MadoHomu Exedra edition
Previous Thread:
>>618934
>>896the website i linked in
>>620123 seems like a good starting point. recently i also read Kitanai Kimi ga Ichiban Kawaii and it was a whole thing… well written though and made me cry at times.
>>898I got my husband a Zippo.
I recommend knives.
Pic related what I got from him
Also god fuck I love men, I like how big they are.
>>903Answered.
>>904Circuit is out. Grindr is in, but hookups are out, contradictory. Next on the agenda is expanding gay networks.
>>899He might think the knife is cool, iirc he has a pocket knife he likes to play with so maybe he'd like a new one. Thanks for the suggestion.
>Also god fuck I love men, I like how big they areI'm the big one in our relationship I'm like 6'3 and he's 5'6 lol. Just a teeny lil guy <3
>>900He does love plushies, he's got like 20 of them crammed onto his bed lol. I've gotten him those just for fun though, so I'd like to get him something more special for his birthday. I'll get him the Gameboy if he hasn't gotten it for himself by then, but otherwise I'm thinking maybe some other piece of vintage tech, or possibly a model car or something.
>>917We're all queer here. Feminism is a touchy subject since many here are more radical than what feminism has to offer.
>>920I'm a Stalinist, whatever that may mean.
>>921Identity politics, in this case, presenting as NB as a political statement or what not, is retarded through and through. NB makes sense historically because gender roles have never been weaker in centuries but at the same time genders are strongly demarcated by society. The end result is that genders stop making sense and people are like wtf am I supposed to be, gender-wise. Of course we must support people presenting as however they want, but gender isn't abolished by these actions, but rather by the material conditions that gave rise to gender in the first place.
>>921>>909>>906I’ve never met a non binary person that doesn’t come from a middle class/upper class background. There’s no nb prostitutes or homeless. To me, non binary is a grift cis middle/upper class queer people use to take resources meant for trans people for their own personal gain.
>>931QED.
>>942For me, transness is about survival, realizing yourself and changing your position in society. If these aren’t your goals in transition, which it never is for nb, then it’s not the same struggle as me and I don’t relate, therefore can’t say we’re in the same "community". I don’t fuck with people that are just in it for the fun/fuck gender!!! crowd. This is real life and these expressions have consequences, that which is most fatal for trans women. NB rarely deviate from their birth gender’s expression, not to mention no one even knows what NB is.
To most, it’s just queer fashion and style trends accompanied with a “they,” which is not the same as changing your gender. You aren’t not considered trans by most because they lack the knowledge to even consider your identity, to be treated as cis is a privilege regardless of your personal feelings. In my experience, non binary have dominated trans spaces, take resources from trans people, spread harmful narratives about transness and commit violence towards specifically trans women. I have countless anecdotes of these moments.
Like this
>>906 is just the average enby anywhere.
>>936Depends on where you live but here you can.
>>939>To me, non binary is a grift cis middle/upper class queer people use to take resources meant for trans people for their own personal gain.I regret nothing. The cute boys must flow.
>>954Anfem? Gay misandrist?
What's this about women being automatic empaths to LGBT?
>>906>>953I always felt it was just white people wishing they felt a modicum of adversity and identity nonwhite have
if they manage to be leftist then I don't care thougher
>>955An exception to the rule
Whereas hetmoids being hateful violent psychopaths to lgbt folk is the norm
I don't think its true that most nbs don't transition. Lots of the transmascs I know (who are on T) are nonbinary, even though they go by explicitly male names. I think in an ideal world I would be nonbinary.
TBH I hate some parts about traditional femininity, some of the parts that lots of people associate with being a woman. I hate party dresses, high heels and women's shoes in general (which just feel like mobility restrictors). It's all just about social capital. That's the deal with that ugly over the top makeup too, its not about looking good its about showing off how much effort you put into it. I HATE romance that doesn't have a plot. Idk how people can only read romance, it's unironically a psyop. Women are only allowed to write Romance, not sweeping narratives about politics and history. And I think most of all I hate the kind of way lots of women socialise. I'm not explaining it properly but anyone that has experienced it knows. Idk but there is something very awful about some 'female' spaces and groups especially at like work.
