The NationStates Feminist Thread III

[Fahran]

One of the problems is gender studies is cancerous with pseudoscience and misandry, hence their unironic use of sexist stereotypes and straight up gendered slurs against men in what I will generously call “research”.

Along with exceptionally large reference to the fiction of patriarchy, a system where men as a group masterminded oppression of women to their own benefit like Superman villains.

Handing them grants to research men’s issues is going to just result in more sexist shit against men. It’s like giving grants to Breitbart to study issues faced by Arab-Americans.

That's a fair point, but, realistically, we ought to strive to emulate the successful strategies of yesteryear when seeking to gain the institutional legitimacy and power to engage in the discourse in a meaningful way. The only issue is that I'm skeptical that MRA's possess the same fanatic dedication as the radical feminists, and that's even before we factor in the numerical disparity and the radical feminists knowing full well how important retaining institutional legitimacy and power is - unlike the people they trounced to obtain their own institutional legitimacy and power. We could always add requirements to grants in the name of broadening the field of serious research.

[Totenborg]

A large portion of feminists don't agree with you. Porn is fine. Exploitative porn is not.

Professionally-produced porn is almost entirely exploitative. It's basically legalized sex trafficking and rape. Imagine Harvey Weinstein on steroids. Come to think of it, many of Harvey's associates are probably porn producers.

Amateur porn varies on a case-by-case basis but I'd wager a good chunk of it is not truly consensual.

What are you basing this on?

[Fahran]

Professionally-produced porn is almost entirely exploitative. It's basically legalized sex trafficking and rape. Imagine Harvey Weinstein on steroids. Come to think of it, many of Harvey's associates are probably porn producers.

Absolutely this.

[New haven america]

One issue I agree with feminists on is how incredibly evil and violent pornography is.

A large portion of feminists don't agree with you. Porn is fine. Exploitative porn is not.

I find it funny how you claim to be a hardcore feminist, but are arguing against a talking point feminism that started all the way back in the 60's.

Feminists generally believe all porn is exploitative and needs to be either highly regulated or outright banned, no ifs ands or buts about it.

[Fahran]

Feminists generally believe all porn is exploitative and needs to be either highly regulated or outright banned, no ifs ands or buts about it.

Sex positive and pro-sex worker feminists have been a thing for awhile.

[New haven america]

Feminists generally believe all porn is exploitative and needs to be either highly regulated or outright banned, no ifs ands or buts about it.

Sex positive and pro-sex worker feminists have been a thing for awhile.

And they're generally not the majority.

[Fahran]

And they're generally not the majority.

I've noticed a decent number of them in all honesty. I don't have precise statistics on who the majority is at the moment, but my gut feeling is that a lot of liberal feminists are pretty inclusive of sex workers, whatever reservations they might have about the sex industries.

[Totenborg]

A large portion of feminists don't agree with you. Porn is fine. Exploitative porn is not.

I find it funny how you claim to be a hardcore feminist, but are arguing against a talking point feminism that started all the way back in the 60's.

Feminists generally believe all porn is exploitative and needs to be either highly regulated or outright banned, no ifs ands or buts about it.

Feminism is not a monolithic ideology. Additionally, being for regulation on a thing is not the same as being against a thing.
For example, I'm a gun owner, but I'm not against firearms regulation.

[Sundiata]

My take on this is the Catholic take. We're all baby factories!

Men too.

No one should be seen as such. Men or women.

No, sexual reproduction is a good thing.

[The Blaatschapen]

It's immoral to force them into becoming baby factories. You've got a very... interesting take on women's lib.

My take on this is the Catholic take. We're all baby factories!

Men too.

Congrats to the catholic church on being supportive of transpeople

Wait

[New haven america]

No one should be seen as such. Men or women.

No, sexual reproduction is a good thing.

There are currently 7.5 billion people on the planet, which is only ~1 billion away from the human ecological capacity limit.

If you don't know what that is, that is the population limit of a species before total resource and ecological destruction. We don't need more people on the planet, the global ecosystem literally can't handle that many people. (Hell, it couldn't even handle 5 billion people)

[The Blaatschapen]

No, sexual reproduction is a good thing.

