TERFs crash London Pride

Yeah. I do think it's interesting to explore the range of motivations and how-stuff-happened-and-evolved-socially of various Stuff We Do To Be Womanly Or Manly. And it's true any number of Womanly stuffs that many consider Timeless Essentials are recent arrivals Created To Get Money and initially completely Driven By Advertising.

BUT.

You can't just say that enjoying your freshly shaved lady legs means you're participating in your capitalist subjugation and patriarchal objectification. Where it came from and the kinds of values that made it popular are not actually the whole entire picture.

'Participating in your own subjugation' type **** only comes in where you're given **** for NOT doing it and that's why you do it. Sure, ok. People shouldn't have to conform to whatever just to not get crapped on all the time. Doing things to play along for reasons like that is not fun or healthy.

But doing it cause you LIKE it? Some other chucklefuck saying 'you're so gross if you don't shave your legs' does not rob you of your own damn agency to be able to like your own smooth legs for your own reasons.

Being so influenced by society that you've internalized liking shaving your legs? Ok sure but that's an inescapable caveat of society and I'm not gonna die on that hill. I feel like a little genuine introspection is plenty on issues like that. "I feel bad about womanly stuff cause the media so often portrays it as stupid, and I'd like to see womanly stuff shown in a way that invites respect and awesomeness" I can get behind. "You only want to look pretty because society tells you you have to" is more like a useless truism.

"Respect ugly women and also pretty women" is really what I'd rather hitch my train up to.
 
Lithrael said:
The one in red is. She looks like any number of badass ladies I've known.

OK I think one of the things that is bugging me about all this is the old gendered double standard that, since at least the 1970's, it's more or less OK for anyone to act more like a stereotypical man because 'men's' mannerisms etc are 'really the default and better' ones.

If you're a man acting more like a man's man makes you heroic and awesome. If you're a woman acting like a man's man just means ladies telling you you aren't going to attract a man like that, and fundies telling you you're screwing up the social order, quit it.

But anyone that wants to act more like a stereotypical woman is degrading themselves, because 'women's' mannerisms are stupid. If you're a woman acting like a woman's woman, well for starters the connotation isn't that you're kicking ass at being a mom or something positive like that, but rather that you're doing that stuff JJ just said, all the negative and being-a-pain-in-the-ass stereotypes. And if you're a man acting like a woman, whoa Nelly, everyone is instantly UP IN YOUR ****. WHAT ARE YOU DOING.

I could make a detailed and pointed argument here but instead I'm going to say I want this whole concept to just **** off. I think men wanting to do cool woman stuff that they enjoy is ******* great. Just like women wanting to do cool woman stuff that they enjoy if great. And if we could get ******* comfortable with that, trans folks could get the curb-cut effect out of the whole deal.

That and, photos like that just remind me of lineups of older ladies meetups where one or two are lookin really smokin and the rest are a little bit frumpy or just comfortably not trying to look amazing. It BUGS ME to see photos like that of 'hi we're all together and friends!' of ANYBODY, posted up for judgement. I know this one is for a finishing school for trans women etc. I don't care. And if these folks are too pretty or too frumpy or too feminine-performative or their hair/wigs look funny then all that applies to the women in all those old-friends-reunion photos. Knock it off, they're PEOPLE.
Click to expand...

Lithrael said:
Yeah. I do think it's interesting to explore the range of motivations and how-stuff-happened-and-evolved-socially of various Stuff We Do To Be Womanly Or Manly. And it's true any number of Womanly stuffs that many consider Timeless Essentials are recent arrivals Created To Get Money and initially completely Driven By Advertising.

BUT.

You can't just say that enjoying your freshly shaved lady legs means you're participating in your capitalist subjugation and patriarchal objectification. Where it came from and the kinds of values that made it popular are not actually the whole entire picture.

'Participating in your own subjugation' type **** only comes in where you're given **** for NOT doing it and that's why you do it. Sure, ok. People shouldn't have to conform to whatever just to not get crapped on all the time. Doing things to play along for reasons like that is not fun or healthy.

But doing it cause you LIKE it? Some other *********** saying 'you're so gross if you don't shave your legs' does not rob you of your own damn agency to be able to like your own smooth legs for your own reasons.

