Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Ohh. That’s too bad. Why not?

10

Anonymous OP 3w

while masculinity undoubtedly has some aesthetics associated with it, the aesthetics of masculinity are by far and away the most unimportant and insignificant part of masculinity, something you have made clear you do not comprehend

-6

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Please tell me what traits are masculine that aren’t just based on looks and vibes? You can label anything as masculine, like protecting people for example, but that’s something that any person could do

19

Anonymous OP 3w

At its core masculinity is a way of interacting and interfacing with the people and world around us, and argue real masculinity IS an inherently good thing. As men, more now than ever, we must strive to be masculine by being resilient both physically and emotionally, brave, strong, temperate, selfless, active, and attentive in our communities and relationships.

0

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

While masculinity is not necessarily men alone who are capable of being, men are uniquely equipped biologically, culturally, and spiritually to embody masculinity.

4

Anonymous OP 3w

I love how below this you see someone say the exact example you said to not say

11

Anonymous inphochewated 3w

what?

1

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

No that’s stupid. Men are not in any way more capable of being resilient, brave, and all the other stuff you said, and to suggest otherwise is sexist. These positive traits that you associate with masculinity are things that anyone can embody. Also, the expectation for men to be resilient and strong often harms men (and that’s not even mentioning how much it causes men to harm women).

12

Anonymous OP 3w

GENERALLY Men are bigger with denser bones making us more physically resilient Men are much physically stronger, faster, and enduring Male hormones make us much more mentally resistant to negative emotions, depression, and anxiety as well as less emotional generally (temperate) Selflessness should come from men's role in society as providers and protectors due to the reasons above.

2

Anonymous OP 3w

The expectation that men need to be emotionally impervious (to an extent) as a god thing is not about our mental health or men at all, it is required to be effective in our role in society. Masculinity in its pure, incorrupt form is antithetical to harming women (other than punishment for crimes obviously, if she is a killer she isn't staying around)

2

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

“Hey women. You’re all weak, slow, emotional, depressed, anxious, and crazy. You just need to rely on men.” That’s you. That’s how dumb you sound. Women are just as capable as men. You’re sexist.

16

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Women should not have to rely on the good grace and kindness of men to avoid violence. Why can’t you just be normal? It’s be so much simpler if you accepted that women are equal to men, and you don’t need to have all these weird expectations

27

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Oh it was some anon and they deleted it, don’t sweat it dude.

1

Anonymous #5 3w

Non existing concept

1

Anonymous #5 3w

Masculinity, femininity, gender, and sex are all socially constructed concepts

5

Anonymous inphochewated 3w

I will tack on to this debate the fact that most people should be striving to exhibit these so-called pure forms of both masculinity and femininity as people are naturally both. To try and actively deny yourself either one or lean to heavily into one will just make you a less rounded person at best and a detriment to others at worst. “General affinities” as was previously mentioned are irrelevant to this fact.

14

Anonymous OP 3w

I mean one of those things is physical

0

Anonymous OP 3w

Sex is a biological quantifiable fact

1

Anonymous #2 3w

Sex is a concept which is used to describe physical traits of human beings. Some people believe that there are only two sexes, but the truth is that everyone lies somewhere on a bi modal distribution of sexual traits. The existence of intersex people contradicts the idea that sex is binary.

12

Anonymous OP 3w

Just because a few mutants with unusual traits exist doesn’t take away from the standard binary but alright. XX chromosomes and XY chromosomes. That’s sex.

-2

Anonymous #5 3w

What about xxy and xxx and the multiple other chromosome combinations? No matter what kind of definition you come up with, there will be exceptions. Stop trying to place limitations on the diversity of all human existence, they’re fake and lame.

10

Anonymous OP 3w

Dude my mother was XXX, I don’t give a fuck. Not joking.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Mutants exist. People have 5 fingers on each hand. That doesn’t mean that a super rare mutant can’t have 6 fingers; but anatomically speaking in general people have 5 fingers on each hand. Stop with the 1/100,000 anomaly crap

0

Anonymous #5 3w

The rarity does not matter. You cannot rely on a model that denies the existence of even one person. Your “generalization” is nothing but erasure

17

Anonymous OP 3w

Green: Never said all, this is just generally true in comparison to men. Studies back this up. Cyan: Men are actually more likely to get the "crazy" mental diseases such as schizophrenia. Orange: This is true within certain activities and provably incorrect in others. Red: We live in a fallen world that has dangerous evil men, and women (without the great equalizer of the firearm) are physically vulnerable to them, it is then up to good men and the government to "manage" them.

7

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Purple: I would also be wrong

0

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Why do you think there are so many bad men? Don’t you think maybe it’s because men believe that they are superior to women? You are treating women as if they are objects with no ability or agency. Did you realize that women are people too? You’re sexist, and it’s getting really annoying.

15

Anonymous OP 3w

Alright now you’re just being disingenuous

1

Anonymous #6 3w

Why do you think I’m being disingenuous? Since when was it okay to believe that women are inferior to men?

11

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

So this is getting into transphobic rhetoric that is very harmful. Gender is a social construct. There is no such thing as "male" hormones. Everyone has testosterone. Plus not every men will have denser bones, and be physically stronger, faster and enduring and that's not a requirement to be masculine. You are excluding disabled men, trans men, effeminate men, and genderfluid people who want to be masculine.

13

Anonymous OP 3w

Bad men exist for more reasons than i can name, but i would argue the existence of societies which commonly do not view women as people equal in value to men as a product of similar root issues that are in themselves too long and complex to get into here. I will say however that I'm confident that it is not masculinity in the way I have been describing it is to blame in any way.

-4

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

I have to ask. Why do you view masculinity in such a binary context? How does that do anything but create this burden for you to uphold for yourself? i mean what happens if you get into a car accident and lose the ability to walk. You then wouldn't be physically stronger than a women, and by your logic that would make you less masculine?

1

Anonymous #7 3w

Cyan: Ok Violet: Perhaps it is in a sense, but it's "construction" was neither baseless nor abstract. To write it off as irrelevant is not wise, these things exist for a good reason and are not to be dismissed carelessly. Red: I was using "male hormones" as synecdoche for male hormonal balance/cycles/ratios and general characteristics of male development. Yellow: That is why i qualified my statement with "generally" as these things are true in the vast majority of cases.

