[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/lgbt/ - LGBT

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender +
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Not reporting is bourgeois


File: 1746572579340.png (27 KB, 957x183, ClipboardImage.png)

 

What the fuck was up with communist parties back then associating being gay with the petit-bourgeoisie? What exactly about fucking a dude is petit-bourgeois?

Revisionist thought has been a problem for years

>>1375
Read Paul Cockshott.

>>1375
Ask yourself the same as to why drug users are being associated with the petite-bourgeoisie, USERS not DEALERS mind you.

>>1375
Essentialism. They saw that there were more proportionally more (petit) bourgeoisie gay people than proles, and instead of thinking "these people are more willing to be free with their sexuality because they are more free generally" they instead came to the fucking insane conclusion that being gay makes one bourgeoisie.

A frustratingly large number of people think like this, unfortunately. It's a deeply unmaterial way of thinking that runs deep in many supposedly Marxist ideologies.

>>1377
It's been a while since I read his argument, so I don't know how well it holds up. I remember not being convinced though.

Cockshott in general is one of those guys who, while smart, puts the carriage before the horse intellectually. I think about his dumbass barista video as an example. Like, he's right that they don't fit the exact definition of a proletariat, and the labor they do doesn't fit the exact definition of productive labor, but if you take your head out of your ass and experience the world from they eyes of a worker, rather than an academic, the kind of person who's stuck working at Starbucks is obviously significantly closer to the guy on the assembly line than they are the middle-manager at the office in terms of class interest.

>>1375
you are not ready for this conversation

Because the petit bourgeoisie and those who have their class character are the most likely to engage in decadence and other repugnant behaviors(USER'S BROWSING HISTORY WAS MADE PUBLIC)

>>1379

Er, Dr. Cockshott does think baristas perform productive labour. Did you watch that video and minimally pay attention at all?

>>1381
What's repugnant or decadent about homosexuality?

>>1375

The pettit bourgeoisie have on average more free time, energy & money to pursue more different kinds of lifestyle consumption, and hence can participate more in homo-erotic behaviours (as well as deal with any potential adverse effects better, including social shunning). That's all it is really.

>>1381
slow in the mind

>>1384
I don't really think of a small business owner or landlord when I think of the LGBTQ community. I think of food service workers, hospital workers, teachers, and folks in the entertainment industry for the most part - all members of the proletariat.

>>1384
By that logic communism would lead to a substantially more queer society as more people have more free time and energy to explore alternative lifestyles.

>>2256781
Not if you do it right. Also doesn't apply gay/bi women.

>>2256789
See previous post.

>>1388
It doesn't even necessarily apply to all male same sex relations since not everybody likes anal. It would also apply to straight anal sex.

>>2256794
More often a result of intravenous drug use these days, what with PREP and all. In Africa it's mostly heterosexual prostitution spreading it.

>>2256800
Not unique at all to homosexuals. Still mainly a problem in Central Africa. Has infected less than 0.0005% of the global population.

>>1382
cockshit is vulgar bourgeois economist. cocksit say bankers create surplus value. cockshit is imperialist

>>1382
It's been a while, I'll admit.

petit-bourgeoisie=thing I dont like
this is the unifying tendency of all socialist movements even the obscure ones that aren't even explicitly marxist

>>1375
>Revcoms
I was wondering what their argument was and there are some articles they published about it from the 1980s. I read one called "On the Question of Homosexuality and the Emancipation of Women," and the argument laid out is a lot like anti-idpol arguments you hear but applied to homosexuality itself. Also that it's misogynistic to be gay. And that it reflected the petit-bourgeois aspirations of the pleasure-seeking, self-indulgent, individualistic 1980s and therefore it was necessary to "ideologically remold homosexuals"

>>1387
>By that logic communism would lead to a substantially more queer society as more people have more free time and energy to explore alternative lifestyles.
You know it's funny, the other thing is that the essay ends with them saying that while homosexuals will be "remolded" in socialism, they couldn't rule out that it would return in communism, or that everybody would bisexual – who knows!

>>1379
>A frustratingly large number of people think like this, unfortunately. It's a deeply unmaterial way of thinking that runs deep in many supposedly Marxist ideologies.
I think it's also just cult shit. Avakian created a cult and while prohibiting homosexuality is one thing they do, they also prohibit a lot of other things too. Because it's about control and they do that by destroying your sense of identity, autonomy, self-worth, etc. to make you dependent on them and the leader. You can be gay in theory and be part of the group, but you have to suppress that and commit more deeply to the group. You're trapped. It's the same with the Moonies, Scientologists, Jehova's Witnesses, etc.