Being so influenced by society that you've internalized liking shaving your legs? Ok sure but that's an inescapable caveat of society and I'm not gonna die on that hill. I feel like a little genuine introspection is plenty on issues like that. "I feel bad about womanly stuff cause the media so often portrays it as stupid, and I'd like to see womanly stuff shown in a way that invites respect and awesomeness" I can get behind. "You only want to look pretty because society tells you you have to" is more like a useless truism.

"Respect ugly women and also pretty women" is really what I'd rather hitch my train up to.
Click to expand...

Very, very well said!

For what that support means coming from a long haired cishet guy who shaves his body 'like a woman' too. :P
 
pharphis said:
I don't see how any of those things "signal their inferior social status". Seems totally made up.
You think women put on makeup or wear dresses or heels to "signal their inferior social status" ?

edit: any time a woman has spoken about why they do these things to me it has been some combination of the below reasons:
1) To look/feel good for themselves
2) To look good for others
3) To look good around other women who they perceive as more judgmental

Basically I think you have the reasoning all mixed up in your head as to why people actually do these things and what they're signalling with oppression olympics ideology.
Click to expand...

Why do you think it is that men tend not to wear high heels when they could feel so good for themselves if they did?
 
JihadJane said:
Why do you think it is that men tend not to wear high heels when they could feel so good for themselves if they did?
Click to expand...

The vibe I get is that the only way to be a proper, empowered woman is to reject razors, make-up and pretty clothes, to sit with your legs apart in a nice, dominant, masculine way (Newsflash: Men have bollocks.), no heels, probably best to have really, really short hair, just so nobody thinks one is confirming to forced, male standards of feminine beauty and to generally act like a man.

Am I a raving bigot for liking ladies that don't act like men?
 
3point14 said:
The vibe I get is that the only way to be a proper, empowered woman is to reject razors, make-up and pretty clothes, to sit with your legs apart in a nice, dominant, masculine way (Newsflash: Men have bollocks.), no heels, probably best to have really, really short hair, just so nobody thinks one is confirming to forced, male standards of feminine beauty and to generally act like a man.
Click to expand...

Where on earth do you get that vibe from? Also:
Dude, if your balls stop you sitting with your legs together, you really should get them looked at by a medical professional :eek:
 
Guybrush Threepwood said:
Where on earth do you get that vibe from?
Click to expand...

Post 894


Also:
Dude, if your balls stop you sitting with your legs together, you really should get them looked at by a medical professional :eek:
Click to expand...

How old are you? - Seriously, dude, things move as you get older, when the weather changes and for all sorts of other reasons, particularly in the heat. There's a reason they're kept outside the body.
 
Last edited:
3point14 said:
The vibe I get is that the only way to be a proper, empowered woman is to reject razors, make-up and pretty clothes, to sit with your legs apart in a nice, dominant, masculine way (Newsflash: Men have bollocks.), no heels, probably best to have really, really short hair, just so nobody thinks one is confirming to forced, male standards of feminine beauty and to generally act like a man.

Am I a raving bigot for liking ladies that don't act like men?
Click to expand...

You didn't answer her question.

Will you answer it before expecting her to answer yours?

This one, the one you quoted:

Why do you think it is that men tend not to wear high heels when they could feel so good for themselves if they did?
Click to expand...
 
kellyb said:
You're again just dogmatically asserting what you wish to be the only true and real definitions of the words "man" and "woman", when you're well aware of the fact that other people use those words in ways that have a meaning outside of biological sex.
Click to expand...

If one does not believe that women's oppression is based on their biology (their reproductive function) then making men a sub-group of women is not problematic.



Are you sure? In which countries according to which laws and statutes?

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17521483.2017.1320037?src=recsys&journalCode=rlah20
Click to expand...

Here's how the law works in the in the UK:

How Legislation Protects Women-Only Spaces – New Legal Briefing
 
kellyb said:
You didn't answer her question.

Will you answer it before expecting her to answer yours?

This one, the one you quoted:
Click to expand...


I'd answer but I don't know. I can speculate. I get the feeling that somehow I'm expected to know the answer but I don't.

I can guess:

Women are, generally, shorter.


Is the implication here that heels are part of the male societal domination of women?

If so, I'm back to 'should women act like men because to act like (we believe) women should act is to bow to male suppression.

As someone mentioned above, is the base state of being to act like a male and women are forced into acting like women not due to biology but due to being forced to act that way by men?


I think that's a hell of a hypothesis. I'd be intrigued to see any reasonable, well conducted, impartial studies on the matter.
 
