FtttG
User ID: 1175
FtttG
2hr ago
True. I can't imagine the reverend would have been an enthusiastic supporter of gay marriage or trans rights.
Based Afroman. He should file a civil suit for them to compensate him for the damage to his property.
FtttG
4hr ago
No, they also have testicles rather than ovaries; all other biological differences are downstream of the hormones produced by these organs, hence 'sequelae'.
Right: in other words, "sex". I don't propose discriminating on the basis of genitals; I propose discriminating on the basis of sex (in certain contexts). Why then do you insist on using the extremely long-winded phrase "genitals and their sequelae" when the word "sex" would capture exactly the same distinction?
Oh, right. Because gender ideology is such a nonsensical and incoherent worldview that you can't defend it on its own merits, and have to resort to underhanded tactics like implying that anyone who disagrees with it is a sex pest.
FtttG
4hr ago
Yeah, I'm not surprised it's blocked. What's surprising is some of the sites which aren't blocked.
And how do you think a trans-woman might feel, when people characterise her identity in such a manner?
If someone is loudly parading their perversion around for all and sundry to see, it's not wrong for me to accurately characterise it as such. Rather, you demanding that I refuse to recognise that the Emperor has no clothes (something which is obvious to everyone, including you) amounts to gaslighting.
Woman: Getting changed in front of a male person makes me uncomfortable and I don't think I should be expected to do it.
Trans-identified male: When I put on women's underwear, I become physically aroused experience gender euphoria.
Celestial-body-NOS: Oh my God, I can't tell the difference – they're exactly as sexually deviant as each other!
Likewise, plenty of trans women just do look ridiculous. Maybe you think it's not polite to point it out, but I know you think it. Don't tell me you look at this person and think to yourself "wow, what a hot sexy lady! I would love to take a gander at those bizarre prosthetics she's wearing under her top!"
The pro-trans side was not the first to use that particular tactic.
To reiterate what I said above: many trans women barely even pretend to hide that their "identification" is just acting out a sexual fetish. You can do this "tu quoque" shit all you like: doesn't mean it's equally true of both sides. Women who want to protect their intimate spaces are not exactly as perverted as gross fetishists who are openly, proudly addicted to sissy hypno porn and hold conferences on how to "overcome the cotton ceiling". In fact, the former group isn't perverted at all.
We can quickly sense-check this by looking at the two groups' stated demands. If, as you imply, gender-critical people's obsession with trans people's genitals is borne of sexual deviance, it sure is weird that they're demanding that trans people not expose said genitals to female people. Is this how we talk about any other kind of kink or sexual fixation? Do people with foot fetishes explicitly object to people walking around barefoot? Do men with a fixation on women's arses generally object to strange women baring their arses in front of them? Gender-critical people are not obsessed with trans people's genitals because it turns them on: they know what's in a trans-identified man's pants and have no desire to see it for themselves.
Meanwhile, trans activists are demanding a) the right to expose their genitals to female people who have made it abundantly clear this behaviour makes them uncomfortable, and that b) female people get undressed in front of them, even if doing so makes them uncomfortable. In other words, on the basis of a claimed, unfalsifiable mental state, trans activists want a special dispensation to commit an act which would otherwise be considered indecent exposure. Call the female people who object to this hateful bigots all you like – we both know which of these two groups it's more appropriate to level the accusation of sexual deviance against.
I have re-read the linked posts and have not found anywhere where I have claimed that you refuse to tell us why you think you're entitled to know about the genitals of complete strangers
A transparent lie. You said:
thus allowing them to make the assertion that other people's genitalia are any of their business without being seen to make said assertion, and avoid anyone asking why they are concerned with other people's anatomy.
No gender-critical person I've ever met or interacted with (and there have been plenty) has ever been the least bit shy about telling me why they disagree with gender ideology, and why they don't want to share intimate spaces with male people. But for some reason you insist that gender-critical people have some secret ulterior motive for wanting to know strangers' sexes which they're refusing to disclose. It's bizarre. I genuinely don't know how you arrived at this conclusion.
If you walk into your manager's office and you're like "I want to see all my cow-orkers' complete medical charts, which will help me make Bayesian inferences on which ones are most likely to go postal, so I can shun them.", how amenable do you think your manager will be to your request?