There are currently 7.5 billion people on the planet, which is only ~1 billion away from the human ecological capacity limit.

If you don't know what that is, that is the population limit of a species before total resource and ecological destruction. We don't need more people on the planet, the global ecosystem literally can't handle that many people. (Hell, it couldn't even handle 5 billion people)

Eden couldn't even handle two

[Nakena]

There are currently 7.5 billion people on the planet, which is only ~1 billion away from the human ecological capacity limit.

If you don't know what that is, that is the population limit of a species before total resource and ecological destruction. We don't need more people on the planet, the global ecosystem literally can't handle that many people. (Hell, it couldn't even handle 5 billion people)

Eden couldn't even handle two

Actually there were three.

Before Eve, Adam had another wife. And her name was Lilith.

They had some... disagreements.

A large portion of feminists don't agree with you. Porn is fine. Exploitative porn is not.

Professionally-produced porn is almost entirely exploitative. It's basically legalized sex trafficking and rape. Imagine Harvey Weinstein on steroids. Come to think of it, many of Harvey's associates are probably porn producers.

Amateur porn varies on a case-by-case basis but I'd wager a good chunk of it is not truly consensual.

Actually a huge amount of porn performers get their main income as freelancing escorts. Go figure. Unless one is quite popular its not really possible to make a constant income from performing alone. This has only worsened since streaming services changed the industry.

[Sundiata]

My take on this is the Catholic take. We're all baby factories!

Men too.

Congrats to the catholic church on being supportive of transpeople

Wait

The Catholic Church supports and exists for all people.

[Sundiata]

No, sexual reproduction is a good thing.

There are currently 7.5 billion people on the planet, which is only ~1 billion away from the human ecological capacity limit.

If you don't know what that is, that is the population limit of a species before total resource and ecological destruction. We don't need more people on the planet, the global ecosystem literally can't handle that many people. (Hell, it couldn't even handle 5 billion people)

The Earth is rich and can handle us all. We are becoming better stewards of our planet through technological advancement, as we should.

Marriage, life, and childbirth are blessings, especially for mothers who play such a valuable role in the provision of these God-given gifts.

[Hirota]

No, sexual reproduction is a good thing.

There are currently 7.5 billion people on the planet, which is only ~1 billion away from the human ecological capacity limit.

If you don't know what that is, that is the population limit of a species before total resource and ecological destruction. We don't need more people on the planet, the global ecosystem literally can't handle that many people. (Hell, it couldn't even handle 5 billion people)

Can you demonstrate why this number is any more accurate than previously cited numbers employed in Mathusian Catastrophes in the past?

[Ben Nas Mij]

One of the problems is gender studies is cancerous with pseudoscience and misandry, hence their unironic use of sexist stereotypes and straight up gendered slurs against men in what I will generously call “research”.

Along with exceptionally large reference to the fiction of patriarchy, a system where men as a group masterminded oppression of women to their own benefit like Superman villains.

Handing them grants to research men’s issues is going to just result in more sexist shit against men. It’s like giving grants to Breitbart to study issues faced by Arab-Americans.

That's a fair point, but, realistically, we ought to strive to emulate the successful strategies of yesteryear when seeking to gain the institutional legitimacy and power to engage in the discourse in a meaningful way. The only issue is that I'm skeptical that MRA's possess the same fanatic dedication as the radical feminists, and that's even before we factor in the numerical disparity and the radical feminists knowing full well how important retaining institutional legitimacy and power is - unlike the people they trounced to obtain their own institutional legitimacy and power. We could always add requirements to grants in the name of broadening the field of serious research.

[Totenborg]

Congrats to the catholic church on being supportive of transpeople

Wait

The Catholic Church supports and exists for all people.

Only in the sense that cancer exists for all people. The church should be completely disregarded as an authority for any aspect of the quest for gender equality.

[Upper Nan]

There are currently 7.5 billion people on the planet, which is only ~1 billion away from the human ecological capacity limit.