I mean on the other hand I do fit into some other stereotypes about feminitiy. I like hugging people, I care about fashion, have stuffed animals, and I generally care a lot about my friends. I cry very easily. But tbh none of these things were parts about myself that I was not pre-transition. I was always very sentimental and cared about aesthetics, liked cooking etc., and liked being the 'care giver' I guess. Some things I did have become 'cute', like being nerdy and kind of autistic. But also like I am not any different from before I transitioned other than that I am now more into women than before when I was mainly into men (and I identified as a gay guy). I guess fag to fag transition. I'm still traditionally masculine in the ways I always was, I like doing physical things like climbing trees, martial arts, being really into hobbies, being anti-pop music (and especially tailor swift and rappers), being pro-violence, personally austere, highly materialist, wanting to be a martyr to a political cause and wanting to die young. Though my template for that chaneged to like Joan of Arc, and tbh maybe thats not much of a male thing, my idea is more like being a beautiful, almost angelic in death martyr.
Maybe in the end 'masculine' and 'feminine' are kind of horseshit. That's where I came to the nonbinary conclusion. By the way I live as a woman, wear dresses, I'm not ugly but I don't pass, I'm not coming from this as like a perennial boymoder or she/her who looks like a fat man.
Maybe I'm just in the same kind of thought tunnel as the straw man of the 'theyfabs', where I actually do want to be percieved as a woman but just hate some parts about it. The not associating with women's friend groups and social things might just be because I don't identify with most social things in general, or that I'm trans and didn't grow up with them. I don't think I would like that shit anyway though, I hate male social groups too, they are even worse. Most of my friends are women anyway. If I was nb I would be almost completely female presenting but like with male hobbies. And what even is a male or a female hobby, what is the difference. There is none, it's just horseshit. The only reason there even are male hobbies is because the men in them are so sexist that it drives everyone else away. Like really in practice I am just like a modern feminist rather than really rejecting gender norms.
In the end I do think most people deep down identify with one of the two genders, me included. These genders are very deeply rooted in our society. Obviously they can, like any social construct, be taken down. But that would be further in the future than nations being destroyed. Maybe gender abolition has to follow the laws of historical development, where they will only go away when the technology reaches a certain point. I actually think that point is not when everyone is born as genderless cyborgs, but instead when artificial babies overtake natural ones. Then the economic basis for gender will dissapear, and what sex organs you are born with will just be like what hair colour you have. That's going to happen quicker under socialism.
>>960>being anti-pop music (and especially tailor swift and rappers), being pro-violence, personally austere, highly materialist, Hating pop music is the most shallow thing ever.
It really is.
Also, traditional masculinity also favors emotional intimacy with friends, but not the way trad femininity do it
>>964>Wtf is histrionictheyre probably referring to histrionic personality disorder, the "female hysteria" of the current dsm
basically theyre calling you a woman and dismissing your post
>>974The current hysteria is BPD, not histrionic.
>>973You're the retard, lmao. Religion is a very embedded aspect in people's lives. If it were so easy to lose it, nobody would believe in that shit.
>>965>Hating pop music is the most shallow thing ever.>It really is. True. The most basic bitch shit there is. Learning to enjoy oneself even in spaces where lab grown cheap ass gay pop is playing is an improvement of one's life. It opens up the horizons of what you can do and where you can be. Bitches be out there segregating themselves in an already segregated segment of society to feel special. Lmao. Can't be me.
>>976>True. The most basic bitch shit there is. Learning to enjoy oneself even in spaces where lab grown cheap ass gay pop is playing is an improvement of one's life. It opens up the horizons of what you can do and where you can be. Bitches be out there segregating themselves in an already segregated segment of society to feel special. Lmao. Can't be meIrony is,most underground music is often just spiced up versions of mainstream slop anyway, and it bases it self far too much on "old school" pop music. Even the lyricism is the same. They always wanna sing about how angsty they feel or how everyone else is fake except them. Or they talk about getting high.
