tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post815464984573553115..comments2024-03-13T11:14:26.768-04:00Comments on A Radical Profeminist: Sara and Julian Discuss Trans/Feminist Issues, part 1: Gender and Race Privilege, Childhood Experience, Structural Political Location, and the Michigan Womyn's Music FestivalUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-70355879461252692392010-12-03T13:54:24.681-05:002010-12-03T13:54:24.681-05:00I'm uncomfortable with the levels of bigotry a...I'm uncomfortable with the levels of bigotry and bias you are now expressing about second wave feminism generally, and specifically about radical feminism as "man-hating". <br /><br />That's not cool with me, Sara. It's exactly what pimps put forth as "the truth" about those groups of people.<br /><br />You say you won't read piles of books. I'm not asking you to. But if you're going to only read the material that reinforces your bigoted/misogynistic/anti-feminist views, who should call that out as problematic?Julian Realhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02933612851144914687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-35880039878003311452010-12-03T11:12:27.921-05:002010-12-03T11:12:27.921-05:00"So which (probably white) women are you spea..."So which (probably white) women are you speaking about? And if the only names you can come up with are white, what do you think about reducing "second wave feminism" to only white people? Isn't that grossly racist of you to do?"<br /><br />Mainly Janice Raymond's "The Transsexual Empire", published in 1979, republished in 2005. There is also Germaine Greer's "The Whole Woman", published in 2003 - the chapter Pantomine Dames is very offensive to trans and intersex women alike.<br /><br />And why I don't know more is because I was born in 1982, haven't been in college, or women's studies classes, and wouldn't dream of reading piles of books about people who might trigger me by insulting my very existence (like Raymond and Greer did). Especially if I'm looking for examples of such.<br /><br />The climate in the feminist-trans community of the 70s could be illustrated by Sandy Stone getting fired over her being trans, by feminists.<br /><br />It's probably not all 2nd wave feminists, definitely. Even just those from the 1970s either. It's a part of those who are now known as radical feminists (ie not all of those either). Who were the most vocal. It's the dirtywhiteboi type (blogger and forum member on MWMF, and who is virulently anti-trans).<br /><br />Let me say that it is ironic that caring for men and pointing out contradictions within the movement gets you excommunicated (as many feminists identifying as gender-egalitarian have been), but hating men is fine for keeping the title of feminist. It's ironic because it's a movement that purports to be about equality.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-52145545199469529682010-12-02T18:07:54.161-05:002010-12-02T18:07:54.161-05:00Hey Sara,
I just found all those posts, and, as y...Hey Sara,<br /><br />I just found all those posts, and, as you can see, got them published here, above. Let me know if anything is missing. You had two versions of part 4, but I think I posted the right one of the two.<br /><br />Wowza! I can't wait to read and carefully respond to each!<br /><br />Thanks for taking the time to write all this out. I appreciate it!!Julian Realhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02933612851144914687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-85534603503719951472010-12-02T10:28:57.514-05:002010-12-02T10:28:57.514-05:00It's like analyzing the life of a geek by look...<i>It's like analyzing the life of a geek by looking at the experience of a jock or a cheerleader. Sharing sex won't mean much for their experience.</i><br /><br />I think we agree that one the interpersonal level, it is wrong to make assumptions about someone's character or likes and dislikes, or preferred ways of being based on them being part of "a group". But my point is that doesn't mean we can't fight for and don't need human rights and civil rights legislation based on socially perceived and politically/institutionally enforced physical differences, such as "race" and "gender" and "sexuality", among other differences.<br /><br /><i>2nd wave feminists made up their mind about trans women back in the 70s, without even knowing them.</i><br /><br />And this is yet another example of you putting everyone with one label into a group and making a judgment that everyone in that group thinks and feels the same way. We don't, Sara. And I'm asking you to please cut the stigmatising and stereotyping of the group "second wave feminists". Because who are you speaking of? Surely not Andrea Dworkin and Audre Lorde and Alice Walker. In what sense were/are each of them NOT second wave feminists?