to say things are "boring" recently when it's obvious they're just offended.

[Anonymous No.13997431]

>>13997422
It's especially weird when they say shit like 'low iq'. Are they just not aware of the implications of taking IQ seriously

[Anonymous No.13997439]

>>13996536
Someone's read Douglas Murray's new book.

[Anonymous No.13997468]

>>13997405
You realize that pointing out the mental ineptitude of rightwingers doesn't make me a faggot, right? I'm straight.
> Now we have trans kids, gay sex scenes in mainstream cinema and naked men in SM gear parading through cities
Maybe in America, and I can't see why I'd give a shit. Don't blame the fags for you being a bunch of degenerate savages.
>>13997422
It is boring because you repeat the same conspiracy theory bullshit without ever taking a bigger look. What the fuck else am I supposed to call a thing I had LITERALLY read 3 minutes before in a /pol/ thread almost word for word? This is all you niggers are capable of: the same tired bullshit over and over. Literally Chinese bugmen tier.
>>13997431
>>Are they just not aware of the implications of taking IQ seriously
>responds with another low-IQ take
Nice one, guy.

[Anonymous No.13997470]

>>13997383
Minorities are ‘radical’ (possessing revolutionary potential) only insofar as they are rejected by society... once they start being included in the bourgeois order, they become upholders of capitalism and the status quo...

[Anonymous No.13997473]

>>13997468
>Maybe in America, and I can't see why I'd give a shit. Don't blame the fags for you being a bunch of degenerate savages.
No, all over the West. You not giving a shit just means you are part of the problem.

[Anonymous No.13997479]

>>13997413
You're retarded. The status quo just adopts leftist views because that's what sounds nice and is convenient. You really think your random Twitter dyke is a communist like it says in her bio? Are you that fucking stupid? You think people retweeting about YAAAAS QUEEN SLAAAAY are representative of leftist thought? That's pretty much on the level of saying that if you want to hear rightwing positions you should go listen to people from /r/TheDonald. I mean honestly, how disingenuous can you be?
>unable to pose a meaningful threat to the status quo or even form coherent views apart from social pressure and ephemeral moral panics
Yes, that goes for literally all ruling classes.It was no different when they were rightwingers, or just today in rightwing circles.
>They have effectively abandoned the christian-augustinian conception of the self and human interiority for a very shallow therapeutic and performative conception
No shit, philosophy starts at Kant, faggot, get out of the fucking time machine.

[Anonymous No.13997487]

>>13997468
>P-please shut up

[Anonymous No.13997489]

>>13997468
>only in america
One can tell you're an isolated NEET faggot since you're not even aware of what's happening in the world.

[Anonymous No.13997490]

>>13997473
>No, all over the West.
Strange, because I live in the west and I haven't even seen guys hold hands outside. And by the West I don't mean fucking Armenia or something, ok. Take your paranoid ramblings somewhere else, the fags are literally the least of my worries, and if it's what you're concerned about most then you truly are a mouthbreather that doesn't deserve any consideration.
>You not giving a shit just means you are part of the problem.
I give a shit about things that matter, like for example how land that can be effectively farmed is going to go out in a few decades, or how the supplies of fresh water are diminishing all over, not to mention the dying insect population that nobody gives a fuck about really. But yeah, tell me more about these fags that are terrorizing your daily life, you fucking spineless cretin.

[Anonymous No.13997493]

>>13997489
I can tell you're projecting because you genuinely have no idea what's happening and you're focused on fags and Facebook conspiracies. Blow it out your ass, mutt.

[Anonymous No.13997505]

>>13997490
Lmao, I live in Central Europe and I see fags doing fag stuff everywhere, you're either lying or you haven't left your mom's basement in a while.

[Anonymous No.13997522]

>>13997479
The majority of the right thinks like /r/TheDonald (I assume, i've never been there).
Commies seem to very often fall into self soothing modes of thought where they think they can avoid facing the reality of their situation by "not real X"ing everything outside of their tiny bubble of theory.

[Anonymous No.13997526]

>>13997493
>he's trying to get people to buy into leftist bullshit by accompanying it with /pol/ words like low iq, bugmen, and mutt
You aren't fooling anyone.

[Anonymous No.13997527]

>>13997490
You sound autistic but not in that "cool" 4chan kind of way.

[Anonymous No.13997538]

>>13997505
>Lmao, I live in Central Europe and I see fags doing fag stuff everywhere, you're either lying or you haven't left your mom's basement in a while.
We both know that you're the one lying, so it's okay, just stop humiliating yourself with your constant projections. Go look some more at your cherry-picked videos taken god knows where and pretend that every city is one big gay parade. If not surely you can supply me some evidence about how this is apparently happening all over Europe (which by the way implies every country and every town, not just some event every few months in a capital that hosts thousands of others).
>>13997522
>The majority of the right thinks like /r/TheDonald
Are you retarded? The people on /r/TheDonald can barely be called rightwingers, they're just stupid boomers following the Establishment propaganda they're given. There are even differences of opinion within the real Right, but those people can hardly count as a part of it. I generally believe Americans are too subhuman to be part of any real political grouping, all they're capable of is the lowest kind of tribalism.
>ommies seem to very often fall into self soothing modes of thought where they think they can avoid facing the reality of their situation by "not real X"ing everything outside of their tiny bubble of theory
You haven't read any commies, clearly.