And most "anti pop " musicians often are the biggest hedonists and control freaks
Cannot even finish an album without having beef with their band mates or record label over certain song placements or having drug induced frenzies.
>You're the retard, lmao. Religion is a very embedded aspect in people's lives. If it were so easy to lose it, nobody would believe in that shit. Wanna know a secret? Most people don't believe in God as an actual sentient being. They believe in God as a concept, or rather, treat God as a psychosomatic effect.
Listen. To how people talk about God in such a vague yet personalized manner.
>>977You're right most music is just pop music but with a different name. I hate all of that music too. I used to tolerate punk because I thought it was cool. But none of this music is actually good to listen to. All modern music is a psyop unironically except some types of electronic music and maybe some types of metal. Everything descended from pop is bad. The only good modern pop music was the Beatles and stuff from that time period. And it sucks. I don't understand how people can like any pop or rock music, it's just boring. It has no heart or emotion.
I think most culture nowadays is pretty good, like I don't think books or films or books or games are worse and in fact they are better in many ways. But music is 100% worse than it was 100 years ago. Classical music has also gotten so pretentious, I can't stand radio 3. That's why I unironically listen to a lot of film soundtracks and game sountracks, I think its the next stage of ballet and opera music, which weren't so prestidgious back then but now are held in high regard, because that is the kind of music meant for entertainment. Though this stuff is obviously worse than the best opera and ballet music from back then. Classical and orchestral music is much more beautiful.
I HATE 'gay' music. I forgot who these 'artists' are but I hate them. It's all so vapid and nothingy. There's no emotion here. It's the musical version of one night stands. Vapid, meaningless. Love music nowadays isn't trying to express it through the actual sounds, using the actual medium. It is just the lyrics of "I love you baby I want to own you baby you are my property", or "I love fucking bitches, I am the bitch owner". We're even at a worse point than when it was three chords, because nowadays it doesn't even sound good, there is no chord progression it is just like in Cardi B it is duu duu duu. It is barely music anymore.
Rap was a psyop by whites to destroy actual black music.
Also I sometimes wish people would listen to folk type music again. That's the kind of simple music I think is good. Socialists need to start making more folk music again I think.
>>977>most underground music is often just spiced up versions of mainstream slop anywaynot really
i guess underground rock is a little dumb to be super proud of since its basically descended from elvis/beatles/rolling stones pop music (i dont think any avant garde white person was at the original rock music parties…)
but even in those cases, taking a popular form in a unique artistic direction that deconstructs its modality is still pretty cool
anyways, as for pop music itself, obviously theres good and theres bad
>>968the issue of discord is that theres an attachment to a name, even if its just within a server. i prefer being anon and detaching from my individuality. Discord with a profile, and friends, and a username, creates a virtual individuality. On an image board i am fleeting and just another voice in the crowd, i like that. either way, discord is just obtuse, there's a level of gatekeeping to information in it, and it doesn't lend itself properly to posting so much as talking.
>>967t. girl who never actually posted on /tttt/ or /s4s/
>>993>>993/repgen/ master race
Simply put the dysphoria is not bad enough to justify the social cost. I only care about achieving power, and money. Ive made peace with the masculine role. Male privilege is too good to give up the goose.
>>994>t. girl who never actually posted on /tttt/ or /s4s/Lmao, sounds like you never posted there. /tttt/ was literally filled to the brim with
-2016-era gamergater or Nazis that at one point in the last 10 years noticed they liked frilly dresses but kept all their racist views
-Unironic military contractor programmer tgirls
-followers of all kinds of reactionary online communities
-the 'let's genocide all brown people because they are homophobic' type.
>>991This is what we've always been fucking saying! The petit-bourgeois both have more free time and the energy to waste on things like religious fanaticism
and have actual reasons to engage in capitalist competition so they resort to things like nationalism, racism, sexism, transphobia, etc. to get ahead of others. The proletariat in their immiseration doesn't have the time nor energy to waste on shit like this beyond some basic prejudice nor do they have anything to gain in doing so like the petit-bourgeois does. There's materially more in common between proletarians of vastly different identities than between two people of the same identity but different class.
