Should single men have right to exploit women's bodies?

[Galloism]

Except you and Chess (although I'm guessing this is another one of her puppet accounts)

Wrong.
And there isn't just only me and Equaliaria, two different users, there are even some others, but they aren't comfortable posting here...

basically say that women cannot be trusted to make their own decisions about their own bodies and so "enlightened" (a term that I am using liberally here) "feminists" (ditto) such as yourself are here to show them what "true equality" is.

You use the word "agency" in a misleading way.
Everybody have "agency", always, even slaves have "agency": they can choose, keep being slaves or a rebellion or trying to escape or commiting suicide. They have four different options.
This isn't about "agency", indeed, this is about balancement of power.

Slaves do not have full agency. Their agency is severely restricted because they can be physically punished for making a choice that's not in agreement with their overlord, including by imprisonment, beatings, denial of food, and other forms of tangible physical harm.

In the west at least, women do not face such things for becoming/refusing to become a surrogate, any more than men face such things for refusing to become a coal miner.

[Galloism]

Wrong.
And there isn't just only me and Equaliaria, two different users, there are even some others, but they aren't comfortable posting here...



You use the word "agency" in a misleading way.
Everybody have "agency", always, even slaves have "agency": they can choose, keep being slaves or a rebellion or trying to escape or commiting suicide. They have four different options.
This isn't about "agency", indeed, this is about balancement of power.

Then I'll use my agency to dress up in revealing clothing, flirt, go to clubs, and watch porn.

As a side note, on the subject of porn, a lot more women watch porn now than in years past, and most of them watch it by themselves for their own sexual gratification. Also a fun fact: when women search for porn, it's usually more hardcore stuff (BDSM, group sex, rough sex, etc).

It's almost as if women are becoming more comfortable with sexuality.

That is SFW.

[Liriena]

So... surrogacy?

I don't really have a strong opinion either way when it comes to commercial surrogacy, although I have my concerns, and if you suscribe to the idea that selling one's own body is the ultimate exploitation, it doesn't get much worse for you than that.

With that said, I lean towards allowing women to act as surrogates if they truly want to.

[Costa Fierro]

Wrong.

Meh, two sides of the same coin really.

And there isn't just only me and Equaliaria, two different users, there are even some others, but they aren't comfortable posting here...

Because they wouldn't last five minutes if they even attempted to spread their misandrist and misogynist poison here.

You use the word "agency" in a misleading way.

No. I use agency which I interpret as "personal sovereignty".

Everybody have "agency", always, even slaves have "agency": they can choose, keep being slaves or a rebellion or trying to escape or commiting suicide. They have four different options.

Someone clearly knows nothing about slavery.

This isn't about "agency", indeed, this is about balancement of power.

Actually it's more about you wishing to exert your "power" over others in a manner you think men do. That's some Freudian penis envy right there.

[Galloism]

So... surrogacy?

I don't really have a strong opinion either way when it comes to commercial surrogacy, although I have my concerns, and if you suscribe to the idea that selling one's own body is the ultimate exploitation, it doesn't get much worse for you than that.

With that said, I lean towards allowing women to act as surrogates if they truly want to.

I mean, basically you said capitalism is the ultimate exploitation.

I'm not sure I'd go that far.

[Costa Fierro]

So... surrogacy?

I don't really have a strong opinion either way when it comes to commercial surrogacy, although I have my concerns, and if you suscribe to the idea that selling one's own body is the ultimate exploitation, it doesn't get much worse for you than that.

With that said, I lean towards allowing women to act as surrogates if they truly want to.

That's a fairly moralistic approach, given the basics of using someone's body for a purpose is no different to a coal miner whose body is being used to perform manual labour.

That's what I don't get about the moralistic approach to things like prostitution: outside of a legal contract, what is the difference between hiring a person's body for sex and hiring a person's body for manual labour? Both involve an exchange of currency for the use of a person's body.

[Liriena]

So... surrogacy?

I don't really have a strong opinion either way when it comes to commercial surrogacy, although I have my concerns, and if you suscribe to the idea that selling one's own body is the ultimate exploitation, it doesn't get much worse for you than that.

With that said, I lean towards allowing women to act as surrogates if they truly want to.