<br /><br />So which (probably white) women are you speaking about? And if the only names you can come up with are white, what do you think about reducing "second wave feminism" to only white people? Isn't that grossly racist of you to do? This is what I see across MRA blogs and websites, on discussion boards online, and on some trans blogs--this insistence that "second wave feminists" ALL believe one way about transgender experience and ALL came to that conclusion in the 1970s. Who do you mean? Name names, please. Cite the examples of the transphobia or anti-trans bigotry by name, not by the group "second wave feminists" please. I'm asking for that clarification and care from you on this issue.<br /><br /><i>Note: You posted my part 1, but not the 31 others. It was a total of 32 small posts.</i><br /><br />YIKES!! I can assure you I never got 32 comments from you!!! Or 31. So, let's do this, Sara, so I can be sure to get everything. Just send me an email of everything/anything that didn't get posted as a comment here OR in part 2 which is a separate post.<br /><br />Anything which is in neither post here on my blog, please send to me as one email. Not through the comments section of this blog. Okay? And I'll put that up as its own blog post. And I'll respond to those points there.<br /><br />How does that sound?Julian Realhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02933612851144914687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-19978486244209316352010-12-02T10:28:45.561-05:002010-12-02T10:28:45.561-05:00Especially stuff like thinking you know about a tr...<i>Especially stuff like thinking you know about a trans person's individual history/experience just by knowing they ever got treated as male.</i><br /><br />This is precisely my challenge to non-trans people like Noah who come to my blog and pretend there's only one experience of being trans. This is my objection to the bias and bigotry within and beyond trans community about "being trans". Such as when you state things more or less like "trans people are more vulnerable to violence than are non-trans women". Which trans people, Sara? And which non-trans women? ALL of us? Because that's surely not true. <br /><br />You say trans people--ALL of us--are more suicidal over our gender experience than non-trans people. My challenge back to you is that I think the break-down is probably more complicated than that and doesn't really have to do so much with being "trans" or "not trans" only. It's more likely a cluster of experiences that may or may not include being trans, that makes our youth or us as adults be more at risk for committing suicide, for example.<br /><br />It could be that people who feel especially isolated and alienated--in one's family of origin, if one has one, or beyond it among friends or more generally, socially. This isolation may be fueled by being seen and treated as inferior. Or by being systematically degraded or insulted or bullied interpersonally. Or by being invisibilised or stereotyped institutionally. <br /><br />Any or all of these things could also happen because we are seen as not being appropriately gendered (but NOT trangender), such as some queer youth--genderqueer and children perceived to be non-heterosexual, butch girls and feminine boys--it could be that THAT population, specifically, shares a very high incidence of being suicidal, including attempting it or succeeding at taking their own lives.<br /><br />And another group at risk may be those who aren't targeted or seen as being "lesbian" or "gay" or "not heterosexual", who are femme girls or masculine boys (as any given population defines those terms, but who are not heterosexual and may not be non-transgender/intergender, and the torment they/we carry about that puts us at risk for depression, suicidal feelings, and committing suicide because we feel so alone and unsupported and invalidated.Julian Realhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02933612851144914687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-70306976412508060122010-12-02T10:28:28.439-05:002010-12-02T10:28:28.439-05:00"Are you meaning to imply that given that fac...<i>"Are you meaning to imply that given that fact--that everyone's childhood is different, in part by culture, language, region, religion, and race, that we cannot organise effectively to end white and male supremacy?"<br /><br />Not necessarily. It's more of a "you can't judge individuals by this standard".</i><br /><br />What do you mean by "judge"? This radical profeminist's position is that I can "judge" (make determinations, discern, understand, predict status and stigma assignations) based on things like gender and race.