FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Radical Feminism
Radical Feminism
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. " Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. " When? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. " Bro out here thinking he's gonna be a sigma male blackbilled gigachad in the 1200's when in reality he'd get wiped out by a virus, infection or a landlord who had a bad day and orders his execution.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure." In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app" Id like to see you survive, all of these things are useless if your on the bridge of starvation and incredible sick. That is if you made it to adulthood as infant mortality rates were high | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. " You dug back through 30 weeks worth of threads just to say this? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"[Removed by poster at 13/02/24 17:00:08]" Was going to type appearances ect. I keep hitting the send button before finishing my replies | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. You dug back through 30 weeks worth of threads just to say this? " He probably searched feminism / feminist on the forum search purely to start arguments | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. " Funnily enough I share your wishes but for completely different reason as far as you’re concerned . No op I’m not a radfem or indeed a fem. T | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !" What is radical feminism?, Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. You dug back through 30 weeks worth of threads just to say this? " There is a search button for the subjects you're interested in. You're welcome to use it and troll elsewhere | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. You dug back through 30 weeks worth of threads just to say this? He probably searched feminism / feminist on the forum search purely to start arguments " He does it all the time just let him crack on | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !" TbH I have very little time for feminists after the 1980s. Many feminists these days are not about quality but are man hating maniacs. All this screaming "Don't need no Man. Yet still need a man to come out in the pouring rain to change a tyre, go down and fix a locked sewer, Dig roads by a high speed motorway clean your streets and collect your waste. Yet turn your nose up at being with a man that does these jobs. Oh yes and I know none of you would give me the time of day be accepted I say this. But yiu never did give me that on here anyway so I have nothing to lose | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. You dug back through 30 weeks worth of threads just to say this? He probably searched feminism / feminist on the forum search purely to start arguments " Ha ha ah you’ve seen his posts before then bless him. T | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !" Try Self Made Man by Nora Vincent. Lone Rider by Elspth Beard. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app" Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. You dug back through 30 weeks worth of threads just to say this? He probably searched feminism / feminist on the forum search purely to start arguments He does it all the time just let him crack on " You're in love with me? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !What is radical feminism?, Mrs x" “Radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical re-ordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts, while recognizing that women's experiences are also affected by other social divisions such as in race, class, and sexual orientation.“ I feel like it’s worth putting here that radical feminists are often of trans exclusionary ideals | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted "Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. " Tell me about the 1200's Daddy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted
Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of"The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, but ok. Be careful what you wish for. The fact you're unhappy with culture war bullshit doesn't mean that life back nearly a thousand years ago was better! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted
Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of"Pardon my lack of confusion but no one went to school in the 1200's for a jolly good reason. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted
Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of
Pardon my lack of confusion but no one went to school in the 1200's for a jolly good reason. "Not in Europe. Europe is not the world | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !What is radical feminism?, Mrs x “Radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical re-ordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts, while recognizing that women's experiences are also affected by other social divisions such as in race, class, and sexual orientation.“ I feel like it’s worth putting here that radical feminists are often of trans exclusionary ideals " Personally I’m not a radfem that’s also a terf as it’d be a bit of a contradiction to have trans exclusionary ideas as a person who doesn’t subscribe to gender anyway  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted
Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of"They were lucky if they made it to be 10 years old so year things werent so good then either. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted
Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of
Pardon my lack of confusion but no one went to school in the 1200's for a jolly good reason.
Not in Europe. Europe is not the world"So you're assuming you have any choice about where you were born in the 1200s? That's cute. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted
Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of
They were lucky if they made it to be 10 years old so year things werent so good then either. "But they were happy disease ridden years with mummy and step mummy and step step mummy dying in childbirth. And unclean water gives you the runs, which is hilarious not deadly! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet," People going through puberty existed though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted
Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of
Pardon my lack of confusion but no one went to school in the 1200's for a jolly good reason.
Not in Europe. Europe is not the world"There were no SCHOOLS anywhere. There might have been monastic education for the wealthy who learned latin and there might have been medieval universities for the very rich but NO schools.... They were taught by priests tho .... say no more. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted
Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of
They were lucky if they made it to be 10 years old so year things werent so good then either.
But they were happy disease ridden years with mummy and step mummy and step step mummy dying in childbirth. And unclean water gives you the runs, which is hilarious not deadly!"As long as your happy yano that just out weighs everything else not  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted
Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of
Pardon my lack of confusion but no one went to school in the 1200's for a jolly good reason.
Not in Europe. Europe is not the world
So you're assuming you have any choice about where you were born in the 1200s? That's cute."No but I can wish I was born in Grenada or Cordoba for example. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, People going through puberty existed though. " Record keeping was a bit scant. We don't actually know how many people took their lives, or were considered expendable in unsafe working conditions. But I suppose we didn't have social media screeching bollocks to scare people, so guess it must have been better to be property. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, People going through puberty existed though. Record keeping was a bit scant. We don't actually know how many people took their lives, or were considered expendable in unsafe working conditions. But I suppose we didn't have social media screeching bollocks to scare people, so guess it must have been better to be property. " We have records as far back as 7000 years. Teenage suicide is a new phenomenon that was unheard of just a couple decades ago | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, People going through puberty existed though. Record keeping was a bit scant. We don't actually know how many people took their lives, or were considered expendable in unsafe working conditions. But I suppose we didn't have social media screeching bollocks to scare people, so guess it must have been better to be property. We have records as far back as 7000 years. Teenage suicide is a new phenomenon that was unheard of just a couple decades ago " Umm. You do know that "records exist" does not mean "all records answering all questions are available"? Go on then. What data exists on death by accident or misadventure in under 18s in the 1200s? Anywhere in Europe will be fine. Cite your sources. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !What is radical feminism?, Mrs x “Radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical re-ordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts, while recognizing that women's experiences are also affected by other social divisions such as in race, class, and sexual orientation.“ I feel like it’s worth putting here that radical feminists are often of trans exclusionary ideals " Ah you are under the delusion that men have it easier. Try reading a book called Self Made Man by Nora Vincent who was a committed feminist and to expose the Patriarchy lived as a man supposedly for two years but lasted 18 months. There are also interviews with her on You Tube. You might learn something. There is also a film called The Red Pill. A committed feminist study the enemy called Cassie Jaye had her own feminist production company. Let's say she had a serious rethink after. Mind you I doubt you will no one likes their mindset challenged | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, People going through puberty existed though. Record keeping was a bit scant. We don't actually know how many people took their lives, or were considered expendable in unsafe working conditions. But I suppose we didn't have social media screeching bollocks to scare people, so guess it must have been better to be property. We have records as far back as 7000 years. Teenage suicide is a new phenomenon that was unheard of just a couple decades ago Umm. You do know that "records exist" does not mean "all records answering all questions are available"? Go on then. What data exists on death by accident or misadventure in under 18s in the 1200s? Anywhere in Europe will be fine. Cite your sources." Britain was illiterate nations and tribes in 1200. But we have records from Historians and social studies from the civilised world back then | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, People going through puberty existed though. Record keeping was a bit scant. We don't actually know how many people took their lives, or were considered expendable in unsafe working conditions. But I suppose we didn't have social media screeching bollocks to scare people, so guess it must have been better to be property. We have records as far back as 7000 years. Teenage suicide is a new phenomenon that was unheard of just a couple decades ago " FACTS not my opinion Over the past 15 years, the UK rate of suicide among 15-24 year olds has gradually fallen, but rose again in 2018 – although this be partly due to a change in coronial standards rather than a true rise. Between 1992 and 2017, the UK rate of suicide per 100,000 young people aged 15-24, decreased from 10.7 to 7.3, but rose to 9.1 in 2018 – a total of 714 registered deaths. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, People going through puberty existed though. Record keeping was a bit scant. We don't actually know how many people took their lives, or were considered expendable in unsafe working conditions. But I suppose we didn't have social media screeching bollocks to scare people, so guess it must have been better to be property. We have records as far back as 7000 years. Teenage suicide is a new phenomenon that was unheard of just a couple decades ago Umm. You do know that "records exist" does not mean "all records answering all questions are available"? Go on then. What data exists on death by accident or misadventure in under 18s in the 1200s? Anywhere in Europe will be fine. Cite your sources. Britain was illiterate nations and tribes in 1200. But we have records from Historians and social studies from the civilised world back then" Britain had writing. As did many other places in Europe. You claimed "records exist". You also claimed that teenage suicide is a modern phenomena. Bold claim, the latter. The former is at least trivially true, although I'm not sure it'll help your argument. I said Europe. I didn't say Britain. Anywhere in Europe will do. What evidence do you have of the cause of death in such cases, to be able to say that young people in the 1200s did not take their own lives? That it was "unheard of" as you put it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted
Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of
Pardon my lack of confusion but no one went to school in the 1200's for a jolly good reason. "Was it covid lockdown? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted
Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of
Pardon my lack of confusion but no one went to school in the 1200's for a jolly good reason.