3point14 said:
Post 894




How old are you? - Seriously, dude, things move as you get older, when the weather changes and for all sorts of other reasons, particularly in the heat. There's a reason they're kept outside the body.
Click to expand...

If you're worried about your bollocks overheating, wear a mini skirt (preferably without underwear). As a bonus, it'll make you feel good about yourself, too!
 
JihadJane said:
If one does not believe that women's oppression is based on their biology (their reproductive function) then making men a sub-group of women is not problematic.
Click to expand...

I believe that the origins of human female oppression absolutely do, at least in large part, lie in reproductive function. So?
 
JihadJane said:
If you're worried about your bollocks overheating,
Click to expand...

I'm not. They're kept outside my body for just that reason. It just means that, sometimes, I need to keep my legs a little further apart than you do because there's delicate stuff inbetween them.

wear a mini skirt (preferably without underwear). As a bonus, it'll make you feel good about yourself, too!
Click to expand...

With these legs? You have to be joking. I've seen Trinny and Susannah, with these legs I need below the knee at least.
 
Darat said:
Woman in terms of legislation is as defined by that legislation or by legal precedent, ...
Click to expand...

Do you have any examples of such definitions?

...there is no sacred definition of woman so it can be changed by society at any time. And of course such things do change, for example being a married woman these days doesn't mean the woman loses most of her rights etc. (See coverture - that was the traditional definition in law of a married woman in the likes of England, thank goodness married woman no longer means that.)
Click to expand...

Who's appealing to the sacred?

Male and female are biological, physical categories.

Married women, with or without rights, are still women. Their sex remains unchanged.
 
3point14 said:
I'd answer but I don't know. I can speculate. I get the feeling that somehow I'm expected to know the answer but I don't.

I can guess:

Women are, generally, shorter.


Is the implication here that heels are part of the male societal domination of women?

If so, I'm back to 'should women act like men because to act like (we believe) women should act is to bow to male suppression.

As someone mentioned above, is the base state of being to act like a male and women are forced into acting like women not due to biology but due to being forced to act that way by men?


I think that's a hell of a hypothesis. I'd be intrigued to see any reasonable, well conducted, impartial studies on the matter.
Click to expand...
I don't know the answer for sure, and I wasn't expecting you to know. I just found it rude to quote a question without attempting to answer it and then move on to another question of your own.
Personally, I suspect heels and most of the other gender-stereotype physical adornments expected of women have to do with the expectation that we'll "play up" attributes men find sexually attractive, and in the case of heels, it has to do with the posture encouraged by heels (butt and chest protruding in a slightly sexually suggestive way.)

is the base state of being to act like a male and women are forced into acting like women not due to biology but due to being forced to act that way by men?
Click to expand...

A lot of times, yeah, almost, although not forced by men, necessarily, but by patriarchy, which is perpetuated by women just as much as by men, as far as I can tell. (I know a lot of people are allergic to the P-word, but I'm fairly confident that if aliens came and visited us, they'd classify bonobos as a matriarchal species, and humans as a patriarchal one.)
 
Last edited:
JihadJane said:
Male and female are biological, physical categories.

Married women, with or without rights, are still women. Their sex remains unchanged.
Click to expand...

You're just baking in an unspoken assertion there about what you see as the "true" definition of the word woman, again.
 
kellyb said:
I don't know the answer for sure, and I wasn't expecting you to know. I just found it rude to quote a question without attempting to answer it and then move on to another question of your own.
Personally, I suspect heels and most of the other gender-stereotype physical adornments expected of women have to do with the expectation that we'll "play up" attributes men find sexually attractive, and in the case of heels, it has to do with the posture encouraged by heels (butt and chest protruding in a slightly sexually suggestive way.)
Click to expand...

Like Chinese foot binding, high heels are physically debilitating and crippling. They are painful and physically damaging to wear and stop women running away, so they are literally disempowering.


One might also ask why so many women being abused in mainstream porn wear high heels and nothing else. Why do men find this sexually arousing? What is this footwear signifying in this context?
 
kellyb said:
You're just baking in an unspoken assertion there about what you see as the "true" definition of the word woman, again.
Click to expand...

Nature makes that assertion, not me. Men and women (and other animals) are differentiated sexually according to their biological, reproductive function. One produces sperm. The other carries eggs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom