The Big Snoopy Thread of S-E-X
-
Exactly my point. its a stupid double standard, if you look like a dude get out, if you used to be a dude, regardless of how you look, get out.
if they dropped trou and showed off their minge, would they let them in?
I have no idea. I try not to predict the behavior of crazy people.
Sensible position, but I am going to proceed with asking people to anyway.
-
"Conference for radical muslims" wouldn't get too far.
I propose to hold both radfem 2015 and crm 2015 in the same conference center at the same day.
-
if they dropped trou and showed off their minge, would they let them in?
I suspect that both biological and ideological reasons are perfectly cromulent for excommunication, and someone who tried to be a man wouldn't fit in. These are people who think being lesbian is a political imperative, and trying to pass as a man is probably furthering heteronormative patriarchy. Or something. Then again...crazy.
-
who look entirely and completely male externally. Would they be welcome at rad-fem events?
It sure would be worth a try. It would probably make that woman angry in one way or another. She'd probably call them "traitors" or something (I've seen the term "race traitor" used regularly in racist forums).
They're also convenient for when someone claims liking trans women makes you gay. If so, then liking trans men is totally straight, and they should love having this beautiful woman as a girlfriend:
http://www.transmanginamonologues.com/tmmimages/simon.jpg
-
if you look like a dude get out
TBF, if you are trying to not be a woman, what on earth are you doing at a feminist conference?
if you used to be a dude, regardless of how you look
Right now we're starting to get into the messy details of what exactly we mean by "trans" and I'm not sure I can carry on such a conversation at work.
-
TBF, if you are trying to not be a woman, what on earth are you doing at a feminist conference?
I agree it isn't particularly logical, but it serves as a kind of proof by negation of the inverse logic.
Right now we're starting to get into the messy details of what exactly we mean by "trans" and I'm not sure I can carry on such a conversation at work.
fair, its a very fuzzy area and incredibly difficult to define, particularly as many hope to increase it's scope to give them a much needed support network in dealing with very difficult issues.
I would recommend that that matters little though, the definition provided by the rad-fem posts linked is very blunt, and the nuances are not particularly relevant as a result of that bluntness
-
Identity politics (not unlike any other, but this stuff is so personal) is riven with contradictions.
-
-
I dont even. what?
All I can tell is that once again people making sweeping generalizations are all idiots.
Those dumb sons of bitches need to learn to "Live and let live."
edit: i'm referring to the twitter feed posted by boomzilla, not @boomzilla himself, in this instance.
-
I am acquainted with several trans people (female to male) who look entirely and completely male externally. Would they be welcome at rad-fem events? what if they have fully completed gender reassignment surgery?
Almost certainly not. Because they look like men. Neither would male to female who had fully completed, because they were men.
I'm guessing...
-
edit: i'm referring to the twitter feed posted by boomzilla, not @boomzilla himself, in this instance.
Now I feel left out.
-
I propose to hold both radfem 2015 and crm 2015 in the same conference center at the same day.
That would be carnage. There's nothing radical feminists hate more than Customer Relationship Managers.
-
There's nothing radical feminists hate more than Customer Relationship Managers.
I know! That would solve a lot of my issues here at work.
-
This seems as appropriate as anything else in this thread, and I got a chuckle out of the headline:
Haven't read TFA, because it's all surely downhill from there.
-
I am acquainted with several trans people (female to male) who look entirely and completely male externally. Would they be welcome at rad-fem events?
Most feminists already look like men to me, so how do you tell?
-
So now I guess that "openly straight" is a thing?
-
TLTQ the many folks who obliquely were pointing to this, but homosexuality is more or less an evolutionary 'safety valve' for procreative instincts (i.e. a response to those instincts that does not spit kids out at the end of the day), as uncontrolled procreation gets us into Malthusian lands of WTF.
-
A cursory examination of available pornography (an exercise left to the Reader) will - in fact - demonstrate a possible third axis: attraction to hermaphrodites.
And about a hundred of other ones, if you look at the right websites.
Anyway, the solution is simple - if I'm not in a sexual/romantic relationship with someone, I don't give a shit about who they are biologically, socially, claim to be, think to be, or whatever. And if I am or plan to be, it's my damn right to find certain things more attractive than others, and penises are kind of low on that list.
Filed under: mine excluded, of course
-
And about a hundred of other ones, if you look at the right websites.
We're still talking about human primary sexual characteristics here? If so, I've truly been leading a sheltered life.
-
Sexual orientation with dwarves still works even though they have nothing between their lower body and legs.
For that matter, they also have no knees. They have two-part legs, but no joint between the parts.
And if you're looking for a dwarf's butt, there isn't one. Dwarves are 100% efficient when they digest food.
-
I contend that dwarves reproduce by alcohol.
-
Even though materials 15-17 exist.
For once I'm glad my company web filter blocks "gaming" related websites.
-
[spoiler]
15 FILTH_B Filth (brown, solid)
16 FILTH_Y Filth (yellow, liquid)
[/spoiler]I bet separating those two was one of the first design ideas for the game.
-
[spoiler]17 UNKNOWN_SUBSTANCE Unknown substance (white, liquid)[/spoiler]
Keep in mind that all of these are inorganic. Materials 19-218 are animal materials, 219-418 are plant materials, and 419-618 are the same as 19-218 but for specific historical figures instead of species.
Some examples:
- 0,177 is Obsidian (inorganic material #177)
- 38,158 is Cat Leather (material #19 belonging to creature #158)
- 46,162 is Cow's Milk (material #27 belonging to creature #162)
- 423,176 is Rock Nut (material #4 belonging to plant #176)
-
Wow, I wonder if the Guacamole thread knew about this topic...
Discourse, why are you suggesting this topic to me?!
-
This post is deleted!
Nathan Tom, First Openly Straight Male Figure Skater, Signs With Olympic Practice Squad