Not in Europe. Europe is not the world
There were no SCHOOLS anywhere. There might have been monastic education for the wealthy who learned latin and there might have been medieval universities for the very rich but NO schools....
They were taught by priests tho .... say no more."Nudge nudge wink wink... Holiday snaps? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted
Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of
Pardon my lack of confusion but no one went to school in the 1200's for a jolly good reason.
Was it covid lockdown? "It was YE covid lockdown to be precise.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, People going through puberty existed though. Record keeping was a bit scant. We don't actually know how many people took their lives, or were considered expendable in unsafe working conditions. But I suppose we didn't have social media screeching bollocks to scare people, so guess it must have been better to be property. We have records as far back as 7000 years. Teenage suicide is a new phenomenon that was unheard of just a couple decades ago FACTS not my opinion Over the past 15 years, the UK rate of suicide among 15-24 year olds has gradually fallen, but rose again in 2018 – although this be partly due to a change in coronial standards rather than a true rise. Between 1992 and 2017, the UK rate of suicide per 100,000 young people aged 15-24, decreased from 10.7 to 7.3, but rose to 9.1 in 2018 – a total of 714 registered deaths. " Copied from a CNBC article: "Last year, suicide rates in the U.S. were the highest they had been since 1941, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. During the last two decades, youth suicide has increased significantly. From 2007 through 2021, suicide rates for Americans ages 10 to 24 rose 62%, according to the CDC." Europe is no different " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, People going through puberty existed though. Record keeping was a bit scant. We don't actually know how many people took their lives, or were considered expendable in unsafe working conditions. But I suppose we didn't have social media screeching bollocks to scare people, so guess it must have been better to be property. We have records as far back as 7000 years. Teenage suicide is a new phenomenon that was unheard of just a couple decades ago FACTS not my opinion Over the past 15 years, the UK rate of suicide among 15-24 year olds has gradually fallen, but rose again in 2018 – although this be partly due to a change in coronial standards rather than a true rise. Between 1992 and 2017, the UK rate of suicide per 100,000 young people aged 15-24, decreased from 10.7 to 7.3, but rose to 9.1 in 2018 – a total of 714 registered deaths. " Well if nothing else can be done at least we can count to 714. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wish I was born in the 1200's. The World has gone to shit with all these failed western isms ideologies. Someone born in the 1200s would likely have been attached to the land, a form of property. The idea that so long ago would have been better only holds up is only true if you assume you were born with status. I wouldn't take that bet if it were offered to me, that's for sure. In 1200's even the lower cast, the poorer could have a family, a loyal relationship, emotional needs fulfilled from childhood up to the end of their life. There was constant struggle to put food on the table for many. Disease ect. But there was a strong social structure. Which is more important than money and fake app Yes, people were trapped in relationships and had no birth control. There were scarce if any standards for caring for children. Marvellous. Just what I always wanted
Children grew up with their parents at least. And no body groomed at school or confused them with 500+ fake genders, and teenagers comitting suicide was unheard of
Pardon my lack of confusion but no one went to school in the 1200's for a jolly good reason.
Was it covid lockdown?
It was YE covid lockdown to be precise.."I prescribe a course of leeches for 2 weeks | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, People going through puberty existed though. Record keeping was a bit scant. We don't actually know how many people took their lives, or were considered expendable in unsafe working conditions. But I suppose we didn't have social media screeching bollocks to scare people, so guess it must have been better to be property. We have records as far back as 7000 years. Teenage suicide is a new phenomenon that was unheard of just a couple decades ago FACTS not my opinion Over the past 15 years, the UK rate of suicide among 15-24 year olds has gradually fallen, but rose again in 2018 – although this be partly due to a change in coronial standards rather than a true rise. Between 1992 and 2017, the UK rate of suicide per 100,000 young people aged 15-24, decreased from 10.7 to 7.3, but rose to 9.1 in 2018 – a total of 714 registered deaths. Copied from a CNBC article: "Last year, suicide rates in the U.S. were the highest they had been since 1941, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. During the last two decades, youth suicide has increased significantly. From 2007 through 2021, suicide rates for Americans ages 10 to 24 rose 62%, according to the CDC." Europe is no different "" So I asked you about Europe in the 1200s and you're giving me data on America in the 20th-21st century? I thought you said records exist for 7000 years as a way to assert that your point was correct? Even if we accept "20th and 21st century USA" in place of "Europe in the 1200s" (which we should not), "highest since 1941" implies it was higher back then. How can it be higher then if it was unheard of before the last few decades? You do know the 1940s were more than three decades ago? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !What is radical feminism?, Mrs x “Radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical re-ordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts, while recognizing that women's experiences are also affected by other social divisions such as in race, class, and sexual orientation.“ I feel like it’s worth putting here that radical feminists are often of trans exclusionary ideals " Thanks for that but don't understand your last sentence,what does that mean? Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !What is radical feminism?, Mrs x “Radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical re-ordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts, while recognizing that women's experiences are also affected by other social divisions such as in race, class, and sexual orientation.“ I feel like it’s worth putting here that radical feminists are often of trans exclusionary ideals Thanks for that but don't understand your last sentence,what does that mean? Mrs x" I wanted to ask that before but did sommat else instead. My understanding is that radical feminists are all for equality across all genders all variations .... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, People going through puberty existed though. Record keeping was a bit scant. We don't actually know how many people took their lives, or were considered expendable in unsafe working conditions. But I suppose we didn't have social media screeching bollocks to scare people, so guess it must have been better to be property. We have records as far back as 7000 years. Teenage suicide is a new phenomenon that was unheard of just a couple decades ago FACTS not my opinion Over the past 15 years, the UK rate of suicide among 15-24 year olds has gradually fallen, but rose again in 2018 – although this be partly due to a change in coronial standards rather than a true rise. Between 1992 and 2017, the UK rate of suicide per 100,000 young people aged 15-24, decreased from 10.7 to 7.3, but rose to 9.1 in 2018 – a total of 714 registered deaths. Copied from a CNBC article: "Last year, suicide rates in the U.S. were the highest they had been since 1941, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. During the last two decades, youth suicide has increased significantly. From 2007 through 2021, suicide rates for Americans ages 10 to 24 rose 62%, according to the CDC." Europe is no different " So I asked you about Europe in the 1200s and you're giving me data on America in the 20th-21st century? I thought you said records exist for 7000 years as a way to assert that your point was correct? Even if we accept "20th and 21st century USA" in place of "Europe in the 1200s" (which we should not), "highest since 1941" implies it was higher back then. How can it be higher then if it was unheard of before the last few decades? You do know the 1940s were more than three decades ago?" I never said I wish I lived in the 1200's in Europe. Or UK. But if it had to be Europe I'd choose Andalusia | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, People going through puberty existed though. Record keeping was a bit scant. We don't actually know how many people took their lives, or were considered expendable in unsafe working conditions. But I suppose we didn't have social media screeching bollocks to scare people, so guess it must have been better to be property. We have records as far back as 7000 years. Teenage suicide is a new phenomenon that was unheard of just a couple decades ago FACTS not my opinion Over the past 15 years, the UK rate of suicide among 15-24 year olds has gradually fallen, but rose again in 2018 – although this be partly due to a change in coronial standards rather than a true rise. Between 1992 and 2017, the UK rate of suicide per 100,000 young people aged 15-24, decreased from 10.7 to 7.3, but rose to 9.1 in 2018 – a total of 714 registered deaths. Copied from a CNBC article: "Last year, suicide rates in the U.S. were the highest they had been since 1941, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. During the last two decades, youth suicide has increased significantly. From 2007 through 2021, suicide rates for Americans ages 10 to 24 rose 62%, according to the CDC." Europe is no different " So I asked you about Europe in the 1200s and you're giving me data on America in the 20th-21st century? I thought you said records exist for 7000 years as a way to assert that your point was correct? Even if we accept "20th and 21st century USA" in place of "Europe in the 1200s" (which we should not), "highest since 1941" implies it was higher back then. How can it be higher then if it was unheard of before the last few decades? You do know the 1940s were more than three decades ago? I never said I wish I lived in the 1200's in Europe. Or UK. But if it had to be Europe I'd choose Andalusia " You said, as a way to strengthen your argument, that records exist for 7000 years. You mentioned the 1200s. I used Europe as an example because it's more likely to be accessible in English (because of the bias of history). I didn't narrow it down to the UK because... I might have an inkling about the evidence that exists for that period, and I wanted to give you a chance 
But I asked you about the 1200s. In Europe. You didn't get the time period or the location right.