>>1395
>petit-bourgeoisie=thing I dont like
I think one can also acknowledge that class and Marxism plays a role in understanding social, political and economic interactions between people. But it's not like every single issue or everything that happens can ONLY be defined or completely understood that way. Because people are not perfect and Marx was not perfect and nothing is perfect. No theory is perfect. Marxism is not perfect. But that's how you get these cults.

>>1393
get a job

>>1375
My only opinion about matters like this is that arguing about idpol should lead to termination of your party membership and after revolution hard labor at working camp.

>>1399
What does “arguing” about idpol mean? Should Harry Haywood have been purged from the CPUSA?

>>1375
>What the fuck was up with communist parties back then associating being gay with the petit-bourgeoisie? What exactly about fucking a dude is petit-bourgeois?

>>1379
>It's been a while since I read his argument, so I don't know how well it holds up. I remember not being convinced though.
https://paulcockshott.wordpress.com/2017/08/29/class-and-the-lgtb-lobby/
>It is today taken as almost axiomatic that the left supports the LGTB cause. It came therefore, as a surprise to me to find a communist journalist Gearoid O Colmain arguing that homosexuals, far from constituting a persecuted minority, are in fact key protagonists of the ruling class and bourgeois ideology.

>He claims that

<In the Soviet Union homosexuality was seen as one of the many perversions promoted by the bourgeoisie and their petty-bourgeois opponents– a ruling class phenomenon of social rather than biological origin. The communist understanding of sexuality has, since the counter-revolutions in Europe in 1989 and the dissolution of the USSR, been conveniently buried and forgotten.

>My impression of his arguments is that they are very mixed with some stuff that is plausible and some stuff that is cranky, denying that HIV causes AIDS for example.

>But I think that a plausible economic argument can be made for one of his key arguments – that the political gay movement expresses middle class and upper class interests.
>I will in this post try to pull together an argument to this effect.
>I will focus on the mean class position of homosexual men, and show that this puts them in the top 10% of the population, and that this economic position is not incidental, but is closely connected with the gay male mode of life. Note the specificity, it does not apply to Lesbians.

Dialectically proven to be bourgeois.(POST LEFT UP TO BE MOCKED AND RIDICULED)

>>1402
Anal is not exclusive to homosexuality nor a requirement

>>1401
So why do I work cleaning offices, oh dialectical genius? Do I dialectically not exist? Fucking retard.

>>1377
>>1401
>Dialectically proven to be bourgeois
Dumb as hell, and this isn't even what dialectics is or how it's used. Cockshott does good work in other areas, but this isn't one of them. The premise that because gay men largely don't have kids, and that by not having kids some are able to focus on their careers and save money for the future, and that this makes them "aligned" with "upper middle class" interest is divorced from reality. Not only because it actively ignores the vast multitude of impoverished proletarian gay men, but because it selectively singles out gay men in contrast to simply single men or woman who also do not have kids, couples who decide to be without child, or any other demographic which does not require part of their income to be set aside to support another.

>>1375
There is a difference between having less common sexual preferences and being LGBT, no matter how you slice it. The way LGBT emerged in the 20th-21st centuries was tied with bourgeois ideology and ways of thinking, and in the 21st century it was also directly tied to US soft power. I don't think this is a problem in the long term since the cat is out of the bag, people will just distance these sexual preferences from their USAID-sponsored past and go on with it sooner than later. It's the way China bans LGBT parades but doesn't care about the really pretty ladies and men.
>inb4 but LGBT only means the abstract idea of being non-straight, not the real way the movement exists today
lol.
>inb4 but why did the Soviets do it, it's not like they had a good idea of social processes that went on to create the modern LGBT community that is extensively used by western capital in their endless destabilization campaigns
idk.

>>1387

I mean it could be (although I have some doubts because intimacy, romance & erotic behaviour would be de-identiarianized and decommodified resulting in just less paraphilias in general).

Still, my point was more that the economic status is an enabling condition under capitalism; Hence all other things being equal, one would expect more homoerotic behaviour from the petit bourgeoisie compared to classes with lesser incomes (and indeed, perhaps the most homoerotic behaviour by the bourgeoisie itself).