<br /><br />It seems to me you've done this yourself in this discussion--over our two posts so far. Am I wrong about this? You've told me that Black women and white women have different experiences. It seems to me that you are clearly identifying--in ways I may or may not agree with--that white women have a distinct experience that Black women don't have. What is that experience? What is the experience that you say Black women have that white women don't?<br /><br />Are you clustering "the experiences of Black women" as one group, a politically identifiable group--based on their political structural location relative to white women (and, also, to white men, Black men, and other men and women of color)?<br /><br /><i>Make legal or social measures to ameliorate things based on averages and tendencies, but don't judge individuals through this, because you're pretty likely to be pre-misjudging someone.</i><br /><br />Okay, I think I'm understanding you more here. Is this what you're saying? That group differences exist, but so too do individual differences exist. And to conclude that the individual members of a group--based on structural/political location, history, and culture, for example, are "all the same" is to be racist or sexist or heterosexist. Is that your point? Or are you saying something more or different than that?Julian Realhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02933612851144914687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-31801372648260768932010-12-01T21:16:46.804-05:002010-12-01T21:16:46.804-05:00"Are you meaning to imply that given that fac..."Are you meaning to imply that given that fact--that everyone's childhood is different, in part by culture, language, region, religion, and race, that we cannot organise effectively to end white and male supremacy?"<br /><br />Not necessarily. It's more of a "you can't judge individuals by this standard". Make legal or social measures to ameliorate things based on averages and tendencies, but don't judge individuals through this, because you're pretty likely to be pre-misjudging someone.<br /><br />Especially stuff like thinking you know about a trans person's individual history/experience just by knowing they ever got treated as male.<br /><br />It's like analyzing the life of a geek by looking at the experience of a jock or a cheerleader. Sharing sex won't mean much for their experience.<br /><br />2nd wave feminists made up their mind about trans women back in the 70s, without even knowing them.<br /><br />Note: You posted my part 1, but not the 31 others. It was a total of 32 small posts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-77087852116714018712010-12-01T12:12:15.586-05:002010-12-01T12:12:15.586-05:00I ask this, Sara, because it relates to the whole ...I ask this, Sara, because it relates to the whole matter of Vancouver Rape Relief's political project, which is critical in understanding their hiring practices. I'll be posting about that soon, I hope!Julian Realhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02933612851144914687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-90021643035652429072010-12-01T11:57:21.512-05:002010-12-01T11:57:21.512-05:00Hi Sara,
Thanks for letting me know more about yo...Hi Sara,<br /><br />Thanks for letting me know more about your own cultural experiences and history.<br /><br />I apologise for not knowing how to write in the language of Québecois.<br /><br />You last point, the summary point, is one that leads us to the crux of the matter, for me, Sara.<br /><br />Are you meaning to imply that given that fact--that everyone's childhood is different, in part by culture, language, region, religion, and race, that we cannot organise effectively to end white and male supremacy? <br /><br />Would you abolish or abandon projects feminists have put in place over the last forty years, across the globe, to address and challenge and end men's very endemic and gender-specific atrocities against women?Julian Realhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02933612851144914687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-5725945480174579282010-12-01T11:41:33.802-05:002010-12-01T11:41:33.802-05:00I re-read myself, but this being a big text and al...I re-read myself, but this being a big text and all (including your quotes it's 12 pages of text), there might be stuff I forgot or misstated.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-73253201701968521982010-12-01T11:39:01.033-05:002010-12-01T11:39:01.033-05:00Part 32 and final