>>1005>vibes are kind of rancid around heretrue
>>1010ecco2ks album e
>>1017yes because yuri is incredibly cute and the purest form of love, keep it going
t. pooner
nytimes did an article on the blare flemings controversy
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/20/magazine/trans-athletes-women-college-sports.html>https://archive.is/d5eMzit's kinda comfy to read. feels like a 00s movie plot set in california
they should've used more pics of blaire to make people in the comments seethe harder, though
>>99925% is still a lot of people
its sadly unsurprising that gay men are the weaker link, and pleasantly surprising than lesbians like trans people more than trans people themselves lol
>>1033i think its because lesbians are also considered sexual predators and perverts, so theyre more sympathetic about being painted with that brush
theyve also tolerated gender nonconformity much more
a lot of "terf lesbians" are probably political lesbians as well
anyways, the 25% of brits are probably the most powerful percentile of the population unfortunately
>>1037when i was in middle school (which is when all this happened) i had some developing christianity-induced homophobia but it never took root and so i've never felt bad about being gay or thought much of it.
it's only lately that i've felt some occasional anxiety about it due to the growing rightoid tide around the world.
>>1050there is not a single marxist argument for essential difference between men and woman
t. not
>>1051, surprisingly
>>1055Marxism doesn't argue for essentialism, but it also doesn’t deny reality. Sexual dimorphism, real biological differences between men and women exists. What Marxism focuses on is how class society shaped and distorted those differences into social inequality.
Engels explained how the rise of private property and the patriarchal family led to the systematic subordination of women. That’s not based on biology alone, it’s based on how biology was organized under specific relations of production.
>>1059behold, essence of cock
(with spices added)
>>894I knew an lgbt board was just a way to cause segregation
Congratulations homophobes and gay misandrist alike, you both got what you wanted
>>1142Limonov
Gorky
Bandera
Trotsky
>>1142Luxenburg
Gonzalo
Bebel
Tubman
Lysenko
Gorky
Browder
Tito
Laozi
Guenon
Bin Laden
Teto
>>1142Lin Biao
Guevara
Bo Xilai
Traore
>>1206>project this onto an imagined othertell this ni*ga that
>>1140
>"mysogyny part of puritainism">idpol shitthat or the newer genz of twitter are more prude and less less receptive to weeaboo bullshit
also i don't see you nig*as saying this uygh* was wrong, most twitter users are wrong n shit and say shit to act like redditors, but uygh*s saying shit about that, the user must be 1/12 correct at this point
it's still 1/8 true tho
>>1634I love them, they're our natural allies
I love women in general, I only have disdain for straight men
>>1634terfs are just the logical conclusion of feminism
>>1635>natural allieslmao
>>1635> Natural alliesWhenever I talk to them, they seem to find the idea of recognizing men having issues as somehow oppressive, until cornered in which they finally go
> Fine!!! Men have issues!!!!< But it's actwually your choice to have that and you guys are actively choosing to not just dismantle patriarchy despite that would require fighting against the fucking state.It's one if you're talking about the goonettes that love gay/bin men since of their shota porn, but otherwise many I've spoken to come off as pink fascists.
>>1642Don't pay gay misandrist much mind, they and anfem poster argue in dogmas and poor frameworks.
They unironically see themselves as Ben Shapiros with
> Facts don't care about your feelingsBut cant explain what factual proof would make a genocide bad for instance, (an argument that requires more than facts) – but here they dress it up in "empathy".
(if "empathy" just means to maximize your ability to rape/abuse, then they'd be more moral granted).
>>1672No???????? On the complete opposite we love Women, sounds like hetero moid projecting
The vast majority of hetero men are misogynists, homophobes and general reactoid subhumans
>>1675It's straight guys who invalidate, and verbally and physically harass us, who dehumanize us and have been the sole responsible for all our miseries since inmemorable times, it's straight guys the sole responsibles for women oppression
If you fail to see why feminists (and I dare to say even women in general) are natural allies of the gays then nothing can
(USER WAS WARNED FOR LACK OF HISTORICAL AND CLASS ANALYSIS) >>1671Hetero males now.