File: 1746594484742.png (1.83 MB, 1000x1481, ClipboardImage.png)

>>1405
Dinks are the most bourgeois of all.

>>1406

Indeed, and there is little reason to think "sexual orientation" as an identity marker wouldn't wither away as well, kind of like race. But I admit I am an optimist about these things.

I am much more pessimistic about gender & ethnicity.

>>1381
>>1402
You have absolutely no idea what straight proletarian couples get up to lol. A lot of workers are freaks, it just comforts you to plug your ears to it. I don't at all understand the judgement of gay men doing anal when straight couples do anal and far more on top of it. Anyone acting like woman and men don't get up to wild shit is either lying, has never had sex, or only had sex missionary lol.

>>1407
>Still, my point was more that the economic status is an enabling condition under capitalism
That just isn't true though. You don't need to be wealthy or well off to fuck people of the same sex. Trans people are also one of the poorest demographics.

>>1406
>inb4 but LGBT only means the abstract idea of being non-straight
I think you will find that that is, in fact, what most people understand it to mean, especially those who aren't being meaningfully obtuse.

>>1410

Not the other anons, but as I point out here >>1384 and here >>1407 its likely they get up to proportionately less "freaky shit" compared to the petit bourgeoisie & bourgeoisie, if only because they have less time energy, etc. for sex in general (I would also add, because of their income, their is less money to be made selling them various paraphilia adjacent consumer goods and services).

>>1411

The problem is that you are reading into what I am writing in binary terms (sex or no sex).

But I am making relational quantitative claims (relatively less sex than, less paraphalias than, due to relatively less money, time, energy (hell even shorter lifespans likely cobtribute)

>>1411
You don’t need to be rich to have sex with someone of the same sex as yourself or to have those desires, but actually going into a full blown relationship means you have security, working class people are not gonna risk getting ostracized just to get their rocks off is the argument.

everyone makes sexual orientation be about sex but its mostly about love. the bourgeoisie cannot feel love. sexual orientation is only a half accurate phrase, it would be more accurate to call it romantic orientation just as much.

being gay is inherently proletarian

File: 1746595448797.gif (204.65 KB, 220x167, the-simpsons-gay.gif)

>>1401
Zeroed in on this part:

>The economic basis of marriage is not love. As both experience and the tradition of romantic literature tell us, you do not need to be married to love, and many marriages continue despite an absence of love. The legal institution of marriage regulates, on the one hand, rights and duties with respect to children, and on the other, the sharing of various juridical assets. These include both direct ownership of dwellings, instances where there are heritable tenancies, and personal rights to other public and private benefits: pensions, insurance, citizenship. In the early stages after the legalisation of homosexuality, gays were relatively uninterested in marriage, and, if anything, disdained it as a mark of respectability.


Yes, it is the case that the economic basis of *marriage* is not love. But it doesn't follow that *homosexuals* are incapable of love. I think that's where these guys' analysis goes wrong. Basically I think they had/have a prejudice that homosexuality is just about sex. They see it as a form of raw hedonism and that gays are freaks who don't share love or intimacy or friendship. He doesn't say that outright, but the idea that men can love each other and form couplings don't seem to factor into the picture, often it has been viewed as sickening and outrageous. Then he writes:

>Two processes operating over the last decades may have made the juridical asset aspect of marriage more attractive. The first of these is just the cumulative result of the economic advantage that gay couples enjoy. It enables them to accumulate property faster than other couples, so they have more to share on the death of a partner. Gays are twice as likely to own dwellings in the highest property band as heterosexuals. Black et al., showed that over 34% of middle-aged gays owned houses in the highest property band as against under 16% of married men and women of the same age. We have been unable to find statistics on ownership of financial assets, but one would expect, from the big income disparity, to find a similar bias there. At the same time, the advance of privatisation, neo-liberalism and the undermining of universal health and social benefits increases the importance of heritable or shareable private insurance rights.

It's possible but here's another thing – urbanization, modernization, and the go-go rush of capitalist development has also broken up traditional family structures and freed people to live more autonomous sexual lives. There's a reason why large cities, for example, are generally more tolerant places for gays than small towns. (The traditional family unit can also be just as oppressive if not more so than any government.) I don't think this is something communists should regret, it's all part of a great historical transformation that is happening whether you like it or not. But a new contradiction emerged since these gay couples couldn't get lawfully married, which is important for the division, transfer, etc. of private property. The resolution of that (in capitalism) was same-sex marriage to create bourgeois subjects.