“BUT, it may also be the case t...Part 32 and final<br /><br />“BUT, it may also be the case that when those problematic behaviors are coming from someone who has been socialised to have male privilege and male supremacist entitlements (whether or not they wanted them), and are aimed at female-women, those women rightfully call it out as problematic and oppressive. And there's nothing wrong with doing so, necessarily. That's how I feel. And I'm open to discussion on this. “<br /><br />Double-standard if I ever saw one. You assume someone was privileged in the past and it's your free pass to bring in hypocrisy. I don't know how Man A, Trans woman B and Cis woman C were raised. I don't assume they have privileges unless they show something (behavior) that others don't. If cis women or trans women do the exact same thing, it should have the exact same consequences.<br /><br />“And, again, far too much attention is spent focusing on events that mostly privilege people get to go to. And that the most non-privileged people generally don't go to. We need to focus more on the experiences of the non-privileged. And so I'm glad you're bringing up rest rooms, as that's something that impacts everyone who is able to leave their primary abode and enter social/public urban and suburban spaces, and many rural ones as well. “<br /><br />I'm not sure if you had a question about this?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-17751267106428594592010-12-01T11:38:27.263-05:002010-12-01T11:38:27.263-05:00Part 31
“Position matters, Sara. If a rich white ...Part 31<br /><br />“Position matters, Sara. If a rich white man looks at a poor white man in a certain way, that poor white man may experience that has deeply insulting and degrading. If two blocks later that same poor man encounters another poor man who looks at him similarly, he may not register it as insulting at all, because political-social-economic-sexual location and position matters. It is part of why we experience what we do and cannot and ought not be discounted or put down. “<br /><br />I don't understand that example. I don't see certain groups as being worst for oppressing me, unless they're understood as being from the same subgroup I am from (I might feel that this someone should know better, being in the same position). To me its something where two people are being jerks, but one should know better, having experience being in that situation (having limited financial means, being homeless – NOT being stared at).<br /><br />And I'll be harder on gay and lesbian people discriminating against trans people. Homophobia and transphobia being similar. They shouldn't reproduce their oppression on a lower group. They should know better. They're also more likely to understand my reasoning, since I can use LGB group analogy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-85329562738548865282010-12-01T11:37:56.091-05:002010-12-01T11:37:56.091-05:00Part 30
“I react differently, in many instances, ...Part 30<br /><br />“I react differently, in many instances, to what male-men do than to what female-women do. And the people may be doing "the same" thing, more or less. But because it is coming from a male-man, my body registers it as different. And THAT subjective experience matters and can't be written off as "acting on a double standard". “<br /><br />Triggers are not just a double-standard, I'll concede that, but they're not always male or female specific. They might be beard-specific. People with soprano voice specific. Sports cap specific. The best is always to work on triggers, because people will probably trigger you without even trying or wanting to. By just being there in a public place, for example.<br /><br />I got physically beaten mostly by boys, often (pre-transition, not after at all), but I'm not triggered by the presence of boys or I wouldn't be able to go out, ever.<br /><br />“Now, if men only experience women interrupting them as "women being a b word" but don't hardly notice if men interrupt them, then THAT ought to be called out as sexist, because they are making a negative judgment only about a group they structurally oppress. “<br /><br />Besides making that judgment, I don't see how your hypothetical guy is structurally oppressing your hypothetical girl. I assume actions oppress, not the presumption that, maybe, people of that group are statistically more likely to oppress.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-15258915888599341472010-12-01T11:36:33.015-05:002010-12-01T11:36:33.015-05:00Part 29
“The example of me interrupting applies h...Part 29<br /><br />“The example of me interrupting applies here, I think. Women may not experience each other as being "oppressive" if the other person is a woman. And when the other person is a man, they may experience the seemingly "same" behavior as oppressive and it may cause them to feel unsafe or upset. “<br /><br />That's hypocrisy, plain and simple. It might depend on circumstances. I don't generally allow strangers to hug me (friends and family, and my boyfriend). But I wouldn't think a man or a woman, friend or family, is different from each other because one was LIKELY to be socialized in a certain way. I call you on the assumption that all men and women are socialized in the same way within their sex – that there is one-true-way of being socialized and perceived as male, or female.<br /><br />“What men do can be triggering to women who have had it done traumatically by men in the past. “<br /><br />Owning to your triggers, by telling close people when something is likely to trigger you, is a good thing. Expecting people to guess your triggers out of thin air is not too safe, for you or them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-35006995815392091722010-12-01T11:35:57.093-05:002010-12-01T11:35:57.093-05:00Part 28