That's a fairly moralistic approach, given the basics of using someone's body for a purpose is no different to a coal miner whose body is being used to perform manual labour.

That's what I don't get about the moralistic approach to things like prostitution: outside of a legal contract, what is the difference between hiring a person's body for sex and hiring a person's body for manual labour? Both involve an exchange of currency for the use of a person's body.

So... surrogacy?

I don't really have a strong opinion either way when it comes to commercial surrogacy, although I have my concerns, and if you suscribe to the idea that selling one's own body is the ultimate exploitation, it doesn't get much worse for you than that.

With that said, I lean towards allowing women to act as surrogates if they truly want to.

I mean, basically you said capitalism is the ultimate exploitation.

I'm not sure I'd go that far.

Not disagreeing with either of you. I support legalized prostitution, and if women can have control over their own bodies when it comes to that, as well as abortion, it's only fair that they can also have control over whether they act as surrogates.

[Frenline Delpha]

Then I'll use my agency to dress up in revealing clothing, flirt, go to clubs, and watch porn.

As a side note, on the subject of porn, a lot more women watch porn now than in years past, and most of them watch it by themselves for their own sexual gratification. Also a fun fact: when women search for porn, it's usually more hardcore stuff (BDSM, group sex, rough sex, etc).

It's almost as if women are becoming more comfortable with sexuality.

That is SFW.

To be fair, not all BDSM is hardcore. But I think that's enough of that tangent.

[Lady Scylla]

Then I'll use my agency to dress up in revealing clothing, flirt, go to clubs, and watch porn.

As a side note, on the subject of porn, a lot more women watch porn now than in years past, and most of them watch it by themselves for their own sexual gratification. Also a fun fact: when women search for porn, it's usually more hardcore stuff (BDSM, group sex, rough sex, etc).

It's almost as if women are becoming more comfortable with sexuality.

That is SFW.

Don't disagree with any of that.

[New haven america]

Wrong.
And there isn't just only me and Equaliaria, two different users, there are even some others, but they aren't comfortable posting here...



You use the word "agency" in a misleading way.
Everybody have "agency", always, even slaves have "agency": they can choose, keep being slaves or a rebellion or trying to escape or commiting suicide. They have four different options.
This isn't about "agency", indeed, this is about balancement of power.

Then I'll use my agency to dress up in revealing clothing, flirt, go to clubs, and watch porn.

That's ok, you're just practicing the internalized misogyny that the patriarchy has taught you is correct.

Do not worry, once the time comes, radical feminism will free you of your disgusting patriarchal chains.

[New haven america]

Except you and Chess (although I'm guessing this is another one of her puppet accounts)

Wrong.
And there isn't just only me and Equaliaria, two different users, there are even some others, but they aren't comfortable posting here...

basically say that women cannot be trusted to make their own decisions about their own bodies and so "enlightened" (a term that I am using liberally here) "feminists" (ditto) such as yourself are here to show them what "true equality" is.

You use the word "agency" in a misleading way.
Everybody have "agency", always, even slaves have "agency": they can choose, keep being slaves or a rebellion or trying to escape or commiting suicide. They have four different options.
This isn't about "agency", indeed, this is about balancement of power.

Oh boo-hoo for those users.

While slaves do have agency, they have restricted agency, which means they can face physical or psychological punishments for not listening to their overlords/owners. Women in the Western World however, have mostly full agency (As long as they abide by the law, which men, women, and anything in-between has to follow, which is where the "mostly" part comes from) to do as they please.

You know, instead of complaining about practically non-existant problems in the Western World, why don't you help people in others areas (Like North Africa, The Middle East, ect...), where patriarchies actually do exist.

[Herador]

Then I'll use my agency to dress up in revealing clothing, flirt, go to clubs, and watch porn.

That's ok, you're just practicing the internalized misogyny that the patriarchy has taught you is correct.

Do not worry, once the time comes, radical feminism will free you of your disgusting patriarchal chains.

I'm genuinely curious what that will look like. I get your joking, but what does a "patriarchy free world" look like to someone like Chessmistress?

[Ebliania]

That's ok, you're just practicing the internalized misogyny that the patriarchy has taught you is correct.

Do not worry, once the time comes, radical feminism will free you of your disgusting patriarchal chains.