6

Anonymous #7 3w

Green: Explanation needed. Yellow: It was never about me or any man trying to embody that same masculinity, it's about being good and useful those around us, so if it is a burden then i'm happy to have it. Orange: Personally, I'll just become a monastic. Generally, there are plenty of ways disabled men can be masculine as physical strength is not the only thing that matters if you are useful to those around you (FDR and Georges Couthon come to mind) Red: Yes, or at least less than before.

2

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

You're okay with being transphobic? Am I understanding than correctly? What I meant by binary is saying that masculinity fits on this scale that you've placed it upon, considering you would view yourself as less masculine if you were to become physically disabled. Which is ridiculous because masculinity isn't binary. The male hormonal or physical strength cycle isn't what determines someone's masculinity, hell ik butch lesbians that are more masculine than men I know. What i'm saying is

9

Anonymous #7 3w

masculinity shouldn't be so exclusive to men who identify with their assigned gender as birth as you are making it out to be and that is the burden that causes people to view masculinity as something to uphold

2

Anonymous #7 3w

Green: Yes, Yes Yellow: I never said nor intentionally suggested that masculinity was a bianary Orange: This is a non sequitur as this has nothing to do with the masculinity binary you alone are talking about Red: It doesn't, but it does make us predisposed and uniquely equipped to be masculine when it works properly Purple: I know some straight women that are more masculine than some straight men, but these exceptions do not disprove the trend Cyan: I said it wasn't

6

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Blue: Masculinity is something to be upheld. Masculinity is something that is inextricably and directly linked to being a Man/Male (these terms while having different definitions are synonymous), but is not exclusive to Men and exist outside of any Man.

0

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

This is kind of an insane take. Firstly, there is a huge difference between “in general” and “on average”. We can say that men might on average have denser bones and all the other physical things, but we can NOT assume over the general population that any man will be stronger than any woman. Even as an extremely conservative estimate of 20% strength overlap, that’s far from a binary difference, and doesn’t make the people below/above average respectively any more/less masculine in any way.

10

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

you might not have directly stated masculinity and femininity to be a binary pair, but you are doing so implicitly by grounding your argument in the physical differences between sexes. If you think that masculinity and femininity can both be expressed across any sex in a positive way, then your argument doesn’t really make sense for why masculinity has anything to do with manliness

10

Anonymous #3 3w

Explain mama bears?

0

Anonymous #11 3w

We are not bears

4

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

If you're okay with being transphobic then our conversation is done here. I don't converse with bigots with no sense of empathy or respect for people who don't fit traditional gender roles. I hope one day you realize how harmful this rhetoric really is

1

Anonymous #7 3w

It's not that that i don't have sympathy for or hate trans people, honestly i for nothing but the best for them in their lives, i've just been told that simply disagreeing with the notions that sex and gender are unrelated and that gender exist outside of a bianary makes me transphobic, and if that is all it takes to be counted as transphobic then i am ok with being transphobic. The label of "Transphobic" is simply far too broad to be useful in my opinion.

1

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

*I hope for nothing but the best

2

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Ohh okay. You’re fine with being stupid then. If you wanted, you could just google it and find out the differences between sex and gender, since they are two different words that have been used to describe different things. Because you can’t support trans people and also not believe that they can even exist. Which is what “sex and gender are connected, and gender is binary” implies. That’s why you’re transphobic. As well as your strict adherence to gender roles, which also harm trans people.

6

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

ik i said our conversation was over but i will always take the opportunity to educate a bigot. You are right on some level where transphobia encompasses a broad spectrum of specific bigotry. It's not just the act of hating someone who is trans or even physically harmful them. There is something called mirco aggressions. You might've heard of it before, i usually see it in reference to race, however it's not exclusive to that. Your comments are full of these mirco aggression towards trans people

4

Anonymous OP 3w

I know of zero models that include every person that exists and has ever existed, not even this one does that. That would be tantamount to describing the unique personalities of each of the 100 billion of us that have ever walk this planet. Does the fact that we say 8 billion people exist and not the exact number erase the extra people we neglect?

1

Anonymous #7 3w

Saying things like men have denser bones, and in general physically stronger than women, and how the male hormonal cycle is specific to upholding masculinity is exclusive to people born as a man. When not everyone who identifies as a man might've been assigned that gender at birth. Therefore implying that the way you perceive masculinity is exclusive to those who are amab. This is in fact a mirco aggression.

8

Anonymous #12 3w

It’s impossible to capture everyone in endless categorizations - because there’s an infinite number of ways to classify, and because people change. I’d even argue that a model that attempts to include everyone, but fails, is more harmful than a rough model that is more generally true. At what point does a model of temperamental traits just start describing individual personalities? If 5 people exist within my subgroup of characteristics I believe I have, are we worth formally grouping at all?

1

Anonymous #7 3w

If a trans man were to read that, he might feel as if he'll never be man enough bc that wasn't his assigned gender at birth, and that could cause a plethora of other mental problems. Gender dsyphoria, depression, anxiety etc. Now onto your strict adherence of traditional gender roles. This is not only transphobic mirco aggression but misogynistic one too. If a women were to break out of a traditional gender roles that wouldn't make her less of a women AND it wouldn't make her an exception.

7

Anonymous #7 3w

Since the role a women within society isn't defined by a single concept. A lesbian who owns a roofing company, and lives with her wife and there three dogs is just as much of a women as stay-at-home mom who takes care of the house and her three kids while her husband works to support their family. The lesbian family isn't an exception, they are just another family. I say that because as someone who is afab but genderfluid, saying i'm an exception to the way womenhood is supposed to be lived make

4

Anonymous #12 3w

I never said sex didn’t exist as a concept. I’m just saying we should be questioning what things we hold as generally true, and if those definitions cause material harm to people. Which in this case they do. All you have to do is acknowledge that these concepts and categorizations are human-made and are imperfect. Also, “gender and sex are bi modal spectrums,” is actually a way better way of seeing things in my opinion.

1

Anonymous #12 3w

For any practical purpose, no one is using more than like 5 classes of sex. As human beings, we have some accepted typical traits. The existence of serial killers does not contradict the fact that people aren’t generally serial killers. Our classifications have to be evaluated on more than just their existence. They have to be relevant and useful, otherwise what’s the point of the argument.