“act out those behaviors around people wh...Part 28<br /><br />“act out those behaviors around people who are female-girls or female-women, and, in the case you cited, those women experience that behavior as male supremacist and oppressive along gendered lines, then their subjective experience has to matter, doesn't it? “<br /><br />No, it shouldn't matter if they do the exact same, in the exact same circumstances. That's simply hypocrisy. Allowing yourself to do something, but not others, is self-supremacist behavior. Rich people and politicians can get away with more than the ordinary citizen, and it isn't right (and not because they have status, just because it's glaring injustice and hypocrisy).<br /><br />“If not, we're then in the position of allowing only one group of people to name reality. And if the only group that gets to name reality is people who have had male privileges at some point in their lives, then that's patriarchy all over again. “<br /><br />If you're allowing people who have cissexual privilege to name the transsexual experience, it's also patriarchy all over again.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-31214285002569108832010-12-01T11:35:29.836-05:002010-12-01T11:35:29.836-05:00Part 27
“Here's an example of why I don't...Part 27<br /><br />“Here's an example of why I don't think what those women are describing is a double standard. I can, on occasion--(or more than on occasion)--interrupt people when they are talking. I often feel inclined to do this. It's part of my regional-cultural heritage, and both women and men in my cultural experience do it, routinely and regularly. “<br /><br />Yeah well MWMF is full of non-trans women who have this ungendered assumption that assertiveness and aggressiveness is normal. Strong women value other women who are like this. But if a trans woman dares be like this, in that same environment where it's normal, suddenly it's an invasion. It's got nothing to do with the “woman from another culture”, its exactly those same women.<br /><br />“So, if men MAAB people, or people with male privileges--who acquired them because they were once viewed socially as male-boys or male-men “<br /><br />If women can acquire them, it's not too evident that men or trans women acquired those skills due to being once socially viewed as male. AFAIK, women are not socially viewed as male, and can acquire them, just as easily. That's its contracultural for them to do so, and not for men, is immaterial in the legitimacy of the behavior itself.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-58660608008514330382010-12-01T11:34:58.376-05:002010-12-01T11:34:58.376-05:00Part 26
“So are you saying women don't have a...Part 26<br /><br />“So are you saying women don't have a right to name what they experience in political terms? Are you saying people of color have no right or responsibility to name and call out "white privileged behavior"? Because if that's where you're going, you'll get no support from me on that point. I believe women can and do often know when someone is behaving in a sexist/misogynistic way, in ways that are aggressive or violating or abusive WITH THE INTENT OR EFFECT OF BEING OPPRESSIVE OR DANGEROUS to those women who identify the behavior. “<br /><br />No, that's not it. They're accusing trans women of being assertive and aggressive and having “male energy”, regardless of their being sexist or misogynistic. Just their very presence is enough. They're also accusing other trans women of being shy and submissive and thus consciously making a caricature of womanhood, for the patriarchy. It's a catch-22. If you're a shy and submissive woman, you're an infiltrator just there to make women look bad. If you're assertive and aggressive (ie a strong woman), you're really a man showing male privilege. Again, regardless of not showing any sexism, racism, misogyny etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-60257902751784389422010-12-01T11:34:02.560-05:002010-12-01T11:34:02.560-05:00Part 25
