/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

>Muh artificial wombs
Guys, you should just stop being incels, maybe you'll realize women actually like it when you cum all over her cervix

>>2637318
artificial wombs don't mean women are no longer able to have natty children you massive fucking spaz.

>>2637268
Sex is a biological fact, it's not a social construct, if society didn't exist there'd still be sex, sex predates humanity and sex will outlive humanity

>>2637318
Sometimes the purity of leftcoms are something.
Like this guy haven't had to interact with radfems.

>>2602384
Disco Elysium was wrong.
It turns out MEN are bourgeois, and WOMEN are proletarian.

>>2602394
the social cues are utterly reactionary right now so your explanation makes no sense. stupid mass tor baiter.

>>2637769
>Thread is over.
if you found that explanation compelling you ought to be shot because their is nothing salvageable in that "brain" of yours

All the radical women got murdered. But unironically feminism became a pipeline to reactionary politics. Read about how the RAF women were abandoned by German feminist groups because they "did not see themselves as women." It happened across the entire Western Hemisphere.

>>2637334
Artifical wombs meana the creation of a new slave class

>>2637813
>became
It was always a tendency within the women's movement, it's just the one that won out due to how hard revolutionary politics got repressed. Any kind of identity politics focused on one particular group is by its nature going to include people who are bigots or reactionary about some other group or social problem. This is an issue with socialism and communism too, it's just something you have to contend with in any mass movement. If you don't properly nip those tendencies in the bud it's very easy for them to fester because primary contradiction in society being class struggle means that the state apparatus will majorly prefer to target the more radical tendencies. In fact it often benefits them for the more reactionary ones to propagate because it can result in the various movements for equality to become hotbeds of division among the workers.

>>2604046
I couldnt find your post until now.
No it wasnt twitter, it was reddit, instagram, and tiktok – all of which fed me pro women algorithms, which in retrospect I realize were female supremacist (which is their default view).

Cutting it barely help, since I damn know they will be white washed – this being the difference in your "[thing every demographic has examples of under SEO web]" comment.
Especially with the female fetishism we have on the left like >>2637181, >>2637789, and >>2637363 .


>>2637813
>>2637847
Good posts.

>>2603000
>>2603552
Because women sticking with an ideology that benefits them (progressive liberalism) isn't fucking "radicalization" at all. They aren't even turning into rad-libs or Jacobins, or whatever. They are certainly not going to show up in your socialist meetings.

>>2637180
Fuck, how based!
Let's reject identity politics and make English completely gender-neutral!

>>2637850
>Female fetishism
But I just fetishize their feet

>>2637268
>They both social constructs
Sex is a scientific model, like Newtonian physics or numbers, I personally wouldn't call those social constructs, but they're also not material 'fact' like >>2637336 seems to be claiming. The number -1 isn't material, but it's useful in interpreting material reality. Newtonian mechanics is a great model for interpreting motion on our scale, but won't enable you to communicate with satellites in space like quantum mechanics does. Models aren't reality, they simplify reality.

The scientific consensus on a biological model of sex has evolved plenty of times. Sex in humans is currently defined chromosomally, and the simple fact that intersex people exist makes it clear that a simple binary model has limitations and is not some definite material fact. I don't examine someone's damn DNA in a lab before deciding on the correct pronouns to address someone.

>>2637899
Give me your wallet, you undeserving proletarian scum. I deserve it.

>>2603000
>>2603552
Are they hot, at least?

>>2637850
>quoting Engels
<female fetishism on the left
no args

>>2637197
>une chemise
>un chemisier
French gendered nouns don't give a fuck about gender. Cling to your nonsense, infant.

>>2637921
You're still being liberal in your approach. Science is not this abstract sanitized thing, it is as based in society and economics as anything else is. This is especially true for sex, which is especially effected by scientific consensus, so while for a lot of chemistry you might easily be able to find objectivity, everything to do with sex science is inherently class based and political and you need to view it through this lenses, and so the truth can only come out later. Science is also used by class forces.

You're identifying how the scientific model might be limited, but you haven't gone far enough in looking at the reasons it might be limited.

Anyway, what I mean by sex being partly a social construct is that if you had a completely perfectly passing trans woman with bottom surgery, how would the average person see her as male sexed if they literally can only identify female traits? I think sex expression and gender are probably socially the same thing, and though there are differences here with the scientific consensus on sex, they both go on to influence each other. Limiting sex to chromosomes so as to be scientific is clearly inadequate, but if you try to include other things you will go further into messy social territory, which degrades this stance of an objective science.

I'm not trying to be pomo here, and again I'm not a biologist but a Marxist so I can't really argue about biological stuff.

>>2637924
I can't go back into findom Godess, i'm getting married this month.

>>2637957
You make a good point about science not being a pure, abstracted thing. Scientists exist in society. One can make a similar point about all of written history being biased in various ways.
>and again I'm not a biologist but a Marxist
I'd like to emphasize there's no contradiction between being a biologist and a Marxist.