If you don't know what that is, that is the population limit of a species before total resource and ecological destruction. We don't need more people on the planet, the global ecosystem literally can't handle that many people. (Hell, it couldn't even handle 5 billion people)

The Earth is rich and can handle us all. We are becoming better stewards of our planet through technological advancement, as we should.

Marriage, life, and childbirth are blessings, especially for mothers who play such a valuable role in the provision of these God-given gifts.

We're literally 10 years away from climate change becoming irreversible and setting us on a course for extinction, and our politicians are sitting on their hands and saying "we can't afford" to not go extinct. I fail to see how we're becoming "better stewards."

[Liriena]

Our latest incident involving violence by young rugby players has kinda opened Pandora's box. Now it's like everyone is starting to acknowledge that rugby is kind of the favourite sport of our upper class and our upper class are a bunch of assholes. And there's talk that rugbiers have been getting a social free pass for years despite recurring problems like sexual violence against women, homophobic violence, violence against the homeless, sexual and non-sexual violence against other men, etc.

The latest incident in question involved ten teenage rugby players on vacation in a coastal city beating another teenage boy to death outside of a night club. It was kind of the straw that broke the camel's back, because this time around their victim was not socially invisible. He wasn't a homeless person, but a model law student called Fernando Baez Sosa.

The conversation has, of course, delved into gender politics, but kind of only as part of a broader discussion about misbehaviour and impunity within a very specific socioeconomic group. Upper class boys growing up in an environment where misogyny, homophobia and violence are either tolerated or encouraged.

While athletes being violent dicks isn't really exclusive to rugby (Argentine football has its own share of controversies), rugby had decades of good PR behind it up until now. It was held up as the "chivalrous" sport with "good values". But now we have dozens if not hundreds of people speaking up on all of the abusive behaviour of rugby players and their coaches.

[Fahran]

While athletes being violent dicks isn't really exclusive to rugby (Argentine football has its own share of controversies), rugby had decades of good PR behind it up until now. It was held up as the "chivalrous" sport with "good values". But now we have dozens if not hundreds of people speaking up on all of the abusive behaviour of rugby players and their coaches.

I think we have a tendency to overlook the bad and toxic behavior of athletes more generally, but it seems most egregious when it comes from male athletes in sports that hold a degree of prestige. This reminds me a lot of the numerous abuses by NFL players (murder, sexual assault, domestic violence, dog fighting, etc.), Hope Solo engaging in domestic violence, and Brock Turner violently raping an inebriated young woman and getting off with a smack on the wrist. It's good that people are finally going to hold them accountable. We should have been doing it this whole time.

[Fahran]

Only in the sense that cancer exists for all people. The church should be completely disregarded as an authority for any aspect of the quest for gender equality.

Most religious institutions do not exist exclusively or even principally to enshrine or establish equality as an immutable principle. However, we do have to address the intersection of religion and gender relations because of the manner in which religion touches most aspects of a person's or society's character. I don't think ubiquitous atheism is a palatable solution to anyone who isn't an atheist.

[Fahran]

Congrats to the catholic church on being supportive of transpeople

Wait

>Implying transpeople can't be baby factories

Bigot.

[Upper Nan]

Only in the sense that cancer exists for all people. The church should be completely disregarded as an authority for any aspect of the quest for gender equality.

Most religious institutions do not exist exclusively or even principally to enshrine or establish equality as an immutable principle. However, we do have to address the intersection of religion and gender relations because of the manner in which religion touches most aspects of a person's or society's character. I don't think ubiquitous atheism is a palatable solution to anyone who isn't an atheist.

There's also the fact that atheists are just as capable of being misogynists as religious folks (in fact, the "atheist community" in America has a massive problem with sexism--and I say that as an atheist myself).

[The Blaatschapen]

Congrats to the catholic church on being supportive of transpeople

Wait

>Implying transpeople can't be baby factories

Bigot.

It was actually on the men being babyfactories. I made the connection that indeed, (trans)men (among others) have fully functional wombs, etc. to produce babies.

Where your mind went, dunno.