If you really, honest to goodness, think that I need to see someone's full medical history in order to accurately tell whether they are male or female, I really don't know how we're expected to proceed with this conversation. Are you blind? Are you composing these comments using text-to-speech?
As an aside: I pointed out to you last time that some other aspects of a person's medical history simply can be inferred just by looking at them. If you're obese, myopic or using a motorised wheelchair, it's meaningless to complain that your right to medical privacy has been violated when people notice this just from looking at you. Likewise, certain mental illnesses. If I get on a train and there's a homeless person who obviously hasn't bathed in days and is loudly talking to himself, you're damn right I'm going to infer that he's probably psychotic and try to stay out of his way on that basis. I'd hazard a guess that you'd do the same.
In your worldview, is this behaviour "ableist"? I would prefer to characterise it as "capable of basic self-preservation".
FtttG
13hr ago
Well, I explicitly said "When I talk about "wokeness...". I'm aware that other people use the word in a different way, sometimes in a manner indistinguishable from how their parents would derisively call things "liberal". But I think my usage is closer to the standard usage than that one.
I don't know why but three leading much likes for three by three analogous statements pleases my brainstem.
What?
Thanks for the link, this was morbidly fascinating. All that looksmaxxing wasn't for naught: he is a fairly handsome dude. I would've thought being that handsome was incompatible with being a lolcow, but apparently not.
Freddie deBoer advanced the theory that Clavicular might be a profoundly closeted gay man, and nothing in that thread contradicts that theory. It's almost like he's so in denial about his sexuality that he's decided to perform an exaggerated parody of what he thinks a macho man behaves like (casually racist, drives a big stupid truck for no reason, says appalling things to and about women, drinks too much, reacts violently to perceived slights etc.). It's sad. I hope he gets out of the streaming game and finds something more fulfilling to do with his time.
I'm really sick of you trying to make me (and other gender-critical people) sound ridiculous and/or perverted by characterising my opinion as "discrimination on the basis of genitals" or similar. "Sex" is not reducible to genitals. Male bodies are not just female bodies which incidentally happen to have penises bolted on. Even trans-identified males who have undergone bottom surgery retain male patterns of violent crime.
"FtttG thinks sex-segregation is reasonable in certain contexts" is a perfectly acceptable gloss of my opinion on this matter which I wouldn't object to. "FtttG thinks he's entitled to know about the genitals of complete strangers, but refuses to tell us why!!" is both a flat lie (I have been more than willing to articulate my reasoning) and a transparent effort to imply that anyone who isn't maximally trans-affirming is a sexual deviant. It's cheap, obnoxious and contemptible behaviour. Knock it off.
FtttG
19hr ago
This strikes me as a bit of a weaselly definition. The Catholic Church is institutionally opposed to abortion, homosexuality and divorce. Women cannot be ordained as priests. People have been characterised as "far-right" for much less.
How many priests are Right Wing Icons?
John Paul II, for one.
FtttG
20hr ago
I think I'm gesturing off in the direction of "right wingers tend not to elevate rapists and pedos as leaders, and are certainly NOT prone to censoring or rewriting history to cover up such traits in their leaders."
Have you heard of this little organisation called the Catholic Church?
FtttG
1d ago
What fucking guy is the unlikely combination of hot enough to get a woman to go on a date with him, romantically frustrated enough to engage in Man-o-Sphere content, AND clueless enough to talk judgy redpill lingo about bodycount and hypergamy to the woman he's on a date with?
You rang?
I jest: I've never watched any manosphere or Andrew Tate content, much less paid for it. But back when I was single, I believe I went on dates with girls in which I would bring up adjacent concepts like hypergamy or sexual market value. I think for some of them it scanned as so outrageous as to make me seem daring and iconoclastic, and hence more attractive.
FtttG
1d ago
Thanks, I'll check this out this evening. KiwiFarms is blocked on my work's WiFi, lol.