Why is that?
And why does your evidence to prove that suicide was unheard of before the last few decades (the 1990s) explicitly say that they were higher at or before 1941?
This isn't even a trivial attempt to justify why you believe as you do. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !What is radical feminism?, Mrs x “Radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical re-ordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts, while recognizing that women's experiences are also affected by other social divisions such as in race, class, and sexual orientation.“ I feel like it’s worth putting here that radical feminists are often of trans exclusionary ideals Thanks for that but don't understand your last sentence,what does that mean? Mrs x I wanted to ask that before but did sommat else instead. My understanding is that radical feminists are all for equality across all genders all variations .... " Radical feminism is a belief that you can’t legislate your way to equality (that’s what liberal feminism is about), instead society has to be radically reordered to create an equal and just society. In short, to borrow a quote about white privileged from the brilliant black scholar Audry Lorde, the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house (ie law and governance was formed by men to keep men privileged, and so their own systems of privilege cannot be used against them). A core tenet of radical feminist belief is that female people are discriminated against because of their sex. It is the female body that is the oppressed body. This means that male people are never advocated for as part of radical feminist discourse. Male people cannot “opt in” to female oppression. That is why some believe that radical feminist is anti trans. It is not, it is anti male privilege and pro equality. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, People going through puberty existed though. Record keeping was a bit scant. We don't actually know how many people took their lives, or were considered expendable in unsafe working conditions. But I suppose we didn't have social media screeching bollocks to scare people, so guess it must have been better to be property. We have records as far back as 7000 years. Teenage suicide is a new phenomenon that was unheard of just a couple decades ago FACTS not my opinion Over the past 15 years, the UK rate of suicide among 15-24 year olds has gradually fallen, but rose again in 2018 – although this be partly due to a change in coronial standards rather than a true rise. Between 1992 and 2017, the UK rate of suicide per 100,000 young people aged 15-24, decreased from 10.7 to 7.3, but rose to 9.1 in 2018 – a total of 714 registered deaths. Copied from a CNBC article: "Last year, suicide rates in the U.S. were the highest they had been since 1941, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. During the last two decades, youth suicide has increased significantly. From 2007 through 2021, suicide rates for Americans ages 10 to 24 rose 62%, according to the CDC." Europe is no different " So I asked you about Europe in the 1200s and you're giving me data on America in the 20th-21st century? I thought you said records exist for 7000 years as a way to assert that your point was correct? Even if we accept "20th and 21st century USA" in place of "Europe in the 1200s" (which we should not), "highest since 1941" implies it was higher back then. How can it be higher then if it was unheard of before the last few decades? You do know the 1940s were more than three decades ago? I never said I wish I lived in the 1200's in Europe. Or UK. But if it had to be Europe I'd choose Andalusia You said, as a way to strengthen your argument, that records exist for 7000 years. You mentioned the 1200s. I used Europe as an example because it's more likely to be accessible in English (because of the bias of history). I didn't narrow it down to the UK because... I might have an inkling about the evidence that exists for that period, and I wanted to give you a chance
But I asked you about the 1200s. In Europe. You didn't get the time period or the location right.
Why is that?
And why does your evidence to prove that suicide was unheard of before the last few decades (the 1990s) explicitly say that they were higher at or before 1941?
This isn't even a trivial attempt to justify why you believe as you do."Why would you look for records in the least literate part of the world instead of the civilised world? Because the civilised world back then didn't speak English?! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !What is radical feminism?, Mrs x “Radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical re-ordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts, while recognizing that women's experiences are also affected by other social divisions such as in race, class, and sexual orientation.“ I feel like it’s worth putting here that radical feminists are often of trans exclusionary ideals Thanks for that but don't understand your last sentence,what does that mean? Mrs x I wanted to ask that before but did sommat else instead. My understanding is that radical feminists are all for equality across all genders all variations .... Radical feminism is a belief that you can’t legislate your way to equality (that’s what liberal feminism is about), instead society has to be radically reordered to create an equal and just society. In short, to borrow a quote about white privileged from the brilliant black scholar Audry Lorde, the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house (ie law and governance was formed by men to keep men privileged, and so their own systems of privilege cannot be used against them). A core tenet of radical feminist belief is that female people are discriminated against because of their sex. It is the female body that is the oppressed body. This means that male people are never advocated for as part of radical feminist discourse. Male people cannot “opt in” to female oppression. That is why some believe that radical feminist is anti trans. It is not, it is anti male privilege and pro equality." I'm on board with this | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" The concept of being a teenager hadn't been invented yet, People going through puberty existed though. Record keeping was a bit scant. We don't actually know how many people took their lives, or were considered expendable in unsafe working conditions. But I suppose we didn't have social media screeching bollocks to scare people, so guess it must have been better to be property. We have records as far back as 7000 years. Teenage suicide is a new phenomenon that was unheard of just a couple decades ago FACTS not my opinion Over the past 15 years, the UK rate of suicide among 15-24 year olds has gradually fallen, but rose again in 2018 – although this be partly due to a change in coronial standards rather than a true rise. Between 1992 and 2017, the UK rate of suicide per 100,000 young people aged 15-24, decreased from 10.7 to 7.3, but rose to 9.1 in 2018 – a total of 714 registered deaths. Copied from a CNBC article: "Last year, suicide rates in the U.S. were the highest they had been since 1941, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. During the last two decades, youth suicide has increased significantly. From 2007 through 2021, suicide rates for Americans ages 10 to 24 rose 62%, according to the CDC." Europe is no different " So I asked you about Europe in the 1200s and you're giving me data on America in the 20th-21st century? I thought you said records exist for 7000 years as a way to assert that your point was correct? Even if we accept "20th and 21st century USA" in place of "Europe in the 1200s" (which we should not), "highest since 1941" implies it was higher back then. How can it be higher then if it was unheard of before the last few decades? You do know the 1940s were more than three decades ago? I never said I wish I lived in the 1200's in Europe. Or UK. But if it had to be Europe I'd choose Andalusia You said, as a way to strengthen your argument, that records exist for 7000 years. You mentioned the 1200s. I used Europe as an example because it's more likely to be accessible in English (because of the bias of history). I didn't narrow it down to the UK because... I might have an inkling about the evidence that exists for that period, and I wanted to give you a chance
But I asked you about the 1200s. In Europe. You didn't get the time period or the location right.