0

Anonymous #7 3w

me feel as if there is something wrong with me for not fitting into what you believe is inherently how afab people should work. i hope this helps explains why what you said is harmful, and i hope you continue to live a more inclusive life when discussing things about modern gender roles and family units. tradition isn't always what is best for a society.

5

Anonymous #12 3w

What does telling an XXY person that they’re their own tiny sexual group thats different from the huge XX and XY groups do for them? Make them feel special?

0

Anonymous OP 3w

I think everything that exists is either human-observed or human-made. I agree with the idea of questioning things we’ve established. BUT I can’t agree with dismantling things for dismantling sake. I think we have to be careful of that, by deciding the value of what has already existed, and our own motivations in breaking down those old walls.

1

Anonymous #12 3w

You’re using a lot of words, but you’re not saying much. What’s your point? “Intersex people don’t matter”? I’m just curious what you’re trying to say here.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

I don’t think sex is one of those human-made categorizations. I think it’s a description of biological realities. It’s as real of a description as the distinction between red and blue. A scientist could tell me that blue is really only red filtered through an atmosphere of nitrogen, oxygen, and argon. So the blue you thought you saw was really red, haha you suck. That would be immaterial to me, but it’d also be scientifically accurate. What benefit does classifying someone’s sex as XXY bring?

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Statistical significance is also a concern here. All classifications are based on their statistical significance and all pronouncements or models that exist are probabilistic. It’s the foundation of the scientific method. Things are just mostly true, to the point where you don’t constantly worry about them not being true. What does saying that “these concepts and categorizations are human made and are imperfect” mean in the grand scheme of things?

1

Anonymous #7 3w

You should read Paglia if you have the time

0

Anonymous #12 3w

Maybe it’d be good for that person to discuss that with their doctor. And intersex people have various health and human rights related issues. Like corrective surgery done on them when they’re newborns for example. You may think I’m wasting time, but there are real people whose lives are made worse because people believe in the immutable truth of biological sex, and the social implications of this belief.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

The obvious byproduct of this new way of seeing things is taking down gender roles. You can see why those who don’t fit any gender roles would benefit from this, but how about the majority? I sincerely believe that the desire to take down established norms for the sake of partisan relief is the motivation behind the new classifications. In the new classifications, more things are able to true, so less things are able to be refuted.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

So it’s all well to question things we’ve generally held as true, but do we have any replacements for our established norms? If we do have replacements, are they better than what we intend to replace? Revolutions largely fail because they are hot flames that burn themselves out after eating up all their fuel.

1

Anonymous #12 3w

I don’t think that binary sex has ever denied the existence of intersex people of any sort, even if it hasn’t upgraded them to their own sexes. I also think that viewing sex as a binary allows us to simplify the roles either sex plays, while also acknowledging the variety of expressions available to both sexes. Allife attempts to keep itself alive, and the best way it’s found is procreation, so it’d make sense that our most fundamental classification is into the only groups that can procreate.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

It seems you’re scared you’d have to be powerless if men are truly stronger than women. Women have always relied on the good grace of men to avoid violence - violence is rampant and men are only a small part of what can harm women. Women have almost always been fine with men’s good grace and protection when it’s convenient. You just seem to have had a bad time with men you’ve met, and that’s unfortunate.

-2

Anonymous #12 3w

Shut the fuck up. Slippery slope fallacy + you’re a conservative + you don’t believe in lgbtqia+ rights. If you love gender roles so much, why don’t you go get a heterosexual, monogamous, god-fearing marriage with them and then fuck them and have beautiful, genetically pure babies that secure the future of the White race.

0

Anonymous #12 3w

The men I’ve met fucked me in the ass and I was happy with it. Maybe you should try it someday. Having sex. It’s really fun imo

9

Anonymous #12 3w

You don’t know anything about me dipshit. You don’t even know my gender or my sex.

11

Anonymous OP 3w

Sex is cool. I already assumed you’re a woman or a minority gender so you’re aligned with the ideals associated with your identity; what’s knowing your actual sex or gender gonna do for me? You could be a 6’5 bearded motorcycle gang member, but I’m arguing against the position you belong to.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

I’m Black. I’m not conservative (this is a funny one actually because for someone who hates binaries so much, you seem to be more than happy to put me in one. Why can’t I be conservato-liberal-tarian?🤔) I also don’t believe in God. You’re like 2 for 5 rn.

1

Anonymous #7 3w

With all the talk of aggression, i'd like to point out I'm the only one here not saying the other side is stupid, weird, dumb, objectifying women, unfeeling, unempathetic, disrespectful, among the other forms of ad-hominem that have been thrown at me. I'm not bothered by it because I know these things to be false but it does seem awfully hypocritical of both you and OP since i've gone out of my way to be nothing but cordial.

3

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Don’t put this on 7, I’m the one being mean. And I haven’t even said anything to you that was an ad hominem attack.

6

Anonymous OP 3w

Okay, I guess I could be more sympathetic of intersex people’s lives being ruined, but I tend to think of harms in terms of the number of victims either way. I think that negating the importance of bigger categories is more harmful than negating the importance of smaller ones.

1

Anonymous #12 3w

You can’t just say you’re not a conservative when you’re over here arguing to conserve traditional values. And I wasn’t saying you were any of those other things, I’m saying that’s what you sound like.

1

Anonymous #12 3w

That’s bullshit.

1

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Also, and this is big. People get mad when you deny their identities and human rights. You will have to get used to this.

9

Anonymous OP 3w

What, so NO traditional values should be conserved?? I am an advocate for improvement, not just change. I don’t want everything to just remain the same, but I also don’t want it to get worse.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Not really, the category of sex is just more important to you than it is to me. There’s endless other categories you could bring up - like politics - where harm is being done labeling everyone one thing or the other. But guess what, it ends up working out pretty accurately, and it makes classification easier.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

This is ONE conservative value, and it didn’t used to be. ONE conservative value doesn’t make me a conservative. If I agreed with you on this, and disagreed about immigration and everything else, it wouldn’t make me liberal. But we determine these things by percentages don’t we?

