/meta/ - Ruthless criticism of all that exists (in leftypol.org)

>allowed to be misogynistic, Lesbophobic, Homophobic
wow just like in the PRC

>>43128
All mods should have a hole in their neck like Kirk. Including the "classic leftypol mods" you have this nostalgic boner for

But also, "gender critical" slop is fucking stupid.

It entirely falls apart because it brings gender down to biology. So a woman is only defined by her cunt? Cool. I guess fat women are less women because they have troubles with pregnancy and higher T levels. Besides, regardless of what you want to think defines a gender, has fuck all to do with applicable laws and society.

So like ok, you're just stupid and think transgender women aren't real women. Doesn't mean you get to stop them from using the women's bathroom. If you think it does, you're wrong. And just cause you use buzz words like "women's spaces" doesn't make you less wrong. Doesn't even work on Reddit where I say Charlie Kirk all mods for invading our spaces, why should it work for you?

Also what's with the Jason Unruhe pic? Unruhe stopped espousing terf coal once it stopped working for him. He probably still feels that way, but it's too ACP adjacent and he needs that YouTube revenue.

this poster regularly derails the leftybritpol thread in an attempt to focus on their particular obsessions. this poster does not reply in good faith if you engage with them from, say, a transmedicalist perspective (e.g. agreeing on the "tumblr conception of gender" but remaining pro-trans regarding those who medically transition) because they are an anti-transgender obsessive rather than some innocent, good faith poster. they seemingly have a desperate need to be agreed with, and because this isn't forthcoming they post often and post terribly. their points of reference are dated (tumblr! who cares about tumblr in the 20th decade of this milennium!?) and out of touch. they operate under the misapprehension that people refuse to debate them because they're afraid of losing, rather than because it's plainly a waste of time - i think the metaphor is "like playing chess with a pigeon" - and no matter what you say, you're guaranteed to get little more than another stream of invective against the "gender cultists" and the /leftypol/ mods, absent any apparent engagement with your major points.

this user has brainworms which are foreign to this site, but held in common with the british government, british press, british judiciary, 55 tufton street (in britain, but in fairness, yankee money) and so on. their posts are composed of stock phrases and repetitive tics. they attempt to leftwash their particularly british mental illness as something held around the world: the CPC is not "gender critical", whatever their policies on trans issues, just as non-Trump presidents were not "MAGA". "gender critical" most usefully refers to the britain-centered anti-transgender movement, a sort of failed progressive-washing of a sudden reactionary turn. the only "gender critical" ""marxist"" organizations exist in Britain, the CPGB-ML and the CPB. (the former is a cult that wonders why it has no women in it, the latter is a feeble copy of the Labour party…)

i really must emphasize for the foreign reader that for all their crowing about Marx and Engels, if you ever visit /leftybritpol/ look out for how quickly this user will go to bat for the British supreme court (because it ruled 'gender critical' prejudices are a protected belief, and that the equality act secretly repealed the gender recognition act), the British government (because it's adopted a generally anti-trans stance and commissioned some anti-trans policy based evidence), the Equalities and Human Rights Commission (which is quite famously packed with people who believe in neither equalities nor human rights and which has boldly answered the trans bathroom debate with a de-facto "no bathrooms for transhumanists" policy, other classics include finding that Corbyn's labour was institutionally antisemitic), the famously reactionary and incestuous british press, wealthy and famous public figures, and on and on it goes. these institutions have it out for transgender people so you see, they must be real Marxist Feminists. If Britain is anomalous compared to every other country on earth in this regard (where there's establishment unanimity on anti-trans policy rather than a liberal/conservative split as in normal countries), it is only because Britain's famously middle class feminist movement is the most Marxist of all…