“It CERTAINLY isn't limited to person...Part 25<br /><br />“It CERTAINLY isn't limited to personal dating experience "which is always anecdotal" according to you. I want to call you out on that, btw. “<br /><br />So you're saying a lesbian woman who dated 1 trans woman in her life is able to speak about all trans women? That's what I mean by anecdotal. What chances are that someone will date more than one trans woman in their life? It's already bad chances to date a single one. 5% lesbian women, 0.1% trans women, that's 50 for 1, and there's also a couple of straight trans women, reducing that number.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-15274841427921467832010-12-01T11:33:27.097-05:002010-12-01T11:33:27.097-05:00Part 24
“Most lesbian women I know have stories o...Part 24<br /><br />“Most lesbian women I know have stories of het men and gay men being dicks, being pricks, being male supremacist jerks. Being misogynistic. Being sexist. Being racist if white. Being classist if not poor. Being ableist if not disabled. And so on. “<br /><br />I got accounts of people being stupid and jerks, but I don't attribute it to their unchangeable characteristics. I attribute it to that one person who did it. I can view people as unique and not necessarily the product of their characteristic's culture. To me, if someone is a jerk, they are a jerk. Not a male supremacist jerk, unless they espouse male supremacist views.<br /><br />“And speaking only for myself and my sense of safety when among male-men, I can feel unsafe in a group if one man is staring at me in creepy ways. Or if one man touches me without my permission. That can happen anywhere--at a party, at a gathering, at an event, at a concert, in a grocery store, etc. “<br /><br />I can feel unsage if “anyone” stares at me in creepy ways. They could be green and yellow colored aliens that it wouldn't matter. I don't attribute the creepiness to their sex, or race, or ethnicity, but to themselves.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-56936700018697567582010-12-01T11:33:03.779-05:002010-12-01T11:33:03.779-05:00Part 23
“As you note, that event can be and will ...Part 23<br /><br />“As you note, that event can be and will be attended only by those with some forms of privilege--financial, partly. But some forms of able-bodiedness also. And, in conversations with non-trans lesbian women, this is what I've heard: it only takes a few experiences of someone with male privileges bullying or harassing or dominating their way into a space to make many, many, many non-trans lesbian women feel VERY uncomfortable with that person being there at all. “<br /><br />I don't know. I think no one has dominion on bullying or harassing or dominating. That if a trans woman does it, it shouldn't at all feel different than a non-trans MWMF attendee doing it. Especially as the who's who is not evident (being a trans woman, even masculine-looking, won't out you amongst groups of masculine-looking non-trans women – it won't feel more threatening). About masculine looking, I'm going by accounts from their forum, I'm not making it up or stereotyping lesbian women. They're not all masculine-looking either.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-52995729737285609022010-12-01T11:32:34.134-05:002010-12-01T11:32:34.134-05:00Part 22
“If you are socially positioned and seen ...Part 22<br /><br />“If you are socially positioned and seen and treated as a male-man, you are also socially-politically "entitled" to do whatever you want that isn't overtly criminal. And you can do the criminal stuff if it's private. That you choose not to--for any reason, including because you are asexual--doesn't mean your entitlements disappear. And it doesn't mean our socialisation to behave as oppressive male-men goes away or takes no root in us. That's how I see it, anyway. That's my experience of males, boys, and men. “<br /><br />That's equally true for just about anyone. Anyone can do stuff that isn't overtly criminal without being arrested. They can do private criminal stuff if they won't get caught, only. I guess you could destroy your 20$ bills (a criminal federal offense), without getting caught. The drive to be opportunist is human, not male.<br /><br />“LOL. Well, shockingly, there are large numbers of white class-privileged gay men who want to be Republicans! “<br /><br />Probably not for their stance on same-sex marriage though.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-57315625231082703952010-12-01T11:32:11.557-05:002010-12-01T11:32:11.557-05:00Part 21
“But if I were heterosexual and seen as a...Part 21<br /><br />“But if I were heterosexual and seen as a male-man, I could stare at women on the street and be patted on the back for doing so, by male-men who share publicly valuing behaving in male supremacist ways, homosocially and heterosexually, regardless of what they wish to do privately. “<br /><br />I doubt many US or Canadian men value homosociality between men. If they did you could hug, hold the hand or talk about anything with them, more than with women – and without being considered gay at all. It's valued in the Middle-East and in Japan, (where it takes a LOT to be considered to do something signifying gayness) not here. Here people call it “bromance” so much it's outside mainstream. Best friends with guys that are truly best friends the way women are, are few (and this is what I see as homosociality, not back-patting). Matt Damon and Ben Affleck are the most known example.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-25877651607600135382010-12-01T11:31:38.289-05:002010-12-01T11:31:38.289-05:00Part 20