1

Anonymous #12 3w

Low empathy, whataboutism, and you’re annoying.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Yes, intersex people are catered for by doctors, I could never say I disagree with that. Why not let them alone after that? I doubt that anyone is going up to an intersex person and saying they don’t exist or don’t matter. I just don’t think the varieties of intersexuality can reasonably make whole other sexes. Everybody can’t be made to feel equally important by just gifting them group identity.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Could you identify the whataboutism? I’ll take your opinion on me being annoying with a grain of salt, since I have a lot of friends and a girlfriend. I’ve actually been accused of having low empathy once before, good job! But I’ve been lauded for having high empathy since before I was old enough to talk, so I’ll have to take a point off your tally😬. Even those damn personality tests say I supposedly am an empath.

1

Anonymous #12 3w

We don’t need to keep doing this. Either say “intersex rights!” or stop talking about it.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Green: I already said this, you should probably read what i've said BEFORE responding Yellow: Sure you can, I can support them in their rights so far as it doesn't encroach on the rights of others whilst disagreeing with their self identification/categorization. Orange: Sex and Gender are bianary, Masculinity and Femininity are not. Purple: I really don't think i'm that strict, i see it as more of a template that can be partially departed from when truly necessary.

8

Anonymous OP 3w

Intersex rights! lol

1

Anonymous #12 3w

Based 🥹

1

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Be a bigot. Just don’t pretend you’re not. If you do not believe that trans people are real, you are transphobic. You’re also sexist. And if you get mad at the things I’m saying, use Google, and that big brain in your head, and find out why I’m saying them. Really, I believe in you! You’re probably smart enough to understand basic trans/feminist theory.

4

Anonymous #7 3w

Green: Every male(including those with kleinfelters, autosomal SRY, etc) is a man. Yellow: Its hard to see how you got this interpretation when one of the first things I explicitly said in this thread was that masculinity isn't exclusive to men. Orange/Red: I am here to discuss reality and objective truth. If it is upsetting to someone to read, I would argue it is the fault of delusion, not any alleged wrongdoing from me. Purple: I've already talked about this Cyan: You are correct.....

4

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

..... , it's sex that determines gender, not masculinity or femininity Pink: it would make her unusual, but sometimes(not always) that is necessary

0

Anonymous #6 3w

Mama bear is a term used to describe woman who would die protecting the ones they love

11

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Jesus how long will this go 😭. Gang if you wanna exhibit truly masculine behavior just move on like damn

6

Anonymous #7 3w

Yellow: Correct Green: This is a non sequitur by virtue of masculinity and femininity having no part in the determination of one's gender, she would just be comparitively to other women very non-feminine and very masculine Orange: Families have children Red: I believe you are delusional to an extent reguarding gender which is not good, but if you can provide true and consistent reasoning to divert from the template, then go ahead.

2

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Purple: It didn't, you would need to explain why people feeling bad when hearing what i say when discussing/debating truth is more important than the discovery, discussion of, and propagation of truth. Cyan: But I think in this case it is.

-1

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Shut the fuck up about truth because you are objectively wrong. Open a goddamn book.

9

Anonymous OP 3w

Yellow: At least we agree on something Green: The function of name calling and labeling people as some -ist, -phobic, etc is to imply illegitimacy to what they say, this is also the function of ad-hominem. Cyan: I am well aware. Red: I never denied anyones rights Purple: I already am

-1

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

If accurately labeling someone’s beliefs was an ad hominem attack, then id be mad if someone called me a leftist. But I wouldn’t be mad. Transphobia, sexism, racism, all those things have real definitions, you can’t just pretend they don’t exist because you don’t like when people point out that your beliefs are based on the superiority of one group over another.

8

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

so unlike you, i actually have a job and responsibilities and can't spend all day and night on yik yak fucking annonating respones. I shouldnt really dignify this with a response because you called me delusional and are confused on why "people feeling bad while discussing/debating truth" is transphobic, but i can't let you think you got to me. If you can't comprehend why your beliefs (bc they aren't objective truths) make people feeling bad is bigoted then I truly can't help you.

8

Anonymous OP 3w

I have read about the ideology/theory of/behind transgenderism, came to understand how it operates/came to be, meditated on it, compared it to opposing theories and observed reality, and decided it was almost certainly untrue. The reason I've remained so consistent is because this is something i've already thought about. It seems you cannot understand that someone who is well read could have come to a different conclusion than you.

-2

Anonymous #7 3w

i also want to mention families don't require children. all i'm saying is your world view is not objectively morally correct over others. you can disagree but it's transphobia if you are claiming people who don't fit into your world view aren't fellow human beings who just trying to live their lives full of love. please don't ever actually have children bc i fear for their livihood if they happen to deviate from the rigid gender roles you'll force upon them

9

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

“I’m not stupid, I just disregard the truth and choose to hate people because it benefits me.” Go fuck yourself, I’m gonna go get my hrt from the pharmacy. Bye.

4

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

so i've seen you're comments on several post and someone point out the sources you rely on are already incredibly biasd towards right wing rhetoric and that personally was enough for me to write off any research you claim as not being properly informed. i've also seen you on Ask Women slut shaming women who don't feel comfortable sharing their body counts / are sexually active and not married. not even ppl who hook up but just regular adult women who have sex within their relationships.

9

Anonymous #7 3w

it's truly pitful that someone so young can be just a bigoted as if they were born in times where people weren't allowed to express themselves. that you would rather the society operate like it was 1955. the reason why your words are so hurtful is bc we have no reason to believe you aren't making spaces worse for minorities. like i wouldn't even trust you to be around a women since you would probably judge and shame her if she didn't fit into your world view.

10

Anonymous OP 3w

sex is NOT a socially constructed concept wtf😭😭😭😭😭

1

Anonymous #13 3w

Google “is sex a social construct”

0

Anonymous OP 3w

the name is social construct. that name used to describe it. not the fact itself

1

Anonymous #13 3w

I am saying that the way people label, discuss, and restrict bodies based on a binary system called “sex”, is a social construct

0

Anonymous OP 3w

that’s gender. not sex

1

Anonymous #13 3w

The idea that human bodies are divided into two anatomical, biological types, the “male” and “female” “sex”, is socially constructed. The m or f marker on your birth certificate is something that people agree on for convenience. It doesn’t inherently correspond to the traits that people assume it corresponds to. It is not an objective fact, it is an interpretation and categorization, which in and of itself, is a deliberate choice and action.

0

Anonymous #13 3w

Gender, on the other hand, encompasses social, cultural, and aesthetic norms and expectations which are typically associated with the sexes. Gender and sex are different, but they are both human-made social methods of categorization, which are based on, but not inherent in, observable trends.