>if you had a completely perfectly passing trans woman with bottom surgery, how would the average person see her as male sexed if they literally can only identify female traits?
My counterpoint is that the average person's opinion doesn't matter when it comes to sex. People in society perceive gender, based on sexual traits and social cues (behavior, clothing, language, … ) which is all subjective. They may think they perceive sex, but they don't truly. Edge cases (intersex, androgynous people, … ) put this on display - people can misclassify sex even without any intentional effort of someone to transgress gender.
The model of sex is mostly used in a medical context. If that woman goes to a doctor because they have frequent and painful urination, and the doctor assumes the woman is female, and the patient doesn't disclose they're trans, the doctor might fail to check for prostate cancer, or may give an inappropriate dose of a drug*. So, when it comes to certain aspects of society, it's important to differentiate our scientific model of sex from other concepts like gender, or sexual traits (genitals, breasts, etc.).

* https://news.uchicago.edu/story/women-are-overmedicated-because-drug-dosage-trials-are-done-men-study-finds

>>2637985
>They may think they perceive sex, but they don't truly
Another example of this is "transvestigation" lunatics who misclassify sexes of cis people as trans. They think they can tell someone's sex through pseudo-scientific analysis of body parts, based on traits Western society perceive as masculine or feminine, and end up claiming Margot Robbie and Marilyn Monroe are trans.
But even everyday people can be wrong. There are people who were only revealed to not be cis after getting biological testing in the Olympics - everyone including themself understood them to be (say) female. It's obvious through these examples that sex cannot be truly perceived without tools. We can guess with reasonable accuracy, that's a biological reproductive skill, but natural humans can't perceive sex with absolute certainty.

Women are just people man, stop with the nonsense

>>2603983
man you are the second coming of mao

>>2637183
The elimination of Bourgeois Femininity in the future World Maoist Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution by forcing all Women to have extremely Short Hair (Pixie Cut or Shorter with a Shaved Head being the most Historically Progressive), banning all Dresses/Makeup/Lipstick etc. is designed to create Liberated Socialist Women who are free from the Symbolic Superstructural Chains (symbolized by Long Hair on Women, with these Symbolic Superstructural Chains being broken when Women get their Hair Cut/Chopped/Shaved off) of Patriarchy and the Reactionary Gender Binary is the opposite of “extreme schizo-misogyny”, and if you believe that my Maoist position on Women’s Hair Length is “extreme schizo-misogyny” then you must believe that Mao Zedong himself had “extreme schizo-misogyny”, because everything I described about forcing Women to have extremely Short Hair (Pixie Cut or Shorter with a Shaved Head being the most Historically Progressive), banning all Dresses/Makeup/Lipstick etc. happened in the IRL Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution in Maoist China, with Mao stating about Women’s Hair length that “Two Braids is Feudal, One Braid is Capitalist, and Shoulder length is Revisionist”, with Mao ordering the Red Guards to give any Women with Feudal, Capitalist, or Revisionist Hairstyles the “Yin-Yang Cut” in which Half of their Head was shaved, ✊😜🇨🇳🇰🇵🇨🇺🇵🇸🏳️‍🌈🏳️‍⚧️🚀☢️ 💇‍♀️👩‍🦲!

>>2637268
Comrade S Poster, can you explain how I am “Sexist”, “Racist”, and “Zionist”, and as a Maoist I am sure you realize that my Maoist position on Women’s Hair Length comes from Mao himself, 🤔?

Because I radicalized them, no need to thank me but I'm really cool like that.

"I'm a woman and I want rights" isn't radical, chuddy

>>2638142
dresses are comfy tho. if you want equality just make the boys wear them too

>>2638353
I am not appropriating scottish culture.

>>2637815
Goodbye capitalism.

>>2637318
Mods, permaban this ultroid bordigger for transphobia, NOW!

>>2638359
if you want to level gender roles, you can't just single out the women. cis men need to be broken of their own patriarchal conditioning too. a careful study of the advanced theories of Alyson Greaves leads us to the dialectical conclusion that men must be forced to experience those same expectations their society has forced on women from the dawn of civilization; that is to say, re-education through forcefem.

>>2638375
Does this mean hormone treatment or do you just have to crossdress, cook and clean?

>>2638375
Name those expectations trccnyugha(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

>>2638377
hormones are only if you want them, or if you don't take your reeducation seriously. but yes to the rest.

>>2638382
crazy that as well as king lear our jannies think the illiterate incel who hangs around to call everyone 'trccns' every day is a valued and worthwhile person that should be protected and kept around.

>>2638375
Ok idiot

>>2637311

>There isn't a single characteristic that makes someone's sex a man or a woman

In biology, the definition of sex in a sexual reproducing species is:

A male is the member of the species that has the potential to produce the smaller gamete.

A female is the member of the species that has the potential to produce the larger gamete.

(And a hermaphrodite would be a member of the species that has the potential to produce, though amongst humans there have been no cases documented of true hermaphrodites in this sense).

>>2649537
I still buy chicks a meal on a date. It's not that big a deal it's only 50 bucks or so.

>>2637180
You're a normie doing a trans LARP to get arthoe pussy.

>>2649961
It’s true, I’ve wasted so much time injecting horse steroids into my penis

Daily reminder that women have frequently demonstrated themselves to be a revolutionary subject, as a class.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_the_Russian_Revolution

>>2649537
>>2649631
It's taken me the wisdom and zen of old age (25) to learn this; it's not even a chivalry thing. Buy food for people if you have the money for it. If they insist otherwise, ask them to buy the next round. Pub society.

Yes, society has systemic biases which disadvantage women. Consider them.
But let's misapply that logic; do you see White peoples buying drinks for Black peoples?