Why is that?
And why does your evidence to prove that suicide was unheard of before the last few decades (the 1990s) explicitly say that they were higher at or before 1941?
This isn't even a trivial attempt to justify why you believe as you do.
Why would you look for records in the least literate part of the world instead of the civilised world? Because the civilised world back then didn't speak English?! "Because that's what was asked of you? I don't actually care, but I was trying to give you a fighting chance to find... something? It makes no odds to me. But you said that this is an issue from the last few decades (1990s). You also said that records exist for 7000 years. Indeed they do - have fun trying to analyse your specific point anywhere before the 19th century though. It's possible - I've done some creative research on the pre common era - but it doesn't prove much. But even taking away the 1200s - which is an arbitrary date taken from your own post. You yourself said that a) youth suicide was unheard of before the last few decades and b) rates in the United States have risen above a previous high in the 1940s. I assume you have to concede that you're mistaken, at least. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This question is for the many feminists in here who are happy with the societal catastrophe achieved by feminism: What do you mean by equality?" What social catastrophe? Youth suicide was higher in the 1940s | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This question is for the many feminists in here who are happy with the societal catastrophe achieved by feminism: What do you mean by equality? What social catastrophe? Youth suicide was higher in the 1940s" Answer the question please. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This question is for the many feminists in here who are happy with the societal catastrophe achieved by feminism: What do you mean by equality? What social catastrophe? Youth suicide was higher in the 1940s Answer the question please. " Your question assumes that a social catastrophe has occurred. I can't meaningfully answer a question which has a part in it that I don't at all understand. Putting conditions into questions that remove them from a common understanding of reality makes them unanswerable. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This question is for the many feminists in here who are happy with the societal catastrophe achieved by feminism: What do you mean by equality? What social catastrophe? Youth suicide was higher in the 1940s Answer the question please. Your question assumes that a social catastrophe has occurred. I can't meaningfully answer a question which has a part in it that I don't at all understand. Putting conditions into questions that remove them from a common understanding of reality makes them unanswerable." There are no conditions in the question. The question is plain and simple: What do the feminists here mean by equality? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This question is for the many feminists in here who are happy with the societal catastrophe achieved by feminism: What do you mean by equality? What social catastrophe? Youth suicide was higher in the 1940s Answer the question please. Your question assumes that a social catastrophe has occurred. I can't meaningfully answer a question which has a part in it that I don't at all understand. Putting conditions into questions that remove them from a common understanding of reality makes them unanswerable. There are no conditions in the question. The question is plain and simple: What do the feminists here mean by equality?" I can't speak for anyone else, and I don't believe I've defined myself in any way in this thread. Why did you change the subject when it was pointed out that youth suicide was higher in the 1940s, in the 1940s? Why did you include a prelude about "societal catastrophe" if it's not meant to be part of the context for the question? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This question is for the many feminists in here who are happy with the societal catastrophe achieved by feminism: What do you mean by equality?" Would you like to rephrase your equation into one that makes more sense? For instance, in the context of this thread you may wish to ask: - “what conditions will have to be met for Radical Feminists understand that we have reached equality” - “what does equality between male and female bodies look like in radical feminism.” - “what does a radical feminist utopia look like.” | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This question is for the many feminists in here who are happy with the societal catastrophe achieved by feminism: What do you mean by equality? What social catastrophe? Youth suicide was higher in the 1940s Answer the question please. Your question assumes that a social catastrophe has occurred. I can't meaningfully answer a question which has a part in it that I don't at all understand. Putting conditions into questions that remove them from a common understanding of reality makes them unanswerable. There are no conditions in the question. The question is plain and simple: What do the feminists here mean by equality? I can't speak for anyone else, and I don't believe I've defined myself in any way in this thread. Why did you change the subject when it was pointed out that youth suicide was higher in the 1940s, in the 1940s? Why did you include a prelude about "societal catastrophe" if it's not meant to be part of the context for the question?" Nobody pointed out that suicide rate was higher before 40's except you after I asked my question. So it's you deflecting my question. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This question is for the many feminists in here who are happy with the societal catastrophe achieved by feminism: What do you mean by equality? What social catastrophe? Youth suicide was higher in the 1940s Answer the question please. Your question assumes that a social catastrophe has occurred. I can't meaningfully answer a question which has a part in it that I don't at all understand. Putting conditions into questions that remove them from a common understanding of reality makes them unanswerable. There are no conditions in the question. The question is plain and simple: What do the feminists here mean by equality? I can't speak for anyone else, and I don't believe I've defined myself in any way in this thread. Why did you change the subject when it was pointed out that youth suicide was higher in the 1940s, in the 1940s? Why did you include a prelude about "societal catastrophe" if it's not meant to be part of the context for the question? Nobody pointed out that suicide rate was higher before 40's except you after I asked my question. So it's you deflecting my question. " You've dropped the topic of youth suicide being unheard of before the last few decades. Given that *you* demonstrated that it was higher in 1941. I don't think I'm the one deflecting here... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !What is radical feminism?, Mrs x “Radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical re-ordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts, while recognizing that women's experiences are also affected by other social divisions such as in race, class, and sexual orientation.“ I feel like it’s worth putting here that radical feminists are often of trans exclusionary ideals Thanks for that but don't understand your last sentence,what does that mean? Mrs x I wanted to ask that before but did sommat else instead. My understanding is that radical feminists are all for equality across all genders all variations .... Radical feminism is a belief that you can’t legislate your way to equality (that’s what liberal feminism is about), instead society has to be radically reordered to create an equal and just society. In short, to borrow a quote about white privileged from the brilliant black scholar Audry Lorde, the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house (ie law and governance was formed by men to keep men privileged, and so their own systems of privilege cannot be used against them). A core tenet of radical feminist belief is that female people are discriminated against because of their sex. It is the female body that is the oppressed body. This means that male people are never advocated for as part of radical feminist discourse. Male people cannot “opt in” to female oppression. That is why some believe that radical feminist is anti trans. It is not, it is anti male privilege and pro equality." I'm not a radical feminist then, Mrs x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This question is for the many feminists in here who are happy with the societal catastrophe achieved by feminism: What do you mean by equality? Would you like to rephrase your equation into one that makes more sense? For instance, in the context of this thread you may wish to ask: - “what conditions will have to be met for Radical Feminists understand that we have reached equality” - “what does equality between male and female bodies look like in radical feminism.” - “what does a radical feminist utopia look like.”" My question is plain and simple and makes perfect sense. Feminists always say: "We want to achieve equality between men and women" I am simply asking what do you mean by equality? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This question is for the many feminists in here who are happy with the societal catastrophe achieved by feminism: What do you mean by equality? Would you like to rephrase your equation into one that makes more sense? For instance, in the context of this thread you may wish to ask: - “what conditions will have to be met for Radical Feminists understand that we have reached equality” - “what does equality between male and female bodies look like in radical feminism.” - “what does a radical feminist utopia look like.” My question is plain and simple and makes perfect sense. Feminists always say: "We want to achieve equality between men and women" I am simply asking what do you mean by equality? " Different schools of feminist thought have different ideas about what equality looks like. So you need to be more specific. Are you asking specifically about radical feminism, as is the context of this thread? And what area of society do you want to discuss? It’s a big old question if you don’t narrow it down. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This question is for the many feminists in here who are happy with the societal catastrophe achieved by feminism: What do you mean by equality? Would you like to rephrase your equation into one that makes more sense? For instance, in the context of this thread you may wish to ask: - “what conditions will have to be met for Radical Feminists understand that we have reached equality” - “what does equality between male and female bodies look like in radical feminism.” - “what does a radical feminist utopia look like.” My question is plain and simple and makes perfect sense. Feminists always say: "We want to achieve equality between men and women" I am simply asking what do you mean by equality? " Ay there's the rub | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. " Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !" If you like science fiction. The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula K Le Guin. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament " Trans people would have existed in the middle ages, hate to break it to you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament " Congratulations you just described radical feminism. Seems like you are a radical feminist yourself. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This question is for the many feminists in here who are happy with the societal catastrophe achieved by feminism: What do you mean by equality? Would you like to rephrase your equation into one that makes more sense? For instance, in the context of this thread you may wish to ask: - “what conditions will have to be met for Radical Feminists understand that we have reached equality” - “what does equality between male and female bodies look like in radical feminism.” - “what does a radical feminist utopia look like.”" That's the majority of religion out the window then. Nothing condones and drives female oppression and inequality more than religion. Maybe tackling the men isn't the way now but looking towards the driving forces. Just a thought. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This question is for the many feminists in here who are happy with the societal catastrophe achieved by feminism: What do you mean by equality? Would you like to rephrase your equation into one that makes more sense? For instance, in the context of this thread you may wish to ask: - “what conditions will have to be met for Radical Feminists understand that we have reached equality” - “what does equality between male and female bodies look like in radical feminism.” - “what does a radical feminist utopia look like.” My question is plain and simple and makes perfect sense. Feminists always say: "We want to achieve equality between men and women" I am simply asking what do you mean by equality? Different schools of feminist thought have different ideas about what equality looks like. So you need to be more specific. Are you asking specifically about radical feminism, as is the context of this thread? And what area of society do you want to discuss? It’s a big old question if you don’t narrow it down." Are you saying they can't agree on the meaning of a simple word? Just tell me your understanding of the word if you consider yourself as a feminst | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament " The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I thought the thread was about the OP looking for some recommended reading on radical feminism? Why are men hijacking it to grill women about the meaning of equality? Start your own thread. " Oh don’t spoil it we’ve just got on to religion again. Rubs hands | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!)" The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !" Just bought a book for my partner, but i fully intend to read it myself. 'Mujeres Libres : Free Women of Spain' The story of the women Anarchist militants during the Spanish Revolution of '36-38 in Barcelona. Fighting against fascism, the State & male attitudes of the time. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world" Given how utterly you embarrassed yourself avoiding backing up your claims about youth suicide, I'd just steer clear of trying to argue about history if I were you. Or anything at all, really. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I thought the thread was about the OP looking for some recommended reading on radical feminism? Why are men hijacking it to grill women about the meaning of equality? Start your own thread. " Interesting | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Plus, i may not know enough to be a feminist, but I'm certainly becoming more radical as i get older. " Being more radical is good. Revolutionary politics is better for this world | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world" Nobody? Really? Are you sure? *Laughs into history degrees* | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I thought the thread was about the OP looking for some recommended reading on radical feminism? Why are men hijacking it to grill women about the meaning of equality? Start your own thread. Interesting" I’ll comment if you do. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Nobody? Really? Are you sure? *Laughs into history degrees*" If you want to count the on in a million mentally unstable person | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Plus, i may not know enough to be a feminist, but I'm certainly becoming more radical as i get older. Being more radical is good. Revolutionary politics is better for this world" I'm certainly becoming more sympathetic to the political views of the CNT-FAI. Spanish Anarchist history has a lot to teach us. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world" Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Nobody? Really? Are you sure? *Laughs into history degrees* If you want to count the on in a million mentally unstable person" Oh, so if they don't agree with you, they don't count? That's called special pleading and it's not considered a valid argument. Why would questions of gender make it into the historical literature - which tended to be the exclusive domain of the elite, and most of which has not been preserved - if it was so rare? Or are you just making things up? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century." You have a PHD? I’ve got school of life mate  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century." Now awaiting the bit about "what do you know, you're just a woman" from this dribbling loon.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century. You have a PHD? I’ve got school of life mate " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century. Now awaiting the bit about "what do you know, you're just a woman" from this dribbling loon.. " It’s ok, I’m well versed in the Rébecca Solnit essay “Men Explain Things to Me.” It’s worth a read (can be found on the tomdispatches site). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century." You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Nobody? Really? Are you sure? *Laughs into history degrees* If you want to count the on in a million mentally unstable person" At this point it feels like your making every single thing up as the only actual sort of evidence you produced still proves you wrong. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century. You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect " What you said was that no one was confused about gender in the past. That is demonstrably incorrect. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century. You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect " Genuinely the funniest thing I’ve read
Man is just wrong and strong | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century. You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect What you said was that no one was confused about gender in the past. That is demonstrably incorrect." How many considered themselves as Queer in the 19th century? You got a stat? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The feminism I like most is Black feminism. "Why? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century. You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect " I don't have a PhD and have no idea how many genders there are. I can't keep up and have no desire to. I know there are 2 sexes..that's all that matters in the end. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century. You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect What you said was that no one was confused about gender in the past. That is demonstrably incorrect. How many considered themselves as Queer in the 19th century? You got a stat? " Just the priests I think? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The feminism I like most is Black feminism.
Why?"Because Black feminists helped me understand the experiences of women that I know, that weren’t represented by mainstream feminism. They taught me about the role of racism AND sexism in the experiences of women. They taught me about my experience as a Black man. They essentially helped me make sense of the world. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century. You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect What you said was that no one was confused about gender in the past. That is demonstrably incorrect. How many considered themselves as Queer in the 19th century? You got a stat? " No I don't have statistics, for obvious reasons. For the same reason that abortions aren't documented in detail at the time either. Official records are not the only way to infer information, as I'm sure you're aware. (Are we talking about trans people still, or LGBT people, or feminism? We seem to be drifting) There are a variety of techniques to try to infer the existence of particular social phenomena. The 19th century isn't my particular area of expertise, but I suggest that writings such as Oscar Wilde should indicate that "queer" identity, defined broadly, existed in the 19th century. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century. You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I don't have a PhD and have no idea how many genders there are. I can't keep up and have no desire to. I know there are 2 sexes..that's all that matters in the end." They will change the meaning of "Sexes" to achieve their goal of mental disorder Pandemic | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Plus, i may not know enough to be a feminist, but I'm certainly becoming more radical as i get older. Being more radical is good. Revolutionary politics is better for this world" Unless it inconveniences me. You do it for me. Better still. Make a tik tik about how revolutionary they are being. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Plus, i may not know enough to be a feminist, but I'm certainly becoming more radical as i get older. Being more radical is good. Revolutionary politics is better for this world Unless it inconveniences me. You do it for me. Better still. Make a tik tik about how revolutionary they are being. " Invent tik tik and I’ll make one | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Plus, i may not know enough to be a feminist, but I'm certainly becoming more radical as i get older. Being more radical is good. Revolutionary politics is better for this world Unless it inconveniences me. You do it for me. Better still. Make a tik tik about how revolutionary they are being. Invent tik tik and I’ll make one" Boom boom shake shake the room? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As tangents on the forum go, this is quite spectacular! Looking forward to the next round of hearing how great life was for us all in the middle ages with faith in the record keeping of the time. Nobody would statter in the middle ages if you asked them what a women is. They'd be laughing to death at the discussions happening today in our parliament The history of gender is fascinating. I highly recommend it. The way notions of gender have shifted over centuries - with or without brutal policing of people's self expression - is fascinating. People find a way. (I recommend a library rather than a social media feed though, people do spout some bollocks to scare other people and drive attention!) The notion of gender have shifted in the past decade. Not throughout centuries. Nobody had any confusion about genders before this madness. And the 99% of people around the world still believe there are only 2 genders. Unless you think the west is the world Gender has long been a difficult and confusing subject. The study of gender made up a substantial part of the case study in my PhD. It was about the eighteenth century. You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I don't have a PhD and have no idea how many genders there are. I can't keep up and have no desire to. I know there are 2 sexes..that's all that matters in the end. They will change the meaning of "Sexes" to achieve their goal of mental disorder Pandemic" Fuck me, I thought I was paranoid
We have a new ultra in the house people!