I'm genuinely curious what that will look like. I get your joking, but what does a "patriarchy free world" look like to someone like Chessmistress?

I'm guessing that it would be a matriarchy. Patriarchy, except that radfems are the oppressors.

[Thermodolia]

That's ok, you're just practicing the internalized misogyny that the patriarchy has taught you is correct.

Do not worry, once the time comes, radical feminism will free you of your disgusting patriarchal chains.

I'm genuinely curious what that will look like. I get your joking, but what does a "patriarchy free world" look like to someone like Chessmistress?

Women oppressing men.

[Herador]

I'm genuinely curious what that will look like. I get your joking, but what does a "patriarchy free world" look like to someone like Chessmistress?

Women oppressing men.

I genuinely doubt that's what s/he expressly wants. Might be how what s/he wants ends up, but ideally I think s/he sees something else. I hope s/he responds to this.

[Thermodolia]

Women oppressing men.

I genuinely doubt that's what s/he expressly wants. Might be how what s/he wants ends up, but ideally I think s/he sees something else. I hope s/he responds to this.

I'm pretty sure that's what she wants. She wants a matriarchy dominanted by radfems with men unable to do anything without their explicit approval.

Also why are you doing "s/he"?

[Herador]

I genuinely doubt that's what s/he expressly wants. Might be how what s/he wants ends up, but ideally I think s/he sees something else. I hope s/he responds to this.

I'm pretty sure that's what she wants. She wants a matriarchy dominanted by radfems with men unable to do anything without their explicit approval.

Also why are you doing "s/he"?

No idea if she's they're a guy or a girl and I'm too drunk to remember "they" is a word.

E: See my problem?

[Lady Scylla]

I'm pretty sure that's what she wants. She wants a matriarchy dominanted by radfems with men unable to do anything without their explicit approval.

Also why are you doing "s/he"?

No idea if she's they're a guy or a girl and I'm too drunk to remember "they" is a word.

E: See my problem?

Chess is a woman, as far as we know.

[Godular]

Given the article in the OP, I can't help but note that the title question is rather extraordinarily loaded.

[Galloism]

Given the article in the OP, I can't help but note that the title question is rather extraordinarily loaded.

A loaded question in a feminist thread?

That's absurd.

[Settrah]

That's ok, you're just practicing the internalized misogyny that the patriarchy has taught you is correct.

Do not worry, once the time comes, radical feminism will free you of your disgusting patriarchal chains.

I'm genuinely curious what that will look like. I get your joking, but what does a "patriarchy free world" look like to someone like Chessmistress?

1) Women would have equal status to men in society, which... they already do, but radfems like Chess see the world as if it was still 1950s. so they try to move towards something alr act here they think hasn't transpired yet. A redundant aspiration.

2) Women being infallible. I don't think radfems like Chess necessarily think they want a matriarchy where women rule all. But I definitely think they want a society where women have more rights, justifications, excuses and lack of responsibility to do much more that men can't.

Given the article in the OP, I can't help but note that the title question is rather extraordinarily loaded.

Radfems love strawmans. In other news, water is wet.

EDIT: Whoops, strawwomyns, sorry my bad, silly internalised misogyny.

[Lady Scylla]

Given the article in the OP, I can't help but note that the title question is rather extraordinarily loaded.

It is extraordinarily loaded. There's hardly anything left of Ol' Yeller.

[Godular]

Given the article in the OP, I can't help but note that the title question is rather extraordinarily loaded.

A loaded question in a feminist thread?

That's absurd.

I'd been under the impression that many feminist-ish threads on NSG were actually well argued. Or would that more apply to specific feminist points that come up as an incidental in other discussions?

[Lady Scylla]

A loaded question in a feminist thread?

That's absurd.

I'd been under the impression that many feminist-ish threads on NSG were actually well argued. Or would that more apply to specific feminist points that come up as an incidental in other discussions?

Depends on who's posting the OP. Chess can't be considered representative of a good advocate for feminism. Most of her threads are like this.

[Thermodolia]

I'd been under the impression that many feminist-ish threads on NSG were actually well argued. Or would that more apply to specific feminist points that come up as an incidental in other discussions?

Depends on who's posting the OP. Chess can't be considered representative of a good advocate for feminism. Most of her threads are like this.

Being at bit optimistic are we?