sorted by: new top controversial old
[-] Drivebyhaiku 5 points 8 hours ago

I feel like we as a culture do not appreciate the raw physical potential of women. The whole "weaker sex" propaganda was way too successful. Like people have no idea what laundry actually used to entail. I am a history enthusiast and I got ropped into a recreation of a full Tudor washday for an Arts and Sciences competition in the SCA. Like I was working as a concrete former lifting and tying rebar for my job at the time and was stronger than about 70 percent of the folks in my group... But Holy fuck my muscles BURNED from weilding a paddle. Not just stirring but beating clothes with something like a cricket bat and then wringing bedsheets by winding them around posts. By the end of the day I was absolutely done in.

I was given an amazing cheesecake for my trouble in helping out for the task but the real take away was an appreciation for the washing machine that I will never forget.

[-] Drivebyhaiku 7 points 14 hours ago

Well everyone should probably be hitting the gym from time to time these days since activity in general has become kind of optional. Going as a couple can make for the best gym partners. Me and my partner have a good time.

[-] Drivebyhaiku 10 points 15 hours ago

Women are generally pretty capable of lifting twice their weight. Stand back to back and link arms (you may need to crouch) and if she leans forward and you tense your core and lift your legs you will end up directly over her center of gravity. It's essentially her lifting you like a backack. It isn't a super comfortable lift for the guy in the equation if he's got a weak core but we used to do this all the time at fight night. A teen girl who is maybe 120lbs soaking wet can easily pick up a 6'5 215lbs guy and walk down a city block with him on her back.

In period women were generally muscled as fuck. Fetching household water, hand milling grain for bread and doing laundry were female coded tasks on top of doing whatever yearly hard labour tasks were required. They would absolutely be trucking their favourite guy out of town even if he was big.

[-] Drivebyhaiku 1 points 4 days ago

There are other models of sexuallity. Things like lesbian/gay/straight/bi etc. or hetero/homosexuality is one based on the relative attraction between sexes or genders... But one could also use the model that simply refers to the subject of an individual's attraction. Gynosexual , Androsexual, Skoliosexual or Pansexual. It's arguably a more neutral way to classify because it draws no particular difference between same-sex or opposite sex attraction. It also tends to work better when dealing with non-binary people because self classification gets weird when you need to use a binary classification system for a non-binary experience.

[-] Drivebyhaiku 3 points 4 days ago

Have you tried acting trans simply for popularity sake? I am genuinely curious if it's something you would be willing to try and ultimately what your take aways on the experience would be.

[-] Drivebyhaiku 2 points 4 days ago

She's definitely not in a good place. The people she preaches to are primed to think she's at best a pitiable freak and mentally ill for being what she is but she's addicted to being their pet trans woman because she's so keen to feel more somehow respectable than other trans people.

It doesn't seem like at all a healthy place to be.

[-] Drivebyhaiku 1 points 4 days ago

I mean I go pretty effortlessly closeted at work as a non-binary trans person even though my hair is a neon rainbow and people clock me as both male or female on occasion. Coming out of the closet to some select folk tends to elicit way more blindsided surprise then seems reasonable given I don't think I could look more stereotypical enby if I tried. My conclusion is cis people in general are pretty trans blind outside of the binary. Infra and Ultra gender sounds about right.

[-] Drivebyhaiku 12 points 4 days ago

They actually sound like deranged seagulls. I think that sound is probably more on the nose for what is going on in the US.

[-] Drivebyhaiku 1 points 5 days ago

I believe what you are referring to is Communism. Let us divorce at least the name of a singular man from a body of work that by your own admission is made up of a number of different writers on the subject just as the elaborations on Newtonian Physics is considered also a part but not whole of Classical Mechanics.

The reductions of bodies of political thought to singular authors is often used to exclude others. Very often on this platform I am told that I am not a Socialist because I am not a Marxist simply because he simply coined a term to a body of thought that predated him and extended far beyond him so why should I extend to Marx the authorial intent by the political realm of thought baring his name? If you said you were a Maoist or a Leninist or a Chavezist would I not conclude that you are in agreement with their very specific realms of their personal philosophy?

[-] Drivebyhaiku 0 points 5 days ago

If you are saying gender equality is Marxist then I am guessing you haven't read much Marx friend. Marx was very about women being relegated to traditional gender roles and was more about whole "seperate spheres of excellence" thing. You are thinking more of the likes of Saint Simone and Robert Owen's Owenites.

Feminist scholarship has tried to adapt Marx by stripping out the veiws about women and applying his rhetoric more unilaterally but that's not his text and quite frankly there are other contemporary philosophers and movement leaders which did it better.

There is this habit to slap the name Marxist on a the most idealized reads of the work and call it his because he's the name people know and the few well known political labels on the far left or because people who have claimed the label of his movement after his death decided to non-canonically add to his work- but I personally wish that people could normalize other schools of leftist philosophy and not treat Marx particularly as the magnet that all of us will inevitably be drawn to or attribute stuff to him that he doesn't particularly deserve. Marxism as a sort of brand name philosophy is misleading and disappointing to those who read his work and find that their ideals aren't actually well represented there.

[-] Drivebyhaiku 4 points 6 days ago

Dude never said "working class" they said "middle" and their point is that a diverse field of labor used to and should earn that sort of status. The winnowing and undermining of the pay structure has pushed more people lower than they should be. What their place is inside that structure is not relevant to the opinion. This has nothing to do with their personal financial circumstances.

[-] Drivebyhaiku 5 points 1 week ago

Not a particularly good point. Just because gender and race are both social constructs doesn't mean that both run on the same ruleset. Women and men exist as social categories in all cultures and trans people are seen across cultures existing even when the idea of trans people is buried and obfuscated. In reality there is no %100 male or female body. Our bodies are all mutable holding different measures of the same horomones, the organs are basically just inversions of each other and male and female are just sliding scales of intersexual potentialities. Trans people in many instances aren't just looking for just a skin deep social category change. If it were a possibility a lot of trans people want to be able to have the full biological function of the category including the ability to birth children. While gender is performative transness is not strictly all about affect. Gender performativity as described by a few genderpunk philosophers does not well explain the full phenomenon of transness.

"Cross racial transness" if it exists in good faith at all, is pretty bloody rare. The likes of Oli London have found their way into the feeds of the anti-trans pipeline where they have used their experience to try and make gender performativity and trans people look like made up bullshit. As a community this has been used as a cudgel against both trans people and POC. Catch all rules for every instance of social construct does not exist - each one is unique and the negotiations are complex.

124
submitted 3 weeks ago by Drivebyhaiku to c/gay
view more: next ›

Drivebyhaiku

joined 10 months ago