I'd heard the name Clavicular mentioned before, but this comment prompted me to read his Wikipedia article. Obviously Wikipedia is a profoundly biased source with every incentive to make him sound as bad as possible, but if half of the content of this article is true, good Lord is this one dysfunctional individual. He started shooting himself up with testosterone at the age of 14, which he has so thoroughly abused as to render himself infertile at the age of 20? He takes crystal meth to suppress his appetite so as not to gain weight? Jesus Christ. Further evidence for the theory that people who devote their lives to streaming every waking minute are fundamentally unhealthy people. No healthy person would choose to live their life in such a way. I genuinely regret reading that article, it legitimately made me feel depressed. What would possess someone to do this to themselves?
I also notice a weird cultural symmetry in his apparent endorsement of taking testosterone to the point of infertility. Is this really the choice facing Gen Z boys?
When I talk about "wokeness", I'm referring to a worldview and set of tactics as described in, for example, Freddie deBoer's canonical article on the topic:
- Explicit endorsement of standpoint epistemology.
- Social destruction for petty ideological infractions, resulting in circular firing squads.
- Ideological infractions couched in abstruse vocabulary impenetrable to those not in the know.
- A fundamental failure to understand the is-ought distinction.
- A worldview which, taken to its logical conclusions, implies that "everything is problematic" and "almost everyone you encounter in contemporary society is a bad person".
- A fatalistic belief that the problems facing our society are so deeply entrenched as to be essentially impervious to resolution or amelioration: political Calvinism.
- A corollary to the previous point is that woke people react with hostility to the suggestion that certain of their pet issues have been meaningfully improved or ameliorated.
- An obsessive fixation on linguistic minutiae ("people experiencing unhousedness" vs. "homeless people") over issues of material, practical significance.
I am not referring to the existence of male people who wear women's clothes, or people who live in small towns who dress in a peculiar fashion and listen to Bladee.
I think when most people express a sentiment like "wokeness is dead", they mean that the ideas and tactics associated with the woke memeplex have much less cachet and influence than they did at their peak (2014-2022). I don't think they mean "no one wears cross-sex clothes anymore". A minority of people have been wearing cross-sex clothing for centuries before the word "woke" was even coined. So I truthfully don't understand the connection between the statements "wokeness isn't dead – here are a bunch of people who dress oddly". They seem completely uncorrelated to me. I'd even hazard a guess that plenty of these so-called "dinergoths" are not meaningfully "woke" in an ideological sense.
FtttG
1d ago
This comes just one day after Clavicular's recent clip with Leela Saraswat went viral.
As an aside: wow, she is gorgeous.
FtttG
1d ago
I'm not even making fun of you, I'm just amazed that you even attempted it without. I think I physically could not run more than 10 km (~6.2 miles) without drinking a lot of water. If I tried running a half-marathon without water I'm sure I'd just collapse.
FtttG
1d ago
I don't sweat nearly as much during strength training as I do during cardio, but I still get very thirsty very quickly.
FtttG
1d ago
So more than a half-marathon? And you used to run that without drinking any water on the way?
FtttG
1d ago
How long was your run on Saturday?
My water bottle is 750-1000ml and I will always refill it at least once during a gym session, even if I'm only doing strength training and no cardio. I can't even imagine trying to exercise without drinking lots of water.
FtttG
2d ago
For what it's worth, I agree that characterising a man who only sees you as a fuckbuddy as "emotionally avoidant" could be a very effective cope to avoid confronting that he's just not that into you. But just because a term is misused doesn't mean that its real meaning is vacuous. Some people even characterise themselves as emotionally avoidant.
New year's resolutions check-in:
- Posted my seventh blog post of the year on Sunday, about attachment styles and infant mortality. Cross-posted here.
- Went to the gym twice last week. After writing the aforementioned blog post, I changed into my gym gear and was about to leave for the gym when my girlfriend pointed out that it closes at 7:30 on Sundays. Aghast: last week was the first week of the year I didn't go to the gym at least three times. To compensate, I'm going to go four times this week (and it must be this week: I'm not going to kick the can down the round indefinitely). Can deadlift 1.8x my bodyweight for 3 reps, squat 1.03x for 5 reps and bench press .85x for 6 reps.
- Have not consumed any pornography since waking up on January 1st.
- Have completed 10/11 modules in the SQL course. Planning to do the eleventh today.
How goes it, @thejdizzler, @birb_cromble, @falling-star and @Tollund_Man4?
In other words: it's a hip-hop diss track.
More options
Context Copy link