[Anonymous No.13997543]

>>13997526
That or he's trying to make himself seem like "one of the good ones"

[Anonymous No.13997546]

>>13997526
I'm not even a leftist by leftist standards, and you literally are a bugman that's incapable of having his own thoughts, so fucking kill yourself, you absolutely worthless and unloved piece of dogshit. At the end of the day, you know yourself just how fucking stupid you are and how you're literally repeating the same shit you heard elsewhere, things you haven't looked into and probably barely even believe in yourself. Just fuck off until you're willing to be an actual human being with his own thoughts.

[Anonymous No.13997549]

>>13997543
I would take even some latte-drinking hipster fake-Leftist over fuckheads like you, so don't worry, the last thing I need is you thinking of me as your friend, subbie.

[Anonymous No.13997554]

>>13997546
I can almost imagine your corpulent form typing away behind that computer screen.

[Anonymous No.13997563]

>>13997554
You aren't wrong, I'm a 130 kg bull and I'm eating a bowl full of schnitzels as we speak. But that will just make me fucking your pretty little mouth that much hotter.

[Anonymous No.13997572]

>>13997563
Disgusting, the opinions of fats don't matter.

[Anonymous No.13997578]

As funny as it is, I've learned more about lgbt/non-binary acceptance from lurking on /r9k/ than I have from anybody who openly supports gay pride. It's insane that a site with the reputation for being full of bigoted scum is better for teaching people about how to accept these differences and not care what people think more than the fucking idiots who claim to really support it and want to push for acceptance

[Anonymous No.13997586]

>>13997572
They will when I'm filling you up with cummies, m8. Don't deny it, you know you want my sweaty man meat in your tight little hole. By the way you type I'm going to assume you're 18-19 or low-end 20s, so just accept it, be a good twink and submit.

[Anonymous No.13997593]

>>13997586
>Look how sexually frustrated i am

[Anonymous No.13997606]

>>13997593
>wanting to fuck a young rightwing twink makes me sexually frustrated
Why do you people like to project so much? Fucking is good, and fucking your enemies is the best.

[Anonymous No.13997619]

>>13997546
cringe

[Anonymous No.13997620]

>>13996568

Repressed homosexual detected.

[Anonymous No.13997630]

>>13997619
Stay mad.

[Anonymous No.13997645]

[Anonymous No.13997659]

>>13997578
you get lots of vitriol and shitposting, but you also get to see an earnestness that is elsewhere eclipsed by moral grandstanding and posturing. I think I could actually get along with some of the autistic faggots on here

[Anonymous No.13997680]

>>13996873
(You)

[Anonymous No.13997717]

If homosexuality is indeed something genetically determined than it might be curable, or at least preventable with prenatal screening. No need to perpetuate any more mutations that cause mental illness than we need to.

[Anonymous No.13997755]

>>13996468
>>13996475
>>13996536
>>13996628
>>13996649
>>13996664
>>13996673
>>13996675
>>13996685
>>13996702
>>13996705
>>13996757
>>13996793
Based quality posts
>13996755
Thanks for putting the one big nail this coffin needed in order to destroy any possibility of reasonable and respectful discussion.

[Anonymous No.13997800]

>>13997755
>call out dubs
>get dubs
You have powers?

[Anonymous No.13997830]

>>13997563
ew, how the fuck do you get that fat

[Anonymous No.13998497]

>>13997468
>Maybe in America, and I can't see why I'd give a shit.
America is the global cultural and political hegemenon, and you should care very much.

[Anonymous No.13998697]

>>13996755
I hope you're doing okay in life, friend. Everything will be okay. Don't let hurtful people ruin your mental peace like this.

[Anonymous No.13998729]

>>13997256
>demanding capital punishment for doctors that perform abortions
If this is real, and not merely a joke of yours, then that is seriously upsetting. I firmly believe our species will not survive long into the future. The various alien races watching us and manipulating us, while we live under this quarantined state, probably don't have any hope left for us either. Ah well. We tried our best, at least. Let the climate crisis and the new world order finish us off from here. I say this all quite regretfully, since I could imagine a far better state than the one we're familiar with.

[Anonymous No.13999413]

>>13997383
This desu. The whole problem comes from materialism.

[Anonymous No.13999459]

>>13996980
Stop.

[Anonymous No.13999492]

>>13996468
>Why can't you just be a man/woman and act in whatever way you find pleasing?
Because of Anglos/Americans and their retarded autistic protestantism.
They just can't deal with sexuality in a normal way, every fetish has to be categorized and labeled and it has to fit a certain rule.

[Anonymous No.14000225]

>>13996628
>a person's gender expression has [no] innate link to their genitalia.
Men and woman have generally different:
bone structure?
>Yes
muscle distribution?
>Yes
fat distribution?
>Yes
body hair distribution?
>Yes
genitalia?
>Yes
reproductive organs?
>Yes
brain structure and behavior?
>Lol nope exactly the same, evolution didn't affect that part, only affected by living in a society
Makes sense.

[Anonymous No.14000238]

>>13996468
>I want to have some real talk about the philosophy of LGBTQ+ and so on
too bad for you this is a literature board

[Anonymous No.14000287]

>>13997439
I haven’t. What’s he say?

[Anonymous No.14000300]

>>13997563
Is your name Dominik? If so post feet

[Anonymous No.14000322]

>>13998729
>>demanding capital punishment for doctors that perform abortions
>If this is real, and not merely a joke of yours, then that is seriously upsetting.
Speaking from the POV of a non-Catholic, this is completely understandable if one considers abortion child murder. It doesn’t strike me as irrational—rather, it’s a natural intersection of ethical, metaphysical and legal principles (in the US at least, plus the Church frowns upon capital punishment).