Hatred towards men is a crack that leads to other bigotry and reactionary thinking – this is why we have terfs for instance, or white supremacist feminism.
>>1681>>1682Take a look at these 2 posters for instance.
It's one they overly represented reactionary ideology, but it's a lie to say vast majority.
This conflation is what feminists do with crime statistics, arguing unironic post-911 cult of fear crap, despite its massive drop and clear understanding in material conditions.
It's that thinking is why the perfect loveable women feminists were arguing that black men would vote for Donald Trump – then after election would be mixed on if to add women to the "rather go with the bear" list.
>>1696im not the same person you dumb fucking retard
>You come into a thread about LGBTmaybe because im trans
>>1706No,
I know
you are, but what am
I?
>>1682>>1721Wanna explain women working in the state and even had detrimental leader ship positions (like thatcher)?
Want to explain why bourgeosis women are fine with the system and exploit?
Want to explain why the exploitation occurs even despite the race or religion or whatever?
You want to explain it?
No, you're a feminist that desires nothing but subjugation.
Liberal feminists, the dominant feminism, contains no natural allys – kill your self, and get the fuck out of this general.
>>1723>Wanna explain women working in the state and even had detrimental leader ship positions (like thatcher)?The system can absorb individuals from time to time
Also you're talking about class, which is a more complicated issue
The point is that feminism is gonna be aligned with LGBT rights most of the time, which is, like, an almost banal observation, tbh
>>1726Different poster.
The issue is exactly that feminism, regardless of its allegiance to queer politics, is bourgeois. If it aligns with queer politics in anyway, it is through the consciousness of the proprietor, the general, and the exploiter.
Your detachment from class makes you falsely believe that ALL queer politics is ALWAYS worth championing, while the opposite is true. Pure, liberal idealism.
>>1734We don't need to speculate. We have the historic record. Same with social democracy and Proudhons anarchism
or indeed all anarchism.
>>1735Marxism-Leninism is not communism (little, or big 'c').
>>1726> More complicated issueIt's literally tied to how we've had this society.
What the fuck do you think came first, general slavery or slavery of women?
There's a reason why racism was only invented like 400 years ago by the spaniards.
>>1733The issue is that it's a broad movement that here has turned liberal, plus has had a history of being white supremacist.
Feminists instead of recognizing limits just go
> We define!!!!!!!!Like fuck off, no matter what bullshit you spew you can't argue that terfs cant be categorized under feminism – your rapey definition changing doesnt change that.
>>1737>>1733go back to your lgbt genocide country
>>>/latam/ >>>/latam
>>1740Please explain the surge of feminists arguing to bring 4b because Kamala (blue Hitler), lost to Donald Trump (red Hitler).
>emancipating women in the abstract is liberal from the get-goEmancipation isn't inherently liberal.
100% you were the type of person to see Chairman Mao's:
> Combat liberalismAnd thought that meant being a combative liberal.
>>1748This is the worst reply to already terrible post.
You should've just went full mask off and say
>>>/hamas/ >>1765>Emancipation isn't inherently liberal.have you tried reading the following words retard. not even the most prominent marxist women were for feminism because its interclassist by definition
communism is the emancipation of the proletariat, no more no less, any consequence of the abolition of class society is a happy accident
>>1767I read read your words and their moronic.
Women need a unique liberation tied to their identity of being a woman along side their identity of being a proletariat.
Saying
> communism is the emancipation of the proletariat, no more no less<(which isn't entirely true since it's about establishment of private property), Doesn't counter the fact that part of that liberation is all the spooks and crap put onto the workers. Like why do you think successful communist movements were anti-racism for instance?
>>1791Posting on the board is unappealing.
I still don't see why it's a whole board, it's insanely overkill.