Seriously for a second though, I refuse to use the word gender now. It's meaningless. If we're taking about men and women then the word is sex. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect " I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you." The third one is feminism lost the plot lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol" How so? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol" What are the grounds on which you say that? Are they similarly well founded as your view that youth suicide was unheard of before the 1990s? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol" The third one, as I said, is something that has been around since way before feminism. You are getting your timelines mixed up. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol What are the grounds on which you say that? Are they similarly well founded as your view that youth suicide was unheard of before the 1990s?" At least in the part of the world I lived in in the 90's. I was a member of a national Student committee/syndicate for years. There wasn't a single case of suicide amongst students. And their living conditions were shit | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol What are the grounds on which you say that? Are they similarly well founded as your view that youth suicide was unheard of before the 1990s? At least in the part of the world I lived in in the 90's. I was a member of a national Student committee/syndicate for years. There wasn't a single case of suicide amongst students. And their living conditions were shit" Are you saying that in the 90s in the country you lived in there was not a single student suicide? I assume you are referring to undergrad, postgrad, and vocational students of all ages? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why is anyone even engaging in this inane drivel? Every thread is: "feminism has destroyed everything" "how so" "blah blah blah"" It’s just words, opinions, egos and individual versions of the truth confused with “fact” as usual. People unable to understand and accept that not everyone shares or agrees with their words and opinion. Same old fab really… | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why is anyone even engaging in this inane drivel? Every thread is: "feminism has destroyed everything" "how so" "blah blah blah" It’s just words, opinions, egos and individual versions of the truth confused with “fact” as usual. People unable to understand and accept that not everyone shares or agrees with their words and opinion. Same old fab really… "Aka fab friction  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol What are the grounds on which you say that? Are they similarly well founded as your view that youth suicide was unheard of before the 1990s? At least in the part of the world I lived in in the 90's. I was a member of a national Student committee/syndicate for years. There wasn't a single case of suicide amongst students. And their living conditions were shit" Wait... Are you arguing about how things have been for all of time based on your personal experience when you were young? With people who clearly have knowledge of history and statistics? I might give that partial credit in a primary school assignment. Possibly. Secondary and up it's definitely a non serious attempt. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol What are the grounds on which you say that? Are they similarly well founded as your view that youth suicide was unheard of before the 1990s? At least in the part of the world I lived in in the 90's. I was a member of a national Student committee/syndicate for years. There wasn't a single case of suicide amongst students. And their living conditions were shit Are you saying that in the 90s in the country you lived in there was not a single student suicide? I assume you are referring to undergrad, postgrad, and vocational students of all ages?" There were the rare cases of passionate murder. Suicide however not any case I heard or read in the news. And I was in a position that I'd very likely heard of it if it happened. Unless there were deaths that weren't declared as suicide due to family discretion. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Wow I'm sure the OP just asked for some book reviews! Shall we all compromise and say mid 1900s "Sticks and stones may break my bones but there will always be something to offend a feminist Just kidding you lovely lot  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol What are the grounds on which you say that? Are they similarly well founded as your view that youth suicide was unheard of before the 1990s? At least in the part of the world I lived in in the 90's. I was a member of a national Student committee/syndicate for years. There wasn't a single case of suicide amongst students. And their living conditions were shit Are you saying that in the 90s in the country you lived in there was not a single student suicide? I assume you are referring to undergrad, postgrad, and vocational students of all ages? There were the rare cases of passionate murder. Suicide however not any case I heard or read in the news. And I was in a position that I'd very likely heard of it if it happened. Unless there were deaths that weren't declared as suicide due to family discretion. " So what you’re saying is that in the 90s you personally didn’t hear about any suicides amongst the student population in an unspecified country, but you also didn’t have privileged access to the coroners reports for every student in this unspecified country in the 90s, nor did you have access to official statistics on this subject. Right. Good. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol What are the grounds on which you say that? Are they similarly well founded as your view that youth suicide was unheard of before the 1990s? At least in the part of the world I lived in in the 90's. I was a member of a national Student committee/syndicate for years. There wasn't a single case of suicide amongst students. And their living conditions were shit Wait... Are you arguing about how things have been for all of time based on your personal experience when you were young? With people who clearly have knowledge of history and statistics? I might give that partial credit in a primary school assignment. Possibly. Secondary and up it's definitely a non serious attempt." Feel free to present stats by country to support your case. Just remember. The west is only part of the world | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol What are the grounds on which you say that? Are they similarly well founded as your view that youth suicide was unheard of before the 1990s? At least in the part of the world I lived in in the 90's. I was a member of a national Student committee/syndicate for years. There wasn't a single case of suicide amongst students. And their living conditions were shit Wait... Are you arguing about how things have been for all of time based on your personal experience when you were young? With people who clearly have knowledge of history and statistics? I might give that partial credit in a primary school assignment. Possibly. Secondary and up it's definitely a non serious attempt. Feel free to present stats by country to support your case. Just remember. The west is only part of the world " I'm not making a case. I'm saying your claims about a) youth suicide (stats provided by you) b) concepts of gender/feminism/sexuality throughout the last 7000 years (!) are difficult to substantiate given the historical record, and c) your admittedly personal knowledge is not universal. Plus some vague stuff about not just the west. If you want to use accounting records from the near east to try to claim anything at all about gender, by all means. But your points, shifting as they do, seem to be founded in personal experience and nonsense. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !What is radical feminism?, Mrs x “Radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical re-ordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts, while recognizing that women's experiences are also affected by other social divisions such as in race, class, and sexual orientation.“ I feel like it’s worth putting here that radical feminists are often of trans exclusionary ideals Thanks for that but don't understand your last sentence,what does that mean? Mrs x I wanted to ask that before but did sommat else instead. My understanding is that radical feminists are all for equality across all genders all variations .... Radical feminism is a belief that you can’t legislate your way to equality (that’s what liberal feminism is about), instead society has to be radically reordered to create an equal and just society. In short, to borrow a quote about white privileged from the brilliant black scholar Audry Lorde, the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house (ie law and governance was formed by men to keep men privileged, and so their own systems of privilege cannot be used against them). A core tenet of radical feminist belief is that female people are discriminated against because of their sex. It is the female body that is the oppressed body. This means that male people are never advocated for as part of radical feminist discourse. Male people cannot “opt in” to female oppression. That is why some believe that radical feminist is anti trans. It is not, it is anti male privilege and pro equality." I learned new things here. Thank you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anyone know some good feminist literature for the OP to read? Jeez. " Germaine Greer. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !What is radical feminism?, Mrs x" A gender based political extremist. Much like the horrific MGTOW but with power. C | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !What is radical feminism?, Mrs x A gender based political extremist. Much like the horrific MGTOW but with power. C" Since this is a thread about radical feminism, could you explain how radical feminists have “power” compared to, say, liberal feminists? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol What are the grounds on which you say that? Are they similarly well founded as your view that youth suicide was unheard of before the 1990s? At least in the part of the world I lived in in the 90's. I was a member of a national Student committee/syndicate for years. There wasn't a single case of suicide amongst students. And their living conditions were shit Are you saying that in the 90s in the country you lived in there was not a single student suicide? I assume you are referring to undergrad, postgrad, and vocational students of all ages? There were the rare cases of passionate murder. Suicide however not any case I heard or read in the news. And I was in a position that I'd very likely heard of it if it happened. Unless there were deaths that weren't declared as suicide due to family discretion. So what you’re saying is that in the 90s you personally didn’t hear about any suicides amongst the student population in an unspecified country, but you also didn’t have privileged access to the coroners reports for every student in this unspecified country in the 90s, nor did you have access to official statistics on this subject. Right. Good. " Check the world's suicide rates by country. Russia, India, USA and Europe are on top of the list. The country I mentioned it's a fraction compared to here. And my personal experience I lived in both countries long enough to know the difference | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol What are the grounds on which you say that? Are they similarly well founded as your view that youth suicide was unheard of before the 1990s? At least in the part of the world I lived in in the 90's. I was a member of a national Student committee/syndicate for years. There wasn't a single case of suicide amongst students. And their living conditions were shit Are you saying that in the 90s in the country you lived in there was not a single student suicide? I assume you are referring to undergrad, postgrad, and vocational students of all ages? There were the rare cases of passionate murder. Suicide however not any case I heard or read in the news. And I was in a position that I'd very likely heard of it if it happened. Unless there were deaths that weren't declared as suicide due to family discretion. So what you’re saying is that in the 90s you personally didn’t hear about any suicides amongst the student population in an unspecified country, but you also didn’t have privileged access to the coroners reports for every student in this unspecified country in the 90s, nor did you have access to official statistics on this subject. Right. Good. Check the world's suicide rates by country. Russia, India, USA and Europe are on top of the list. The country I mentioned it's a fraction compared to here. And my personal experience I lived in both countries long enough to know the difference " If you check the WHO Mortality Database for 1995 Russia is indeed the second highest for suicides by country. India and USA don’t even appear in the top 40. Europe isn’t a country. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I lost count how many times this man got his ass handed to him in this thread and I have to say it's peak fab entertainment. " Hilarious isn't it? Best bit, he's getting repeatedly done over by educated & erudite women. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol What are the grounds on which you say that? Are they similarly well founded as your view that youth suicide was unheard of before the 1990s? At least in the part of the world I lived in in the 90's. I was a member of a national Student committee/syndicate for years. There wasn't a single case of suicide amongst students. And their living conditions were shit Are you saying that in the 90s in the country you lived in there was not a single student suicide? I assume you are referring to undergrad, postgrad, and vocational students of all ages? There were the rare cases of passionate murder. Suicide however not any case I heard or read in the news. And I was in a position that I'd very likely heard of it if it happened. Unless there were deaths that weren't declared as suicide due to family discretion. So what you’re saying is that in the 90s you personally didn’t hear about any suicides amongst the student population in an unspecified country, but you also didn’t have privileged access to the coroners reports for every student in this unspecified country in the 90s, nor did you have access to official statistics on this subject. Right. Good. Check the world's suicide rates by country. Russia, India, USA and Europe are on top of the list. The country I mentioned it's a fraction compared to here. And my personal experience I lived in both countries long enough to know the difference If you check the WHO Mortality Database for 1995 Russia is indeed the second highest for suicides by country. India and USA don’t even appear in the top 40. Europe isn’t a country." Fwiw if you’re going to look at suicides as an element of feminism you’re probably most likely going to want to look at it from either a Marxist or a liberal feminist point of view. Radical feminism probably isn’t quite the right type of feminism for this kind of analysis. You’ll want a new thread. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I lost count how many times this man got his ass handed to him in this thread and I have to say it's peak fab entertainment. Hilarious isn't it? Best bit, he's getting repeatedly done over by educated & erudite women." 
They are inspirational | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You don't need a PHD to know that there are only 2 genders. The rest is either a mental confusion mostly caused by the new system induced culture. Or in the rare cases of genetic defect I think you misunderstand the definitions of gender. The first definition of gender is synonymous with sex. Gender has historically been used as a polite way to not say the s word. The second is one that comes from second wave feminism. It describes the set of expectations that are placed on us because of our sex. That is, for example, that female people should be caregivers because their bodies are designed to be capable of giving birth. The third is the way that you see yourself in society. It is true that more recently, perhaps the last thirty years or so, people have been finding different ways to describe themselves. However this is not a new phenomena. Historically many people have expressed masculinity and femininity in different ways, however they used different words to describe this, or they did not have words for it. Hope that clears up some of the basics for you. The third one is feminism lost the plot lol What are the grounds on which you say that? Are they similarly well founded as your view that youth suicide was unheard of before the 1990s? At least in the part of the world I lived in in the 90's. I was a member of a national Student committee/syndicate for years. There wasn't a single case of suicide amongst students. And their living conditions were shit Are you saying that in the 90s in the country you lived in there was not a single student suicide? I assume you are referring to undergrad, postgrad, and vocational students of all ages? There were the rare cases of passionate murder. Suicide however not any case I heard or read in the news. And I was in a position that I'd very likely heard of it if it happened. Unless there were deaths that weren't declared as suicide due to family discretion. So what you’re saying is that in the 90s you personally didn’t hear about any suicides amongst the student population in an unspecified country, but you also didn’t have privileged access to the coroners reports for every student in this unspecified country in the 90s, nor did you have access to official statistics on this subject. Right. Good. Check the world's suicide rates by country. Russia, India, USA and Europe are on top of the list. The country I mentioned it's a fraction compared to here. And my personal experience I lived in both countries long enough to know the difference If you check the WHO Mortality Database for 1995 Russia is indeed the second highest for suicides by country. India and USA don’t even appear in the top 40. Europe isn’t a country." 1995 is 3 decades in the past. I know Europe is not a country. I am comparing different regions of the World by culture. USA is nulber 25th in the world. 6 times worse than war torn Afghanistan | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I lost count how many times this man got his ass handed to him in this thread and I have to say it's peak fab entertainment. " *PEAK* | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I lost count how many times this man got his ass handed to him in this thread and I have to say it's peak fab entertainment. Hilarious isn't it? Best bit, he's getting repeatedly done over by educated & erudite women." It's the circle of life. *Unsubstantiated claim *Pedantry and Sophistry *Ad hominem attack *Pivot *Wrecked These women are an inspiration | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !What is radical feminism?, Mrs x A gender based political extremist. Much like the horrific MGTOW but with power. C Since this is a thread about radical feminism, could you explain how radical feminists have “power” compared to, say, liberal feminists?" Happily. There are self admitted radical feminists in power in Westminster. Thankfully there are no MGTOW's in power but extremism has no place in power as decisions need to be made fairly and down the middle. Valerie Solanos has had her SCUM manifesto taught in university despite the vile content in that. There is also the whole gender studies debate to be had. C | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This thread offers a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is why no amount of rational, educated expertise will penetrate the armour of the intellectually impervious." This | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" 1995 is 3 decades in the past. I know Europe is not a country. I am comparing different regions of the World by culture. USA is nulber 25th in the world. 6 times worse than war torn Afghanistan " You were the one talking about the 90s. I just picked the middle year for ease. I’m unsure where you’re getting your data from or what year you’re referring to. Could you specify which database you’re using? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This thread offers a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is why no amount of rational, educated expertise will penetrate the armour of the intellectually impervious." Using fancy words to insult people you disagree with don't make you smart. Intellectual content does. Not being a cultural sheep that cheers for it's ideological team. With nothing to contribute of your own independent thoughts. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Who else is a radfem? I need more feminist literature to read, whether fictional or not Hello to all my radfems, if any are here !What is radical feminism?, Mrs x A gender based political extremist. Much like the horrific MGTOW but with power. C Since this is a thread about radical feminism, could you explain how radical feminists have “power” compared to, say, liberal feminists? Happily. There are self admitted radical feminists in power in Westminster. Thankfully there are no MGTOW's in power but extremism has no place in power as decisions need to be made fairly and down the middle. Valerie Solanos has had her SCUM manifesto taught in university despite the vile content in that. There is also the whole gender studies debate to be had. C " Could you let me know which radical feminists are in power in Westminster? Admitting you’re a radical feminist at the moment is basically career suicide at this point in both politics and universities. Do you think that power is all about Westminster? Considering that radical feminists believe, at the core of their discourse, that problems of equality are not solved by penetrating governing power structures, why do you believe that radical feminists would take up space in Westminister? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This thread offers a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is why no amount of rational, educated expertise will penetrate the armour of the intellectually impervious. Using fancy words to insult people you disagree with don't make you smart. Intellectual content does. Not being a cultural sheep that cheers for it's ideological team. With nothing to contribute of your own independent thoughts. " I don’t know how to tell you this but all of those words and concepts are learned before GCSE. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This thread offers a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is why no amount of rational, educated expertise will penetrate the armour of the intellectually impervious. Using fancy words to insult people you disagree with don't make you smart. Intellectual content does. Not being a cultural sheep that cheers for it's ideological team. With nothing to contribute of your own independent thoughts. I don’t know how to tell you this but all of those words and concepts are learned before GCSE." I didn't study in the UK, nor in English. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This thread offers a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is why no amount of rational, educated expertise will penetrate the armour of the intellectually impervious. Using fancy words to insult people you disagree with don't make you smart. Intellectual content does. Not being a cultural sheep that cheers for it's ideological team. With nothing to contribute of your own independent thoughts. I don’t know how to tell you this but all of those words and concepts are learned before GCSE. I didn't study in the UK, nor in English. " Well, now you know that to someone who learned English in the UK to an average standard, none of those words and concepts would be difficult. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This thread offers a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is why no amount of rational, educated expertise will penetrate the armour of the intellectually impervious. Using fancy words to insult people you disagree with don't make you smart. Intellectual content does. Not being a cultural sheep that cheers for it's ideological team. With nothing to contribute of your own independent thoughts. I don’t know how to tell you this but all of those words and concepts are learned before GCSE. I didn't study in the UK, nor in English. Well, now you know that to someone who learned English in the UK to an average standard, none of those words and concepts would be difficult." My point still stands. Using fancy words to insult someone they disagree with without contributing anything intellectually to the points debated | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" 1995 is 3 decades in the past. I know Europe is not a country. I am comparing different regions of the World by culture. USA is nulber 25th in the world. 6 times worse than war torn Afghanistan You were the one talking about the 90s. I just picked the middle year for ease. I’m unsure where you’re getting your data from or what year you’re referring to. Could you specify which database you’re using? " Yes, I would have thought that the 1990s was a key point to draw inferences from given the entire discussion here, and had I been on the ball I likely would have picked 1995 (or, I dunno, 93 and 97). There seems to be a radical disconnect between the methods and evidence base we use and what our friend is using. I don't think that there are western and non western evidence bases, or standards of evidence. Pretty sure that's universal? (Although trying to figure out youth self harm across countries - rates, reporting differences, causes - is probably a bit above the pay grade I attract on Fab? I can be contacted for my freelance rates at example at I'm joking dot com) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This thread offers a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is why no amount of rational, educated expertise will penetrate the armour of the intellectually impervious. Using fancy words to insult people you disagree with don't make you smart. Intellectual content does. Not being a cultural sheep that cheers for it's ideological team. With nothing to contribute of your own independent thoughts. I don’t know how to tell you this but all of those words and concepts are learned before GCSE. I didn't study in the UK, nor in English. Well, now you know that to someone who learned English in the UK to an average standard, none of those words and concepts would be difficult. My point still stands. Using fancy words to insult someone they disagree with without contributing anything intellectually to the points debated" They're not fancy words | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This thread offers a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is why no amount of rational, educated expertise will penetrate the armour of the intellectually impervious. Using fancy words to insult people you disagree with don't make you smart. Intellectual content does. Not being a cultural sheep that cheers for it's ideological team. With nothing to contribute of your own independent thoughts. " There was no disagreement from Davina as far as I can see. Merely a statement based on a study. An explanation of behaviours. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This thread offers a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is why no amount of rational, educated expertise will penetrate the armour of the intellectually impervious. Using fancy words to insult people you disagree with don't make you smart. Intellectual content does. Not being a cultural sheep that cheers for it's ideological team. With nothing to contribute of your own independent thoughts. I don’t know how to tell you this but all of those words and concepts are learned before GCSE. I didn't study in the UK, nor in English. Well, now you know that to someone who learned English in the UK to an average standard, none of those words and concepts would be difficult. My point still stands. Using fancy words to insult someone they disagree with without contributing anything intellectually to the points debated They're not fancy words "Are we debating fancy words now? Lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I know there are 2 sexes..that's all that matters in the end. They will change the meaning of "Sexes" to achieve their goal of mental disorder Pandemic" So are people not identifying in gender conforming wsys a symptom of covid or of vaccines? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This thread offers a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is why no amount of rational, educated expertise will penetrate the armour of the intellectually impervious. Using fancy words to insult people you disagree with don't make you smart. Intellectual content does. Not being a cultural sheep that cheers for it's ideological team. With nothing to contribute of your own independent thoughts. I don’t know how to tell you this but all of those words and concepts are learned before GCSE. I didn't study in the UK, nor in English. Well, now you know that to someone who learned English in the UK to an average standard, none of those words and concepts would be difficult. My point still stands. Using fancy words to insult someone they disagree with without contributing anything intellectually to the points debated They're not fancy words
Are we debating fancy words now? Lol"No. You're making something of words that are considered very basic for an adult communicating in English. You're an adult communicating in English. It's been a ride, I guess. From the oldest writing in existence to hypotheses about rare mental illness being throughout the historical record, to the 1200s and 1940s in a single leap, and trans/queer/feminism being the same thing. And a lot about the 1990s, which is both central and irrelevant. I hope the OP finds some books. Hood Feminism is in my pile, but I don't know if it's specifically radical feminism. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This thread offers a prime example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. This is why no amount of rational, educated expertise will penetrate the armour of the intellectually impervious. Using fancy words to insult people you disagree with don't make you smart. Intellectual content does. Not being a cultural sheep that cheers for it's ideological team. With nothing to contribute of your own independent thoughts. There was no disagreement from Davina as far as I can see. Merely a statement based on a study. An explanation of behaviours. " Just a fancy way of saying: Look how intellectual I sound, so I am going to judge others here of not being intellectual and I have nothing intellectual to enrich the discussion other than my judgement | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