I'm just riffing on this, but it's not "gays are bourgeois" per se, it's that capitalist development sorta logically leads to the embourgeoisement of gays. But then again, we do live in a class society, so that happened to some gays and not others.

That's really why you see these banks at Pride parades. It's not a conspiracy. It's because when you get married, one of the first things married couples do (if they can afford the down payment) is to take out a mortgage and that's what the banks provides. There can be tens of thousands of people who attend a Pride parade in a major city and it doesn't cost much to send a float down the middle.

>>1406
>It's the way China bans LGBT parades but doesn't care about the really pretty ladies and men.
Yeah just look at Zhou Shen. But I have a charitable theory that they see the parades as kind of like proselytizing. And that can be wrapped up liberal ideology but I suspect they don't allow those for the same reason they don't allow many types of religious processions. And that's combined with "you can do whatever" and "none of my business" in terms of people's private lives as far as the state is concerned.

>>1407
>Still, my point was more that the economic status is an enabling condition under capitalism
I think it's more about the overall development of the economy and society and the transition from agricultural to industrialized and urbanized societies. Proletarian workers are, in certain ways, better off than agricultural laborers and subsistence peasants under conditions of feudalism or landlordism (who are also more isolated and subject to traditional hierarchies including the patriarchal family). It doesn't mean workers' conditons are good, but it can be less bad compared to rural laborers. And it's not necessarily absolute immiseration that motivates class conflict, but relative inequality, like the conditions of workers actually improving – which creates rising expectations – yet the wealth of the rich grows by leaps and bounds more than that. It's complex.

>>1413

I should add as an addendum that its not a coincidence when you exclude the labour aristocracy (highly concentrated in the west, though not exclusively existing there) that it isn't surprising that the rest of the world have more conservative sexual mores.

Anyway I am not trying to make a moral point here really, or "laud the virtue" of the world workers & pesants. This is just how things happen to be, and there are materialist explanations for it.

>>1408
is this a real movie

>>1406
>>1409
>There is a difference between having less common sexual preferences and being LGBT, no matter how you slice it. The way LGBT emerged in the 20th-21st centuries was tied with bourgeois ideology and ways of thinking, and in the 21st century it was also directly tied to US soft power.
You could apply this to literally any social movement of the 21st century, this is a myopic way of thinking. Gay and Queer people weren't even accepted in any capacity in the United States 40 years ago, only got some modicum of being tolerated 30 years ago, got some of the basic legal right straight couples got around 20 years ago, and have been fighting ever since to keep those legal rights as they get thrown around every administration or so regarding if they should be able to exist much at all. Politicians and capitalists taking advantage of a given social movement and recuperating it is a tale as old as capitalism, but you would look at this as somehow essential to the given social movement. This is like looking at the black social movements of the 90s, seeing their radical principles co-opted and defused for neutralized capitalist "solutions", and then coming to the conclusion that it's black people and more specifically the black movement that is and was a problem. Its a position that I can only imagine emerges from having a pre-existing disdain for a given thing, and then rationalizing it by means of vulgar "analysis".

>>1414
I'm gay and working class, and I know plenty of people who are. It's not that big a deal, especially not in the United States. Despite what certain pseudo-populists would say, being gay is pretty accepted here.

>>1419

Oh dear anon, you misjudge me! (specifically the one who made this post >>1409)

I have disdain for all things; In this thread I just happen to be putting on more of a materialist analysis cap. But nothing is beyond grasp my raw raging contempt.

If anything I happen to disdain so called heterosexuals the most, if only because they are the majority demographic for capitalist degradation & degeneration.

Thank goodness at this stage there is no "hetero pride" parades, though I wouldn't be surprised if they started at some point…

>>1375
Because it was and still used under an umbrella of vague liberation movement as glowops against any non shitlib controlled movement or government, essentially as tool in westoid imperialism soft power toolkit. Commies not obliged to shitlib version of sexual liberation to embrace, but gay, pan or whatever the fuck (who cares) obliged to see context and depart from being an imperialism lapdogs. But it requires to obtain the class conscious, larping is easier.