but i digress. more to the point, this user is wrong on a point of fact:
>There is [sic] no rules against being Gender Critical.
>There is no ordinance against being Gender Critical.
OP pretends to cite the rules, but clearly has not read them: the rules are plain on why "mods do not even want the debate on gender critical positions to happen": because stupid circular arguments about transgenderism with obsessive weirdoes who go on and on like a broken record are precisely what one of the rules was designed to prevent! because it isn't interesting!
<14: To ensure a basic level of quality, topics or posts will not be tolerated when contributions are not conductive to well-intentioned discussion. Therefore, posts or topics are likely to be removed at the discretion of moderation staff if they;
>b) imply reactionary or false positions of the userbase as a form of group shaming
>f) are low effort sectarian bait rather than good faith discussion
>g) are likely to create pointless and unconstructive arguments about ‘idpol’ (as defined in Article 1).
i include b) and f) because OP is guilty of them perennially, including within this very post, but g) is unambiguous.

article 1 defines idpol thus:
>We believe that conflicts between genders, races, sexualities, and so on are distractions from the wider class struggle that are intentionally fanned by the ruling class. This does not mean that oppression based on personal characteristics does not exist, but that it should be approached from an egalitarian perspective which is not personally accusatory and does not assign ‘victim’ and ‘oppressor’ groups. The rights of individuals to live according to their own wishes is a fundamental part of leftism

OP is personally accusatory to the mods (members of a cult! jerking off over reactionary horseshit!) and to most of the userbase of the threads they spam, OP clearly sets "gender critical" people up as a victim group (if a crybullying tactic is good enough for the UK supreme court, why not /leftypol/?) and then assigns everyone else as the oppressors, the misogynistic, Lesbophobic, Homophobic anti-feminist reactionaries. It will not surprise you to know that OP is also guilty of constant ban evasion. It will not surprise me when OP either ignores this point entirely, or gives a nonsensical reply.

i agree with OP on only one point: we should have an ordinance declaring this a pro-trans site. it need not expand on rule 14g at all, which is more than adequate, but it should serve as a reminder that anti-transgender obsessiveness is unwelcome. one can be an anti-transgender ""gender critical"" obsessive and post on leftypol, but only if they keep quiet about their anti-transgender obsession when it isn't interesting - just as i am more than welcome to be an Egyptology obsessive, but will get into hot water if i start spamming pyramids in /usapol/.

>>43435
>It entirely falls apart because it brings gender down to biology. So a woman is only defined by her cunt? Cool
Gender expression is a mix of material realities in regards to biology and biological sexual dimorphism with socialization aspect in roles, clothing etc. I don't see how this is a controversial statement beyond anybody but the gender cult who believe sex (not even gender) is 100% socialized and that you can literally just change that entire lifetime of socialization on a whim, yet refuse to extend such a position to race, which is far more an arbitary social role.
>>43458
Dude, anybody who has read the leftybritpol threads can see I've engaged in good faith relentlessly, while you Gender culties literally just respond with insane fucking SNARK.
I'm the literal fucking one that took a position of a legal third gender, and the left to argue for extention of gender norms within the sexes, while you gender culties are like "NOOOO EVERYONE HAS TO PLAY ALONG WITH STEREOTYPICAL GENDER ROLES AND IF YOU SAY YOU ARE THE OPPOSITE SEX AND DRESS AESTHETICALLY LIKE A PARODY VERSION OF THE OPPOSITE SEX YOU ARE!"
You've completely misread my position on Transmedicalism, which is that Transmedicalism at least has a basis in a more materialist basis, but still doesn't deal with the numerous social and philosophical or sheer logical issues in regards to… why should we be reinforcing dysphoric conditions or forcing others to play along with literal mental illness? Should we all play along with the delusions of Schizos? You types don't even support other forms of Dysphoric expression like "Pro-Ana"/Thinspo or Diaracial.
>i include b) and f) because OP is guilty of them perennially, including within this very post, but g) is unambiguous.
God you are such a bad faith fuckhead it's actually unreal.
Again, I'VE LITERALLY ENGAGED WITH YOU FUCKTARDS POSTS AND NONSENSICAL DODGING ARGUMENTS RELENTLESSLY, meanwhile you faggots literally just post snark and mock anybody who dares question any of your positions.
Pic related, not even me, you guys couldn't even accept the reality of someones lived experience and just handwave it away despite women talking about this happening everywhere, and entire Trans communities like /tttt/ and Reddit's trans communities as well and numerous trans figures on twitter outright gloating about doing shit like this.
How about the reality that the Trans community still cynically denies AGP is real while a near majority of trans identify with the label near unanimous majority meet AGP standards in studies? Which brings up another question, why should people be forced to play along with a sexual fetish without consent?
>OP is personally accusatory to the mods (members of a cult! jerking off over reactionary horseshit!) and to most of the userbase of the threads they spam, OP clearly sets "gender critical" people up as a victim group (if a crybullying tactic is good enough for the UK supreme court, why not /leftypol/?) and then assigns everyone else as the oppressors, the misogynistic, Lesbophobic, Homophobic anti-feminist reactionaries. It will not surprise you to know that OP is also guilty of constant ban evasion. It will not surprise me when OP either ignores this point entirely, or gives a nonsensical reply.
Because they constantly delete my posts which have tried to reason with you cultists in good faith countless times, even had mods simply repeatedly delete souces to studies and official data sets that go against the gender cult position, while leaving up posts of you gender culties being misogynistic, homophobic, bad faith crybully sociopaths? I mean the other week, every time I tried to respond to a user asking for datasets on crime, a mod would delete it, then the user immediately after would post "so where is the source then?" which is clear at that point after I did like 5 fucking times it was just trolling in conjunction with the mods/jannies.