It's like they saw leftychan with like 20 dead boards and went
>Hold up they're cookn >>1870>>1765Middle class women and bourgeois are privileged and aren't exploited for their labor with no reserves under this society. I'm not even talking about work at home, of which the dynamic isn't like 20 years ago, I mean productive labor. So there's no way one can speak of a universal exploitation of women as its own social category with unanimous conditions under which compels them to have shared interests to struggle for. One is wealthy and commands over labor power and politics, the other is trying to survive. That's the issue I'm contesting here.
Working class women don't struggle and get exploited under capitalism as women, they do so as proletarians and communism isn't a movement to emancipate 'humanity' or whatever the fuck. People like Rosa simply said that the emancipation of women is in lieu with the overall goals of socialism, not by bandaging 'marxist' to bourgeois rights. That takes away from the class struggle and its ends of abolishing such social categories as they emerged in class society, along with class society itself. Feminism is inherently an interclass movement and applying it or other ones like equality and rights of races, nations, claims for liberty, justice, etc. to the proletarian movement doesn't make them any less anti-communist.
><(which isn't entirely true since it's about establishment of private property), The abolition of class society and property emancipates the proletariat, genius.
>>1873>>1872Proletariat women are not only oppressed for being proletarians, but also receive unique oppression in stuff like lower wages despite being in the same field – this is just material reality.
Recognizing their unique additional oppression is necessary since capital in general will exploit one sub group over the other to bribe the other, with an additional demonizing of each other – racism is a famous example.
This isn't to say that bourgeosis women are oppressed because they're women, they're so benefiting of their class that it overrides that – both of these things work together.
>The abolition of class society and property emancipates the proletariat, genius.If you're going to be snarky, you need to do it right.
(Unlike me which forgets to add words).
>>1874Thread sucks because it's a dead board, not because a "chud" doesn't get a now liberal movement that's constantly white washed.
>>1896>>1900>>1874>>1905This is Eleanor Marx about women workers, highlighting how middle-class women's interests diverge from those of working class women, and how feminists (women's rights-ers) differ from working class women.
Luxemburg's stance on feminism is well-known enough so not gonna bother posting that one.
>>1905>Women's oppression serves to divide the proletariat.>Emancipation within the capitalist framework leaves women in a class position.>Proletarian women have more to gain from organizing with men than to fight an inter-class struggle.While i think this analysis largely holds up, i find the wholesale dismissal of engaging with this intra-class competition very short-sighted. Is the economic discrimination of women, like those of racial minorities, not a very visible head of the capitalist hydra that can spur organization? Likewise the eventual disappearance of the need for such underclasses does not automatically result in the disappearance of related ressentiments. Need i remind you the emancipation from the family structure was fought for in the USSR, unsuccesfully. Feminism is a valuable tool for marxists, to a point.
Yet there is also another side to the issue, besides how women should organize with respect to their class. Gender ideology necessarily pervades every aspect of society and most apparently can lead to the trivialization of uniquely women's issues. I would argue bourgeois feminism is pretty transparent in every one of its incarnations. Proletarian women's economic marginalization and the gendered burden of childcare are a part of the wider proletarian struggle, as much as the working conditions of amazon warehouse employees or price gouging in healthcare, and, in addition to present economic conditions, they are both enforced by patriarchal notions of women's inferiority and predisposition towards mother roles. The enduring prevalence of such notions even among the working class is the reason women need to loudly advocate for their own issues, or risk being brushed aside.
>>1905Idk why this reply when the first image explains that proletariat women are unequal to proletariat men.
Also your second post (
>>1906 ), is just highlighting liberals in the movement and the sway/leading it has.
The problem I had was simplifying the contradictions of the struggle to just purely proletariat vs bourgeois, when it's clear that, even if they're extensions of the first dialect, they still exist.
You're misunderstanding me in thinking that I'm arguing for the solution to be derived from that liberal-feminist framework, or that a communist movement should work part within in it to satisfy those liberals.
And confused when I'm using the modern (water down) definition of feminism of being:
> When you're for the liberation of women and men from the patriachy And saying that communism, a movement that logically incorporates it but to those less read in theory would not realize this (hence le "maga-communism"), would aim to liberate proletariat women more than just their status as a worker.
Unique IPs: 140