wonderingwanderer

That’s what your 16 kids are for, duh…

Also, the whole village likely cultivates the same fields, so it’s not like it’s some private landholding that will fallow if you’re not there to tend it. Long live the commons!

It’s a break from the tedium of subsistance sharecropping…

Plus, you’d get to carry a sword and no one would bat an eye. I mean how cool is that?

By year 2326 it’ll be Johnson’s Brewing Co. Co. co.

Sorry, it’s just hard to approach these topics from my angle without bracing to be punched in the face…

Nice deflection. I never claimed gender is immutable. You just brought cis/trans distinction into a discussion about man/woman.

So gender isn’t obsolete per se

So it’s only obsolete if we’re talking about cis men? Cause if you meant anything else by that, then why would you even bring it up? Is it obsolete or is it not obsolete?

Don’t give me “per se,” cause that just leaves you room to carve out exceptions for anyone you don’t think is oppressed enough to deserve your sympathy or acknowledgement.

Rapists will always prey on people who are more vulnerable than them. Things like prison rape show that a person’s genitals aren’t always a factor. Mtf trans people also get raped.

Rape is an evil, vile, despicable thing to do to another person. That’s a bit of a red herring though, because my question was about how this topic reflects on gender roles. Cause it seems like the same people who want to say “gender roles are archaic and should be done away with” are in favor of sending a man into a situation where a woman might be in danger. But wouldn’t that make it a gender role?

By the way, cis men get raped too. Using mtf as an example to show that a person’s genitals aren’t always a factor is akin to saying “Only women get raped.” Especially when combined with your statement that “Ftm would be pretty safe.” So what’s your agenda, to claim the world is ultimately safe for men?

So are you saying men should do the dangerous stuff, fulfilling the gender role of “protector”? Because most feminists would be allergic to a statement like that. And yet here they are, saying “The world’s too dangerous for women, so they need to send men to do the dangerous stuff.”

My only point one way or the other is that it displays a glaring inconsistency that needs to be examined. There’s no need to insert the cis/trans distinction into the mix; if gender roles are obsolete, then it doesn’t matter; and if they’re not then the only difference it makes is in how men or women perform their gender, and whether they’re cis or trans wouldn’t change that.

Is it? Or are you just in the habit of labeling anything that conflicts with your assumptions as being disingenuous?

They’ll still find a way to triangulate whose dick that is

“Okay, bluetooth disabled for 24 hours.” It’ll turn itself back on tomorrow.

Microsoft knows your dick size

If I could get them to realize one thing, it would be that feminism isn’t about women participating in patriarchal structures of oppression as oppressors; it’s about abolishing patriarchal structures of oppression.

If I got a bonus thing, it would be getting them to realize that patriarchy also harms men, that toxic masculinity harms men (and can be perpetuated by women), and that only a relatively small percentage of men can be categorized as “oppressors.”

An oligarch is an oligarch, whether man or woman. And bullying a vulnerable man because he’s an easier target than an actual oppressor is not “smashing the patriarchy.”

ははは

555

And yet their solution is to use a man for protection?

Nothing wrong with that, I just think it’s a little one-sided to say “women are afraid of men” while ignoring the part where “women use men for safety.”

How does this apply to the whole “gender roles are obsolete/archaic” thing?

I’m not trying to be edgy, I’m just trying to understand how that idea meshes with “wife sends husband into potentially dangerous situation because the risk for him is lower”

But see, every human social interaction these days is viewed through the lense of “must have sexual undertones.”

That’s why it’s hard to go in public/make eye contact with strangers without someone glaring at you and accusing you of something nasty…

Wow, this comment chain went from heartwarming to depressing real fast. I’m sorry you lost your friend.

The loneliness epidemic is absolutely real, and this isolating society is killing us all by design and it breaks my heart.

That’s true, but internet pseudo-feminists seem intent on declaring that the loneliness epidemic isn’t real and is just made up by the manosphere to oppress women.

(This isn’t a statement against feminism, but the idea that anything that hurts men is feminist isn’t really feminism)