>>43459
you repeatedly emphasize that you get nowhere trying to discuss this topic. let's say you're right about everything there is to say about gender: fine. rule 14g still applies. you know (or ought to know) that your posts are likely to create pointless and unconstructive arguments where people just snark at you, and on a topic that is unambiguously a question of identity politics. that is, in and of itself, sufficient grounds for your posts to be removed.

the reason people post snark and mock you is because nobody except you is interested in having this idpol discussion. the reason mods delete your posts is because they are rule breaking even when we make the most sympathetic assumptions possible, and they are disruptive enough that someone bothers to report them. the very fact you persist in trying to start arguments on this topic when nobody's taking the bait (going so far as to ban evade to try and keep them going) makes it impossible to believe you are acting in good faith. anyone acting in good faith would move on and engage with what the thread is actually discussing.

nobody cares about that you want the left to take the gunther fehlinger-jahn position on gender roles , nobody cares about the sociology of transracialism vs transgenderism, nobody cares about the philosophical and logical issues you imagine with something that's happening anyway, nobody cares about re-litigating the boundary between mental and physical illness, nobody cares to debate the appropriateness of your comparisons, nobody cares to answer your loaded questions, nobody cares about "the reality of someones lived experience" (and you accuse other users of being tumblrites?) on an anonymous board, nobody cares about what you find AGP subreddits, and nobody cares what random trans figures on twitter are doing. these are your interests, not the interests of the wider thread.

/leftybritpol/ is a thread for the discussion of left-wing british politics and society. it may intersect briefly with gender issues, such as when government institutions change policy, where political parties and figures adopt a position, or where there is a major news story, but it is not a thread for engaging with gender issues in depth. "is being anti-trans a vote winner for labour?" is an on-topic discussion which may go in productive directions, even if it is idle electoralist pondering. you do not need a full philosophical breakdown of gender politics to check polls on how many Labour > Green/Other switchers attribute their move to Labour's stance on trans issues.
"why should we be reinforcing dysphoric conditions or forcing others to play along with literal mental illness?" is not a question which will lead to on-topic or productive discussion. it is the wrong question, asked in the wrong way, in the wrong thread. no wonder all you receive is snark!

I have an idea,what if we prohibited homophobia only on /lgbt/ board?