“Most of what I've done "sexuall...Part 20<br /><br />“Most of what I've done "sexually" was not what I'd want to do now that I feel personally (not socially) "entitled" to not have sex with anyone. Even now, today, I AM socially entitled to rape, to abuse, to act out in male supremacist ways. I CAN access pornography--images of raped and pimped women and men. I can voyeur. I can stare at men I think are physically attractive. I choose not to. “<br /><br />Pornography is analyzed a bit too much. Especially in this puritanical society. As long as you consider it's a work of fiction, and don't think porn should physically happen in your life, I think you'll be fine. I'm definitely not for underaged people or people being forced physically or by circumstances, to participate in porn. I also don't think it's interesting, I prefer to imagine it via text (erotica) if at all. Some people are more visual. Porn should definitely be more ethical, but it's not morally wrong in itself – it's how its sometimes treated that is. <br /><br />Like guns, people kill using guns, but it's people who felt entitled to take a life from the start. Regulating guns is a good idea. Less gunshot-crimes, less “I won't get caught if I can easily kill all witnesses”, because guns are the way of the facility, and people might not feel confident they can win a fight without it. Regulating guns is like regulating porn, it helps less people fall victim to it. Completely removing them won't work. Prohibition proved what happens when something that still exists is removed from legality.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-25429108524370688182010-12-01T11:31:07.892-05:002010-12-01T11:31:07.892-05:00Part 19
“And we acted out in some male supremacis...Part 19<br /><br />“And we acted out in some male supremacist, privileged, and entitled ways. How we "act out" has a whole lot to do with how we are socialised to behave, sexually and otherwise. I hear that for you, "being sexual" as that is commonly understood, was not an option for you. And I'm glad you were able to honor that in yourself. Most of us are not. Most of us have sexual behaviors thrust upon us, and we are sexually active in compulsory ways, whether we desire to be or not. “<br /><br />The only compulsion is libido, and men's right hands are universally recognized as being able to fix that (left hand for left-handers). I have no idea what you're really saying here. It's like you're saying I couldn't have done nothing sexually, that my socialization forced me to be aggressive and sexually aggressive against girls. I got news for you though – for aspies common sense and “normal socialization” seems at worst wrong, at best misguided, so I question everything I'm taught, directly or indirectly. And only apply what actually makes sense to me. I'm not agnostic because it's “in” to be agnostic, but because I questioned the dogma of organized religions as a bunch of nonsense.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-6743067284736084482010-12-01T11:30:42.824-05:002010-12-01T11:30:42.824-05:00Part 18
“So I'm challenging you big time on t...Part 18<br /><br />“So I'm challenging you big time on this one point. You say, "Being asexual made it physically impossible to be entitled for sex (I didn't want any)." <br />I say in response to that the following: many boys don't want to be or feel like being aggressors against girls. Many older male-boys don't want to be sexually violating to female-girls. But those of us who are male and identified as boys as children, and as teens, are socially entitled to be aggressors nonetheless. Not wanting to be has very little to do with it. “<br /><br />This doesn't make logical sense to me. I never felt someone “owed it to me”, to be the recipient of some imagined aggressive behavior, sexual or otherwise. I felt entitled to physical safety, and got it punched in me that I shouldn't be, somehow (I still feel entitled to physical safety, I feel it is a fundamental human right).<br /><br />“And it may have been impossible for you to act out sexually, but for many asexual kids, especially those of us who were sexually abused and assaulted in childhood, we DID act out sexually, even though we were asexual. “<br /><br />I wasn't abused sexually. I was physically assaulted, often, but never sexually. I never acted out sexually, and am not sure at all what you mean by this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com