File: 1746596655347-0.webp (122.99 KB, 768x631, 8564.webp)

File: 1746596655347-1.jpg (257.64 KB, 1000x557, NYTimes.jpg)

>>1417
>This is just how things happen to be, and there are materialist explanations for it.
I think it's the greater percentage of the population working in labor-intensive agriculture. But changes in the superstructure lag the material base (possibly by decades). When the Islamic Revolution happened in Iran, around 40% of the population worked in agriculture, and large parts of the country were still basically feudal.

I think there's something about societies built around labor-intensive agriculture that makes it so homosexuality can't exist or is severely repressed, like the combination of a population boom due to the rising productivity, but still labor heavy methods, so you need more kids to grow more food to feed more people in a loop. Like medieval Europe. And also there we go with the rise of Christianity with the church in the middle of the agricultural villages reflecting a feudal-agricultural mode of production compared to how things were arranged in antiquity where there was more tolerance for same-sex love (and people were also fed to lions as a form of entertainment). The Aztecs also sacrified some number of people every year to their gods, and then the Spanish arrived and fed natives they caught for the crime of sodomy to dogs. Really.

Iran executes gay people from time to time. But clearly gays exist in Iran because some of them have been hanged. But I'm not sure in the 1970s, they would have even felt the need to symbolically run over Pride flags on the street. I reckon they might not have thought it even existed. But now you have a much more urbanized country with a government that has an ideology that's rather feudal and represented hangover elements – including people who opposed the Shah's land reforms. That's a contradiction. There's also (apparently) a lot more people in Iran with secular views nowadays.

>>1421
>Thank goodness at this stage there is no "hetero pride" parades
They have them in the U.S. and it's called Mardi Gras and Spring Break Weekend.

>>1413
>Not the other anons, but as I point out here >>1384 and here >>1407 its likely they get up to proportionately less "freaky shit" compared to the petit bourgeoisie & bourgeoisie, if only because they have less time energy, etc. for sex in general (I would also add, because of their income, their is less money to be made selling them various paraphilia adjacent consumer goods and services).
This isn't true, and when I hear this kind of stuff, respectfully, I can only feel like a lot of people making these statements have little interaction with people regarding sex or what not. I've been in the scene for a hot minute, LOTS of proletarian people have freaky sex. While energy is a concern, that actually ends up adding to it because people end up really sexually frustrated too. Some people here really think tradesmen and nurses and teachers and retail workers all have sex in the missionary position.
>>1417
>I should add as an addendum that its not a coincidence when you exclude the labour aristocracy (highly concentrated in the west, though not exclusively existing there) that it isn't surprising that the rest of the world have more conservative sexual mores.
Socially conservative? Maybe. Conservative when no one is looking? I'd argue less so.
>Anyway I am not trying to make a moral point here really, or "laud the virtue" of the world workers & pesants. This is just how things happen to be, and there are materialist explanations for it.
Maybe, but also, I would make the suprising argument that kink events have people talking and acting vanilla as fuck and making sure to act respectable in some way or another, while non-kink events that still have the obvious intent of people trying to get with each other are far more "debauched" and sexual.
>>1421
I didn't see this before I started typing, but I'll say that I feel that most of the points in this post still stand regardless separately.

>>2257048

Again you are not understanding that I am making a quantitative argument, and the context is international (not just your country, nevermind your local scene & hangout spots)

Consider: Do really believe the average bengali textile sweatshop worker, ghanaian cocoa farmer aide or mongolian miner is proportionately as much or more time in an elaborate sex dungeon compared to an average first world 40k usd or more a year office worker, teacher, etc? Nevermind compared to the petit bourgeoisie of the imperial core with 100k a year income.

Malakies.



I should add, there is a very similar materialist reason why communist parties the world over have disproportionate membership from the more well to do.

An activity have more or less proletarian participation does not by itself logically imply any particular stance on its desirability.

>>1408
Birth protesting is the only effective form of protesting when there at too many reactionaries.

>>1423

>They have them in the U.S. and it's called Mardi Gras and Spring Break Weekend.


You know gaynazi, it didn't come to mind, but you are absolutely right. They absolutely are functionally equivalent, and in many ways worse. See this is the kind of insight I really do find invaluable.