>>43460
> rule 14g still applies. you know (or ought to know) that your posts are likely to create pointless and unconstructive arguments where people just snark at you, and on a topic that is unambiguously a question of identity politics. that is, in and of itself, sufficient grounds for your posts to be removed.
>the reason people post snark and mock you is because nobody except you is interested in having this idpol discussion.
Except it's you retards that keep creating this discussion by shitting on relentlessly anybody or any group part of the UK left that doesn't bow down to the TRA cult and all their demands to be the center of UK politics.
How can there not be a debate on Idpol when you freaks literally set fucking purity tests, that actual Socialist parties have to adhere to that Biological Women do not exist and the idea of Biological women is transphobic?
This is the fucking point, you retards are trying to force a fucking INSANE misogynistic position on behalf of a mental illness cult on the level of fucking spoonies, then have massive fucking cryfests when anybody pushes back.
I mean, how fucking dare scottish women protect their rights against a fucking cult that wanted to erase their biological existance from reality, the ultimate reactionaries according to leftybritpol.
>
/leftybritpol/ is a thread for the discussion of left-wing british politics and society. it may intersect briefly with gender issues, such as when government institutions change policy, where political parties and figures adopt a position, or where there is a major news story, but it is not a thread for engaging with gender issues in depth
Then how about you fucks shut the fuck up constantly with your trans crybullying horseshit and calling everyone on the left who doesn't play along with gender ideology some sort of reactionary sociopath traitor, while forcing your bullshit slippery sloping nonsense as insane purity tests?
Oh wait, Idpol for me but nobody else is allowed to criticize it because that's idpol otherwise.
I will continue to challenge the points you fucking retards bring up because you fucking losers are the ones CONSTANTLY trying to make this the core issue of UK leftism.

>>43465
it simply isn't true that people shit on groups or individuals who "doesn't [sic] bow down to the TRA cult and all their demands to be the center of uk politics.", people shit on groups or individuals who make arses of themselves. you can be as "gender critical" as you like and still conclude that adnan hussain's comments were a liability to your party or that getting the endorsement of prominent "gender critical" people did the communist party of britain no help at the last election.
nobody is demanding that these people adopt a radically pro-transgender policy platform. at the risk of arrogance, i would say the consensus position of the thread is that they should shut up and do nothing to attract attention over the issue one way or the other because it is boring.
the vast majority of "gender critical" demands are already government policy. they are already the consensus policy of the two parties which have governed this country for the last hundred years, plus the party most likely to displace both of them. there is nothing to be gained by loudly declaring one's agreement with the government and with most established institutions. (this applies to you too, by the way.)

you take a highly moralizing stance to issues that are more interesting when you look at them as the administrative matters that they are, suggestive of your own over-investment in the outcomes of their identity-politicking.
what "rights" were "scottish women" protecting? oh, right, their "right" to not have transwomen count as women when the scottish government sets a female quota on the boards of quangos (to which the government generally appoints wealthy cronies anyway). truly, a deeply important philosophical issue, a matter which all champions of the proletariat should rally behind instead of scorning as the worst sort of upper-class feminism, and, indeed, a very serious practical issue which i'm sure comes up regularly (wealthy transgender members of the scottish establishment politically allied to the SNP and angling for a quango job? there must be… one of them!)

you rarely challenge the points which are actually brought up. if i say that adnan hussain is an idiot for the optics of publicly agreeing with giga-zionist rosie duffield on gender issues when he could easily say nothing either way, his gender critical views already a matter of public record, you will pipe up insisting that he's right to do it and that i'm a purity testing liberal who wants him to loudly pledge his fealty to the gender cult that everyone but you was secretly invited to join. you are not able to remain confined to the narrow question of optics or political judgement, you feel some compulsion to spin it into a wider argument about identity politics which holds only limited relevance to britain specifically.