0

Anonymous OP 3w

Ok that ones is just dumb, male and female are real categories

1

Anonymous #2 3w

Nothing is real!!!!!!!!!!! The very idea of truth is socially constructed and has varied in definition throughout history!!!! Read! A! Book!!!!!!

0

Anonymous #6 3w

Bros hear the word “bear” and immediately get defensive now

6

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

What.. I don’t understand what you think being trans means?? There is no “ideology”. You may disagree with them on the definitions of gender and sex, but if you come to some agreement on those definitions it doesn’t make sense to argue that being trans is “untrue”

6

Anonymous #10 3w

Bro can only conceptualize being transgender as a belief system because @stanczyk only knows how to operate in belief systems. They can’t fathom that some aspects of humanity are intrinsic and immutable, because to acknowledge that would mean letting go of their own illusion of control

13

Anonymous #11 3w

oh clock it

12

Anonymous #7 2w

Green: Not historically, but I'll concede this is just semantics that don't really matter Yellow: It isn't about morality, I just believe that A: there is objective truth and B: there are true and untrue beliefs, and I *believe* that my beliefs are true Orange: I never claimed this Red: I explicitly said i don't hate trans people for being trans Purple: Like you said, in modern society my life would be significantly easier to believe in transgenderism.

0

Anonymous #7 2w

Green: I assume you are referencing my use of BYU social studies on relationships and premarital sex, which in a vacuum i could definitely agree could be biased considering BYU is primarily mormon, but their research on relationships aligns with studies done by many other institutions who have more diverse staff which leads me to believe that they are true. When I said I read about transgender ideology, I went to explicitly pro-trans writers/speakers/etc trying to explaing the idea of being ....

1

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

...trans to an assumedly uninformed audience, listened to what they had to say, and simply disagreed with the basis of their propositions, namely that personal assertions have anything to do with who/what a person actually is. Yellow: Though I disagreed and did discuss things with them, I went out of my way to not shame anyone outside of the case of explicitly lying to their established partners for personal gain, something I previously thought wouldn't be a controversial thing to discourage.

1

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

ITS BEEN A WEEK

10

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

Orange: I never said that nor do I want that Red: You also have no reason to believe I AM making them worse, you are just assuming that. Purple: You don't *have to* trust me on anything, but I would hope you are aware you are making big assumptions about me, ones I would argue are wrong.

-1

Anonymous #10 2w

Green: Maybe "ideology" is the wrong word to use, what i meant by it was the philosophical proposals which lay the foundations for the idea that someone can A: exist outside of a gender bianary, B: be a different gender than that associated with their sex, and C: have a fluid/changing gender. Orange: being transgender or agreeing with someone asserting they are trans requires a certain belief of how reality functions, and no I don't think of everything in terms of belief systems, it's just......

1

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

...easiest to discuss using the language of beliefs Yellow: I both fathom and agree with the idea of unchanging, intrinsic, and immutable truths, I am just saying that I, as well as the majority of humanity throughout history, think sex determining gender is an immutable and intrinsic truth of humanity.

1

Anonymous #2 2w

I haven't been on in a week, I only get on when i have free time and i don't have anything better to do. This is a consistent pattern to how I post and I just thought I aught to finish up here since it didn't take me too long.

1

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

That was a lot of words that provided very little new information. Could you maybe state what belief it is exactly that you’re disagreeing with so that we can address whatever your actual argument is here? Again, being trans or gnc isn’t really a matter of ideology to most. It’s often is talked about using different definitions of gender and sex than what you’ve said you use, but preferring your own self expression over conformity is not a belief system.

4

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

Regardless of what you believe to be “truth”, there have been multiple studies showing the obvious fact that people are happier after they transition, and when others accept their chosen identity. Why are you like this? Do you even know any trans people? And why do you think you have the power to decide if someone is “correct” for how they live their life? Especially when they don’t harm anyone by living that way.

11

Anonymous #10 2w

Sure, there are a couple of ideas/philosophical proposals i disagree with which provide the logical foundation for being trans, but starting with one would probably be easiest. I disagree with the idea that gender is not related to sex. I believe gender is the normative set of traits cultural, psychological, physical, and behavioral associated with men and women that is founded in both sexual dimorphism between men and women and human social structures, where an individual's gender is set by....

3

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

...their sex. Sex here usually being the normal XX/XY chromosomal sex, but even non-standard biological sex such as instances of Kleinfelters, Autosomal/X SRY translocation, androgen insensitivity disorder, etc can still fall into being part of the gender bianary by virtue of intersex people's biological traits leaning to be far closer to one of the two sexes instead of right in the middle of male and female.

2

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

sure, but that’s not foundational to being trans, that’s just semantics. Being trans is fundamentally a statement about how you present yourself and how you wish to be treated, whether you “are” a man or woman is just a way to describe yourself and your relationship with social norms.

11

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

so if a woman or a man for that matter doesn't want to disclose their body count for whatever that isn't lying. even to their partners, the only information that is needed when it comes to past sexual experiences is if you have STDs or sexual trauma. if someone says they are experienced or a virgin that should be enough for you.

2

Anonymous #10 2w

Wait, to could you clarify if this statement as true or not in your view before moving on. "MTF people ARE women and FTM people ARE men..." "...in the same way that men and women ARE men and women" I'm separating the two clauses so you can address them individually if either has error according to you.

1

Anonymous #7 2w

Green: It is either a lie by omission or obfuscation, so not as bad as an outright lie but it still isn't good. Yellow: You do not determine what men's standards for relationships are and what "should" and "shouldn't" be a factor in our decision making when deciding to start/continue relationships. If you disagree and want to change minds, prove via argument that the reasons why we shouldn't care are greater than the current reasons we (*most* men) do care.

1

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

Cyan: Again, you need to justify yourself when making prescriptive statements, especially since most men disagree that just saying "experienced" is enough since it is too broad a description to gain useful information.