Yet another reason, amongst so very very very many, the united states must be totally civilizationally annihilated.

t. Your Faithful Eamobulgaric Enemy

File: 1746597956126-0.jpg (11.91 KB, 201x251, images.jpg)

File: 1746597956126-1.jpg (79.83 KB, 512x341, preview.jpg)

>>1425
An elaborate sex dungeon is pretty extreme, and I suspect you're probably right, but there are counter-veiling examples because Lady Gaga (who is a queer-coded artist) had two million+ Brazilians show up at her concert over the weekend. Or some absurd number. Most of them are proles and it's Brazil (the concert was free because the city government paid for it). The Rio metro area's population alone is 13+ million. But think: urbanization, social productivity, transportation, mode of production.

The gay party scene – which is different from this – is also now an international entertainment industry. To travel for it does require disposable income, but you see now in Thailand with the Circuit Party Asia a pretty big festival that draws men from all over the world, and all over Asia as well.

>>1427
Whatever I can do to help.

>>1427

You know what it must be the late hour, but I can't believe I forgot it (video in Hellenic parliament) where Pafilis exactly points to this phenomenon (promoted by the major bourgeois parties and their university groups).

Μελιγαλάς, not even 1% of the job that needed to be done…

>>1429

Wierd it didn't post.

>>1428

Right exactly, you are elaborating on my points. While I focused on disposable income and how much energy/sanity/time one has left over after a hard day of labouring, surely the social infrastructural & institutional elements are key as well.

For a third worldist, this kind of thinking is doubly important for praxis: Often identitarian tensions exacerbate divisions already (in Africa it takes form of ethnic nationalism/tribalism mostly), and so making sure downplay potentially very inflammatory erotic identity issues takes on similar importance (though less proportionately).

The communist party has no identity based criteria; The key is to accept party ideology & discipline.

Being a top is bourgeois, being a bottom is proletarian.

Homosexuality itself is not burgeois. The LGTB lobby and ideology are, though.(USER WAS SENT TO THE LOBBY FOR THIS POST)

>>1375
Couldnt care less.

>>1433
>LGTB lobby
lol

Didn't we make a board for this

>>1437
You're wrong, statistically speaking.

>>1436
This is the most blatant ragebait I've ever seen lmao

>>1375
It's simply projection. "Family values" or the obsession with property inheritance is primarily a petty-bourgeois or peasant thing. Unfortunately, a lot of the periphery nations which have had the most success with socialism still maintain backwards feudal values. This also combines with capitalist psyops trying to divide and conquer. To some degree, part of this is also that many queer people effectively haven't had a bourgeois democratic revolution yet the same way women have had in many places which is a prerequisite for them participating in proletarian revolution.

Anyhow the remedy for this is rainbow anti-imperialism and anti-imperialist queer liberation. Anti-imperialists must study how to radicalize lumpenized groups such as queer people. IMO Black communists have written the most on this subject. Queer activists should tie the struggle against white Supremacy into their activism. Racism is the main justification for imperialism today and the struggle against racism brings the contradiction of imperialism into more public view. On the other side, white Supremacy and the inheritance of whiteness justifies "family values" and queerphobia. As much as you may detest the progress pride flag, putting race issues to the front brings anti-imperialism to the front immediately.

>>1441
I think the progress pride flag is a better design than the Philly pride flag myself but the fact is that Bringing race to the front pretty directly brings forward imperialism as an issue. I've been thinking for a while about a hybrid Pan-African pride flag design with explicit communist iconography. We must tie the gay struggle to anti-imperialism to heighten the contradiction of bankers at pride.

>>1375
>communist parties back then associating being gay with the petit-bourgeoisie?
Not going to waste an hour reading the entire thread, but lots of Marxist-Leninist parties are still like this today.
The Greek communist party (KKE) is still very anti-LGBT, in Britain there's two ML parties, one which is still very anti-LGBT (CPGB-ML) and one which accepts LGB but not T (CPB).

>>1436
>Wholesome Family-Friendly Christian Cuckoldry.
Thanks for the fap Agent Kochinski.

If party has transphobic chuds it is a bad party, shrimple as.

>Be OP (faggot)
>Not gonna have kids
>Paid wages same as breeder coworkers
>Wages are priced in for having kids i.e. the reproduction of labor power
>Can instead accumulate that surplus capital and reinvest
>Bourgeois aspirations and class consciousness naturally follow
It's basic Marxism. Not going to generalize too much because there absolutely are gay proletarians, but they have an advantage in petit-bourgeois striving.(POST LEFT UP TO BE MOCKED AND RIDICULED)

>>1447
Holy shit. Impeccable material analisys

Communist parties back then either did nothing to prevent feds from taking over or immolated themselves by fedjacketing because they didn't have as robust understanding of how to deal with abusing behavior and that if they did the feds would just leave or not be capable of anything other than being a security risk.