if i am nice and fair, i might say that i ought to know that you'll appear and derail the thread if i comment on hussain running his mouth, making my post a potential rule 14 violation too. i am nice and fair. it's a small price to pay to maintain the basic principle that these arguments are tedious, go nowhere, and that moderators are right to expunge them as soon as possible.
there is no point trying to discuss these questions (political judgement and administration) when you're around, even though it is easy to do so without taking a stance either way on gender issues.
you want to own the "TRAs" and have /leftypol/ agree with your "gender critical" stance too badly. you will derail any thread to that end, insisting (if you engage at all with the question) that the only possible reason the UK establishment has (anomalously amongst first world countries) reached a "gender critical" consensus is: "because they're right and everyone else is wrong and that's all there is to it"
how boring. the worst sin one can commit on an imageboard: being boring. that's what rule 14g is there to protect us from: boredom. try saying something new.

why is this sharty copypasta still up?

>>43459
Race is in fact arbitrary. I actually can personally attest to this as it's a big debate in my own family whether we qualify as Latinx because of white socializing and passing.

Yes, I'm using the word Latinx on purpose just to be a bitch about it lol. And you ask any Hispanic and will get seven different answers on if they even like the word Hispanic because some see that as giving into the white man's colonialism because it implies Spaniard, but there's no way they'd just accept being called brown aka a Jeet, or Native American. And you definitely don't wanna call a Porterican or Cuban Mexican.

So this ain't a gotcha. Race isn't real, gender isn't real. Only individuals are. Individuals invent and construct narratives around race and gender as a cope.

This actually does relate to gender in a lot of ways as what makes me white or Hispanic? My DNA? It's not like there's a lab on hand to show the cartels how Cholo I am. So we base it off stereotypes and attitudes. Aka bullshit. Which I act way more "white" considering. So all the same, because there's no way to determine a gender unless you're having sex with said person or for some other reason looking at them naked, you gotta go by how they present and how they act. Meaning a lot of trans pass for women far better than women who look butt ugly. And I am in fact correlating femininity with beauty. Not to say there can't be beauty in masculinity, but that would better be described as handsome wouldn't it? In fact even than, a sunset is beautiful, "feminine beauty" is more like…petite, or fair. Not even cute, because dogs can be cute. Cute just means non threatening and triggers emotional surrogate responses. Than again feminine characteristics are adjacent to that.

Pic isn't entirely random. Trans girlfriend looks like Marinette. This actually raises another abstract of terfs want me to "admit" we're two gay guys. But I don't feel gay. I never once grew up thinking "wow I like men". I've always been sexually attracted to feminine features so why am I gonna call myself gay when that simply isn't true? Than again terfs insist trans women call themselves men. They just seem to have a habit of wanting people to go along with their schizo demands as if we owe them anything besides a Hasan shock collar.

Also saw the image, and I'll just say they're lying. Not even cause I know for a fact they're lying, I literally just don't care enough to argue with them from their standpoint because why am I gonna give them the benefit of the doubt?

Like terfs really have a problem with comprehending simple concepts like
>I don't have to come from a position of defensiveness. You're not in the right just because you're a woman. The fact you think you are shows your female privilege.
>I don't have too assume your experiences are valid or true either. Again female privilege that just because you're upset, it's my job to care. I don't.
>None of this benefits me. In no way does accepting gender critical theory benefit me. I don't want segregated bathrooms, or prisons, or anything. Really I don't even want prisons at all but if such things should exist, they should exist as a pish posh mish mash of whatevers. And again. The terf assumes it's my responsibility to care about the situations she made up. "But if you don't segregate the bathrooms and prisons, rapes happen!" And??? Not even you're wrong, fucking and? So what? I don't like western society. I don't like America. I don't like civilization. A few rapes is inconsequential to the abstraction of all your imperial definitions.

All this footsies with fascism terfs do and yet they won't read some damn Evola and learn how to nihilism lol.

How is this elaborate shitpost still on meta and not siberia? OP is playing a character of a conservative while speaking full sharteen. OP is a contrarian with no coherent position.