0

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

you and other men shouldn't care bc it has nothing to do with the current relationship? why dwell on the amount of sex someone has had? it can't change nor does it affect who they are as a person. as long as they are responsible then it shouldn't affect your overall attraction and it's weird if someone body count does

2

Anonymous #6 2w

Holy incel

1

Anonymous #7 2w

Green: It is one of the most consistent and significant predictors of relationship quality and stability in every measurable way. Yellow: Because the more they have had, the more likely things won't work out according to statistics. Red: Yep Purple: This is dumb, I find it odd how hard it is for women to understand and accept that one's life choices and experiences affect who they are. Cyan: Long sexual histories indicate being irresponsible. Orange: But it does, even for men who agree with you

3

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

How do they not realize you’re wiping the floor with them?

-1

Anonymous OP 2w

Green: Could you cite them? I can't respond if I don't know what you are referring to Orange: low agreeableness Red: Yes, I play video games with them sometimes Purple: This isn't a necessarily moral thing, I just think their (trans people) beliefs about reality and themselves is factually wrong Cyan: I disagree that it is totally harm free in practice, but that feels outside the current scope of conversation and should probably stay so unless you want to open that can of worms.

0

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

So if you stop seeing someone you're dating bc they have a specific body count and nothing else all bc you trust statistics the actual person, then you have trust issues. All relationships are unpredictable, you could have a awful relationship with someone who is a virgin, but a great relationship with someone who has a body count of 50+. There past doesn’t define them. People change and grow.

2

Anonymous #7 2w

Green: I'd break up if they lied, I wouldn't start a long term relationship if they are secretive about their past or had too much of a history to be worth the risk. Yellow: I'd call it risk aversion but sure Orange: To an extent Red: Possibly, but it is VERY unlikely and I'm not one to gamble with odds so poor. Purple: Ones past experiences and choices is what shapes who they are today, is the idea of cause and effect that hard to grasp? Cyan: ....in reaction to their experiences and choices.

0

Anonymous #7 2w

Green: reformation like that would effectively be subtracting from the "effective body count", but I don't know if I personally would be comfortable dating someone who ever was a "sex addict", as I would be skeptical that the part of them that chose to be a "sex addict" was totally gone. Red: Maybe, but I will continue to make choices I think are best for me. Purple: I understand context is relevant, it is accounted for.

0

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

yeah no you definitely have trust issues if you trust statistics over someone you personally know. it's not "risk aversion" bc at the end of the day, you are factoring in the statistics instead of trusting they could be an outlier bc like i said every relationship is different and things like divorce often aren't bc someone had a higher body count than they other person.

2

Anonymous #7 2w

“Trust issues” and its a perfectly reasonable response backed by both statistics and a clear evolutionary purpose

0

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

I feel sorry for your trans friends, if I was them I’d never talk to you again. I’m me and I don’t want to talk to you again. Btw trans men (ftm) are men and trans women (mtf) are women, in exactly the same way that cis men are men and cis women are women. And nonbinary people are real. Also could i cite my sources… USE GOOGLE!!!! Why do I have to do everything for you? Fuck this. Take a long walk off a short pier in cement shoes. If I ever hear from you again I will get progressively less kind.

2

Anonymous stanczyk 2w

I would personally agree with that first statement, but again that’s semantics, not ideology, it doesn’t really matter if our definitions of man and woman differ. I assume we can agree on “MTF people would like you to treat them as women” etc, which is more important. “in the same way as cis people” very much depends on the person though, some trans people pass completely, some have no interest in passing and just reject gender norms overall. nb people fall under the trans umbrella as well.

2

Anonymous #7 1w

Cyan: you only REALLY get to know someone after you started dating, and when i am yet to really know someone i will trust the statistics (to an extent) Green: I have no reason to be so charitable to someone i am yet to know Purple: ...but they are very predictable. Red: It's not about body count differences, just the flat number, the statistics count each divorce twice with each data point being for one of the two partners.

-2

Anonymous OP 1w

Green: The question was for number 10 as I wanted clarity on what exactly they were saying with their argument, but thank you for your input. Orange: You already said you don't trust my sources, so I think for you to give me ones you feel are unbiased is only fair. I mean I do it all the time. Purple: Lol

-2

Anonymous OP 1w

yk that statement contradicts itself right?

1

Anonymous #10 1w

Green: I think it does matter, Saying "treat me as if I was a woman" is VERY different than "I am a woman and should be treated as such". To have a cohesive society where there are to be useful Women's only spaces (Sports Teams, Bathrooms, Homes for abused women, prisons, etc), we need to collectively agree on what a woman is. Yellow: This is objectively true I think Orange: This is confusing to me. At least from how i've been told what it means to be trans, one's physical body/appearance is...

-1

Anonymous stanczyk 1w

... completely separate from determining their gender, as the ONLY factor to one's gender is whatever they say it is. So are you suggesting that gender is at least partially based on characteristics outside of self determination? Either way I think I need some elaboration to understand what exactly it is you are saying.

-1

Anonymous stanczyk 1w

we do collectively agree on what a woman is, it's frankly conservatives like you that have a hard time grasping it. if someone tells you they are a women, then you have no reason to not treat them as such. it also means they have a right to all women spaces, like all the ones you listed. it's literally not that hard to grasp.

6

Anonymous stanczyk 1w

and im not #10 but you are right abt someone's physical appearance doesn't determine their gender but that to be said if someone does present as masculine or feminine, then society will treat them as such. its a very similar concept to POC who are white passing. if you pass as a trans person the harsh reality is that will come with privilege but not every trans person has a desire to pass

4

Anonymous stanczyk 1w

and with this you are just proving your trust issues even more, part of dating is literally taking that risk. you need to trust someone in order to date them. why would you agree to date someone you don't trust? that's why people go on multiple dates with each other before they commit to a relationship/labels. no one (at least they shouldn't) become exclusive after a single date

2

Anonymous #7 1w

Green: What do you mean by "we", I have yet to see a real concrete pro-trans definition put in place that any significantly large group of people agree on. You can also give a definition if you think it would make debate easier. Orange: Sure I do, mainly that their biological reality is independent of their proclaimed gender. For example, I would never fight an FTM like I would a real healthy man because they still have the body of a woman and it would be cruel. Red: This would largely defeat..

0

Anonymous stanczyk 1w

.. the purpose of the majority of women's only spaces which exist as a product of the physical differences between men and women and would drastically reduce the quality of life for women. For example, women's sports exist because outside of maybe endurance swim, women simply cannot compete fairly against men. Homes got abused women are specifically there so real women can take time away from being around males due to trauma. The list is long, but the point is that what you are proposing IS...