>>1447
But homosexuals adopt kids. Single incels are more bougeosie. Homosexuals do have kids

>>1447
Go back to your discord, Haz.

>>1386
>I don't really think of a small business owner or landlord when I think of the LGBTQ community. I think of food service workers, hospital workers, teachers, and folks in the entertainment industry for the most part - all members of the proletariat.
I was thinking flight attendants, one of the most stereotypically gay male profesions.

i dont care who fucks who, if you want to murder elon you are a comrade

I was looking up pics of striking flight attendants and DAMN

>>1447
isn t this professor William Paul cockshott's argument?

>>1454
these men like to be pretty and should be critically supported

There's nothing bourgeois about LGBT+ people.
What's bourgeois is the way that capitalism is co-opting the identity to reduce it to a marketing demographic.

Why isn't this thread on >>>/LGBT/ ?

>>1405
also it ignores that gay people want to adopt but are often prevented from doing so due to discrimination. So I really don't get the argument that "oooooh you're not doing your party of reproducing the work force" when so many straights abandon their kids and then LGBT aren't allowed to adopt for not being "normal"

t. was raised by lesbians

>>1445
he was also a god builder and lenin thoroughly rebuked him for that spooky nonsense. anyway not an argument

One doesnt have to read theory to know that homosexuals can have children. Therefore, cockshot is stupid

>communist parties are communist because they call themselves so
cmon you gotta try harder

>>1377
>>1379
>>1401
>cockshott
>intellectual grifter (like all intellectuals) who turns marx's critique of political economy into political economy played straight
lol aight

>>1464
Dumb argument to make tbh. They're communist but their intellectual capacity is absolute garbage. Just see the KKE and the dumb shit they publish. Unfortunately, due to living in the blackest reaction, communist parties in the west are absolute garbage.

I don't understand how people can read Marxist theory and come out not understanding the fundamental notions of it. Instead it feels like they memorized terms and apply their morality on top.

CPGB-ML and CPB as mentioned too. But also the so-called anti-campists on this board. Apparently 0 reading. We're so lost in the west, and I don't see a way out.

>>1466
>They're communist
<no connection to strike committees or trade unions whatsoever
whats with all the marxflaggots posting nothing but absolute dogshit this past month

>>1468
marxflag this past month is pretty much just me.
A communist party doesn't necessarily need to have trade unions or whatever other criteria you pulled out of your ass. Accept that communists in the west are by and large dogshit. It's time to face reality and not hide behind no-true-scottsmans.

>>1458
tbh i didn't know if people even used the boards other than /leftypil/

homosexuality was seen as "decadent" (probably the enjoyment of sex in general as well)
stalinist parties tried to replicate a kind of conservative industrial work ethic which also meant to have a mass appeal to peasantry, is the best explanation i can come up with

>>1476
see also the "new soviet man" archetype that was pushed a lot
also the soviet woman archetype who was increasingly depicted as a baby oven

>>1375
I don't really have any stake in the argument about gays being bourgeois
As a whole though, as a group, we're very alienated (despite / because of all the awesome kinky hookups, hedonism, international travel, etc that we're "enjoying")
https://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/gay-loneliness/

I find str8s tend to project this fantasy onto LGBT people being completely liberated when that's not actually the case

>>1476
The Soviet union was a backwater largely peasant uneducated society. I don't know why Marxists pretend this doesn't have an influence on the ideology present in various parts of society. As if by establishing a communist state, it eliminated all social ills instantly and everyone suddenly became a Marxist scholar, a historian, and a scientist.

It's no surprise that people like Haz and the schizos at ACP, or the CPGB-ML exists. Or that the rather well read but poorly socialized first worlder semi-autistic shut ins that haven't done a second of praxis in their lives that lurk around here have absolute dog shit takes. It's almost as if Marx wrote about this somewhere.

>>1477
only if you cherrypick and ignore the material reality. the soviet union was a country where women became engineers, post-soviet russia is the world capital of sex trafficking

File: 1746707801368.jpg (120.3 KB, 856x836, IMG_20250508_143425.jpg)

>>1485
>the soviet union was a country where women became engineers
>became
Uhmm actually they were pushed into it by the regime. Glad that's over.

>>1465
>anti intellectualism
>thinking about things is grifting
>scientists, inventors, engineers, mathematicians, medical professionals, all grifters
out of all the legit criticisms one can have of paulie dickblast, this is not one of them

post examples of working class gays for science you retards

>>1401
>The communist understanding of sexuality has, since the counter-revolutions in Europe in 1989 and the dissolution of the USSR, been conveniently buried and forgotten.
What a retarded sentence.
How the fuck can you come to the conclusion that homophobia is a cornerstone of communism? It's about as ridiculous as arguing that phrenology is a cornerstone of biology. Just because a lot of people were engaging in it at one time doesn't mean it's an essential aspect of the movement. Science is constantly changing and adapting to new information and ways of thinking.
Cockshott uses this statement to poorly launder (what he thinks is) a more "palatable" homophobia that has "nuanced" "dialectical" positions. Oh gay men are bad but lesbians are fine. How convenient for a straight old boomer. Impressive, very nice, now let's see your search history.

>>1492
Me. ←—

>>1484
Also even though the USSR had state atheism there was still a lot of religion, underground churches that the state couldn't reasonably get rid of. Hence why religious belief seemingly skyrocketed in Russia post-USSR.

>>1492
I literally work moving crates in an exploitative supermarket

>>1491
>>1465
samefag cockshott shill

>>1476
They should have just gulaged the conservatives as the obvious counter-revolutionaries they would prove to be.
When china had racist riots they just shot the conservatards and that was settled. Either re-educate or shoot.

>>1492
I work in a literal factory

>>1505
Whats the issue with Dickblast?

File: 1746745231276-0.webp (139.7 KB, 640x568, mgdotw9fomze1.webp)

File: 1746745231276-1.webp (331.07 KB, 960x683, ioprevxeomze1.webp)

>A majority of Clevelanders surveyed seem to agree is that it is a city of couples. A high percentage of those interviewed by The ADVOCATE were, themselves, currently involved in primary relationships of one to 16 years in duration.

>"There seems to be a tendency in Cleveland for people to couple up instead of remaining single," David Feltham notes. "It's that kind of town. But as a result, everybody is into their own little social group and un-willing to let other people in. It is very cliquish in Cleveland."


https://reddit.com/r/rsforgays/comments/1ki25p6/advocate_archives_cleveland_ohio_edition_1979/


Saw these profiles from the Advocate of gay men living in Cleveland around 1979, some of them poor and proletarian.
Interesting that nearly all of them are monogamous, very different to what was happening in Los Angeles, NYC, SF at the time.

>>1506
The party was also filled with people who weren't really good Marxists plus they simply couldn't escape their historically contingent moment. If centuries later people like cockshott can't do it either, with mountains and mountains of research into the topic of homosexuality in a huge variety of fields, there was not a lot of hope for the burgeoning soviet republic. Even then, people forget how homophobic the entire west was. The DDR was groundbreaking in this regard. Everywhere else in the west was absolutely horrible.
>>1509
>>1507
Just mathematically it doesn't make sense that gays are bourgeois. Plus there have been many studies that confirm that incidence of homosexuality is pretty uniform independent of time and place, not to mention that people seemingly have a set sexuality since very very early in life, which wouldn't make sense with the class component angle.

>>1485
its complicated
the soviet union made a lot of leaps in reforming rights in favor of women, and industrialization freed a lot of them from patriarchal peasant life, but under stalin these developments were curbed a bit

>>1561
Yeppp. Stalin was responsible for every single decision taken by the central committee. Especially the bad ones.

>>1563
yeah i guess smol bean stalin literal chief executive wasnt responsible for anything

Guys, is le gender acceleration le real?

>>1375
probably because homosexuality was tolerated in some upper class circles like boarding schools meanwhile poorer fags just got bullied into remaining in the closet

>>1492
me and your dad for example

>>1387
well is not called GAY fully automated luxury space communism for nothing

>>1459
Def this. I don't remember how it worked in the actual legality of it, but I had a friend who was also raised by lesbian parents. And those two lesbian parents had to do this insane bullshit legal loophole where they had to legally adopt each other and then adopt a kid. It was weird. One of the moms is a lawyer and is still unbelievably pissed even thinking about it because it was so difficult to do.


Unique IPs: 58

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]