2

Anonymous stanczyk 1w

...damaging to the welfair and quality of life of real women.

0

Anonymous #7 1w

Green: I agree with all of this Yellow: I wouldn't if I didn't trust them *enough* The point isn't that i'm looking for a relationship with zero risk, those don't exist, I am just going to avoid ones where it is clear that the risk is obviously too great to be in balance with the potential reward, it's risk management more than avoidance

8

Anonymous stanczyk 1w

so first things first trans women are real women. i'm going to say again. trans women are real women. for the sports thing trans women on hormones don't actually have any differences endurance wise against cis women. only thing might be height but some women are just tall. as for the homes the abused women, trans women are still women should why shouldn't they be allowed if they have been abused? that's only an issue if you don't view trans women as real women. which u clearly don't.

1

Anonymous #7 1w

hence why I said it multiple times. you obviously aren't friends with trans people or else we wouldn't even be having this conversation. a trans women can play sports with other women. being cast as a women in a play or a musical. use the women's restrooms and basically do everything cis women can. the only difference is cis women agree with their assigned gender at birth. i suggest maybe actually befriending a trans person and you would probably have a better understanding.

1

Anonymous #7 1w

the only thing i think a trans woman can't do is give birth. i wouldn't be surprised tho if science advances in a few years to make that a reality

1

Anonymous stanczyk 1w

SHUT THE FUCK UP SHUT THE FUCK UP SHUT THE FUCK UP

4

Anonymous OP 1w

I’m not reading anything else you say.

2

Anonymous stanczyk 1w

If you can’t replicate the simple Google search I did to find my data, you’re stupid. Actually? I don’t really need to qualify that with an if statement. You’re stupid. Go look in a mirror and say it. “I’m stupid.” So you really internalize it. Be a good boy and do that for me, okay?

5

Anonymous #6 1w

Thanks for the award :3

4

Anonymous stanczyk 1w

I’m not sure you’re understanding, I see no difference between those statements. “I am a woman” is far less valuable of a statement to me than just the “I want to be treated as such” part. I believe in treating people how they want to be treated, rather than deciding how to treat them based on the standard for their sex. If that can be considered a “trans ideology” that you disagree with we don’t have much else to talk about.

2

Anonymous #10 1w

You can argue women’s sports should only include cis women, sure whatever, or say bathrooms should be sex based instead. You could consider those points ideological. But the way you treat people on an individual basis and the way you are treated are a far more important aspects of gender than “what bathroom do I use”, and my moral stance there is simply “treat people the way they would like to be treated”.

2

Anonymous #10 1w

I meant “want to pass”, but I think 7 explained it well. Physical appearance affects how people are treated even if I believe it shouldn’t. It does not, however, affect their gender, by either of our definitions.

2

Anonymous stanczyk 1w

I’m not really sure I understand what you mean about there not being a concrete definition, self assigning is far simpler than the way the sex-based definition you use handwaves any exceptions. Trying to specifically include people who don’t fit the normal binary will obviously make definitions more fuzzy, for both gender and sex, and trans inclusive definitions try to do that, where exclusive definitions do not, and people just say “they aren’t a large enough percentage to matter”.

2

Anonymous #7 1d

Alright, 5 days ago I tried to respond to this initially with 2 academic studies showing that males who have gone through hrt for 3 years still retain large advantages in physical ability when compared to females, thus at the very least putting into question your assertion about it being fair. However before I could follow up after running out of space, my comment was taken down and I got a 4 day ban. I made no moral or prescriptive statements, I simply cited studies contradictory to what you...

-2

Anonymous stanczyk 1d

had said, but it appears yik yak did not take kindly to that. The most surprising thing is that I thought it was by far the least controversial thing i've said this far, mostly because studies are objective, but I guess not.

-5

Anonymous stanczyk 1d

Why don’t you suck my estrogenized cock

0

Anonymous OP 1d

lol

0

Anonymous stanczyk 1d

I skimmed it

3

Anonymous stanczyk 1d

yeah bc ur post was transphobic which is discrimination which is against community guidelines. that study was literally only conducted to discriminate against trans athletes. you suck and i wish yik yak had permanently banned u. t

3

Anonymous #7 20h

i'll continue where i left off Yellow: If you read the studies I provided you will see that this is wrong. Orange: There exist other spaces for them(mtf), it's just the type of space that female exclusive abuse shelters provide to women relies on the total absence of male anything to avoid reliving/retriggering trauma and "detoxing" from male presense. We don't need to sacrifice that on the alter of inclusivity as exclusivity is what makes them useful. Red:I already responded to this accusation.

-1

Anonymous stanczyk 19h

Purple: On sports and restrooms, they currently *can* but I think that is something that needs to be changed for the preservation of what makes women's only sports/restrooms useful, being their exclusivity. There are plenty of things trans women can't do that females can, gestate, have natural periods, naturally grow breast, etc. Cyan: See above, doing so has only reaffirmed my thoughts as they all behave more in line with the gender associated with their sex than their declared gender.

0

Anonymous stanczyk 19h

...Maybe it's selection bias with the specific trans people i have been/are friends with (2-ftm, 3-mtf, and 1-nb over the past 6 years) universally affirming my beliefs by their actions, temperments, personalities (obviously I didn't share this with them).

1

Anonymous #10 18h

Cyan: I disagree, wants are not something that must be honored (though doing so is a fine thing to do so far as it does not negatively affect others or the want is unreasonable) whilest ones gender comes with associated rights and privileges exclusive to said gender, meaning the former statement contains many more and greater demands than the latter. Green: Fair Yellow: The "ideology" i was refering to was specificly the belief in self determined gender and its implications, and since you seem..

-1

Anonymous stanczyk 18h

Bro just shut up

6

Anonymous stanczyk 18h

...unwilling to defend or argue for your beliefs, i agree there is little more to say on the matter of gender determination and bring trans specifically. Orange: Thanks for not telling me to kill myself and acknowledging my (and many others') concerns on these matters. Red: I agree, though the latter isn't unimportant. Purple: Fair

-2

Anonymous stanczyk 18h

I don’t understand what you mean by the yellow bit. I am telling you we have a difference of definitions, not a difference of belief system, and that is why our statements clash. I’m not arguing my point using your definitions simply because it wouldn’t make any sense. If we find something better to agree on the definition of, such as gender expression, instead of the ever-controversial absolute idea of gender, then there is no ideology to argue.

1

Anonymous stanczyk 18h

to go back to cyan, I don’t see why gender should cone with associated rights and privileges. It certainly *does* in our current patriarchal society, but I don’t see any inherent reason why we *should* have a difference in rights between genders or sexes for any reason, besides obvious healthcare related needs. Showing masculinity and femininity both fall well outside anything that I would consider an inherent sex/gender related privilege.

1

Anonymous #10 17h

Green: Yes, granted I generally treat people based on who they are/may be with exceptions to avoid conflict. Yellow: I think #7 and OP would agree, though #7 blocked me and OP is unlikely to genuinely respond to anything I say so I wouldnt be able to tell. Orange: I am looking for an objective and universal definition that does not rely upon the feelings or beliefs of individuals to exist. Red: Simple but useless, and I didn't handwave anything, I can answer specific questions if you have any.

4

Anonymous stanczyk 17h

What do you mean that they “affirmed your beliefs”? You went “yeah this person definitely is just a mentally ill woman instead of a guy”? I don’t understand why you would still want to be friends with any trans people based on what you’ve said so far. To me it sounded like you think trans people are somehow trying to take privileges that aren’t theirs, and I don’t really get how that worldview allows for a remotely close relationship

1

Anonymous #10 17h

Read paglia

1

Anonymous stanczyk 17h

Purple: Saying the only thing that matters is what someone says about their own gender does far more "fuzzy-ing" to gender than the biological determination of gender. Also I never said sex only exist in a bianary. Blue/Cyan: I need an objective definition to respond to this Pink: I at least never said that.

2

Anonymous #10 17h

If you explain your definitions I can argue using them/argue why they are not useful. I'm saying I agree when it comes to debating absolute gender since you don't seem to care, but there is still room for conversation around the way people should be treated and gender expression I guess (though I don't think i've went into this at all yet)

-1

Anonymous #10 17h

Green: Women have sex/gender exclusive sports divisions because they are naturally weaker than men, Bathrooms are separated for similar reasons. Women have maternity leave because gestation, childbirth, and parenthood are hard. Women are not discriminated against as much for being emotionally vulnerable because of male only responsibilities/expectations and womens natural temperaments making them more prone to anxiety/depression/etc. Men are privileged by biology to be less reliant on our...

-1

Anonymous stanczyk 17h

...looks to be found attractive to the opposite sex as women place more value on the capacity/capabilities of men than our looks because women naturally care more about being reliably provided. Inversely women do not need to be as particularly outstanding academically, professionally, or tempermentally since men tend to find most women too be more physically attractive than women find most men to be physically attractive because women are generally not expected to provide in a relationship.

-1

Anonymous stanczyk 17h

Yellow: There isn't inherent reason as the reasoning for their existence is based on the beneficial outcomes from their institution, not anything abstract. Orange: I agree

0

Anonymous stanczyk 17h

King crimson is pretty cool

1

Anonymous #10 17h

Cyan: The way they behaved and their temperaments were better and more logically explained and foreseen by the logical and social frameworks I believe than the frameworks layed out by both themselves and others. Green: Yep, they all had exceptionally long lists of co-morbidities which made being mentally ill a measurable fact. Yellow: Generally, they were fun to play games with. Orange: Many are, but not all are. Red: The friendships were not close....

0

Anonymous stanczyk 16h

... There was one exception of one FtM turned DID clusterfuck of identity which I talked to online often a couple years ago. I did so primarily out of curiosity to hear how they viewed the world and the problems they face and a desire to see their life improved. Eventually the degenerate porn addicted gooner part of their personality (something all but one of all trans people I have ever known shared) made it damn near impossible to continue having good and chill conversation, so I ghosted them.

1

Anonymous stanczyk 16h

This one I’m happy to have read, your friend sounds fun

1

Anonymous stanczyk 16h

I’m not sure I understand what you’re arguing anymore. Medical things can obviously depend on sex. Bathrooms and sports are unimportant for this discussion in my eyes. The original discussion was about presenting masculinity and femininity, and you held the standpoint that males *should* be more masculine for some reason, that masculinity is a good thing for men, and vice versa. Trans people got dragged into it as counter examples, but I’m not understanding your stance on masculinity here.

1

Anonymous OP 16h

They were fun to talk to before they started making every conversation about having DID or smut/sex, I hope they are doing better but I doubt it.

0

Anonymous #10 16h

Cyan: I'm just explaining where I think people are wrong in their assertions and what I think is right in order to challenge peoples beliefs, invite introspection, and to humanize people who agree with me by showing that we don't think the way we do out of simple hate or spite. I feel I explained myself pretty thuroughly so if you want more explanations, ask a specific question to what you do not understand. Yellow: Then other people kept on mentioning new things so the topic shifted.

0

Anonymous stanczyk 16h

Orange: Because it makes men more useful. Red: It's good for everyone when men are properly. Green: It was when #7 said my rhetoric on masculinity was transphobic.

0

Anonymous stanczyk 15h

okay, that’s what I’m disputing, besides the transphobia. Men have no duty to be more “useful” than women. that may be traditional in our patriarchal society, but it is not inherent to sex or gender.

1

Anonymous #10 10h

Just jumping in here: it’s not about being more useful than women, it’s about men becoming more useful themselves.

1

Anonymous #12 9h

You can’t concede that men are at least a little different than women and not admit that those differences lead to different worldviews and abilities - some as small as having longer limbs or being more likely to reach the top shelf. Men are almost all serious violent and sexual offenders so there’s at least something there - I don’t think you can deny that at least.

1

Anonymous #12 9h

Men and women aren’t that different, but the people who make the most difference are exceptional. When you look at distributions of male and female attributes, they mostly overlap - but notably the ends of each distribution have zero overlap. This means that the “most male” and “most female” people are nothing like the other sex. Those people are exceptional; they are the people who end up in prisons, mental hospitals etc.

1

Anonymous #12 7h

oh yeah I agree there, I think having differences between people is usually good, we don’t all need to be the same. I just mean that a tall strong man isn’t inherently more useful than a tall strong woman, or a short man who can cook and sew. Cooking, sewing, and being tall and strong are all useful regardless of the gender of the person

1