[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]

/dead/ - dead

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Captcha
Tor Only

Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Matrix   IRC Chat   Mumble   Telegram   Discord


File: 1608528427368.jpg ( 45.7 KB , 750x750 , d5f.jpg )

 No.1304

What the fuck is gender nihilism/abolitionism/etc.?
>>

 No.1305

>>1304
Is a recognition that gender is a social relation (like class) and exists to perpetuate oppression.

Abolish gender and you abolish some forms of oppression
>>

 No.1306

>>1305
but i thought everyone who doesn't believe in class reductionism is a radlib?
>>

 No.1307

>>1306
class reductionists are libs as much as gender reductionist. its about seeing how all exploitation and oppression is tied together and influences each other
>>

 No.1308

>>1305
That sounds too simple it won't impress my college liberal friends
>>

 No.1309

>>1307
thanks for saying it comrade. very succinctly put.
>>

 No.1310

>>1306
we're not /leftypol/
>>

 No.1320

On the topic of current gender politics:
Do you guys believe that the search for more and more specific gender expressions are, in essence, the trend towards egoism that Stirner described?
I think that this notion of 'history moving towards the abolishment of spooks' was mostly a meme by him to fuck with the other hegelians. He basically constructed this notion out of his historical geneology of liberalism as a meme, to fuck on those who didn't move beyond these hegelian ideas of historical trends.
But, from the outside, these people who are creating new pronouns and genders everyday seem to be pushing towards an genuine expression of their ego, only that they keep using abstract terms that end up mystifying this self-reflection again. This does sound like the whole 'building up new royal palaces only to storm them again' on the way towards the abolishment of abstract ideals.
>>

 No.1340

>>1320
Are people less spooked today than they were in the time of Stirner? I don't think so. As you recognize, people who play with gender are not any less spooked, they just managed to move gender from something that is imposed externally on them to something that they impose on themselves, which makes it possible to "defang" it.
>>

 No.1341

>>1340
>Are people less spooked today than they were in the time of Stirner?
I kind off think so.
If you compare the spooks prevelant (especially in europe) during the times Stirner lived with our modern spooks, I think there are major differences. In the 19th century, nationalism, pietism and religious fundamentalism were so strong, they majorily influenced the life of people (for example being send to catholic schools or landing in prison because you are homosexual). Those spooks were so mighty that they influenced the social and institutional make up of societies.
Obviously it's not like ideology is dead today, but it has chnaged in major ways. For one, they are, aside from expectations of economic efficiency, no longer supported by state institutions. Show me the state school that still teaches catholicism or protestantism as a core truth in the west. Or the judge who throws you into jail for a lack of piety.
The reason this happened is imo also not that society became more enlightened, it simply is because the free market did end up subverting all ideas that it couldn't commodify or use economicly. But the fact stands that in west, spooks don't manifest in social institutions, rules and expectations as much as in the 19th century.
>>

 No.1351

>>1341
But economic efficiency is a spook! In place of God, schools today sing the praise of the Spectacle. Almost all institutions have been completely transformed to conform to the "economism" of today and the remaining few, like public libraries, are under constant attack. People are slowly forgetting how to talk about everyday life without evoking the market, everything has to be about investments and developments.
>>

 No.1354

>>

 No.1375

File: 1608528431374.webm ( 254.36 KB , 320x240 , Jones_&_Laughlin_Pittsbur….webm )

>>1351
>People are slowly forgetting how to talk about everyday life without evoking the market
I constantly think of everyday things in my life and small decisions in terms of cost-benefit and profitability.
pain

Why the fuck did I have to railroad myself into going to prison to learn Economics rraGGHH gonna be a FRICKIN """ePIC""" """""cOOl""""" Marggsist egonimist xD like Flacid Benis Shoot or Dick Wolf xD
WEEE hEE HEE
Maybe I can still salvage this and be an 'Anti-Economics Ecooonomist,' if there is such a thing.

>>1304
For the time being I just consider myself trans she/her, but I feel the actual correct conclusion all this gender stuff'll have to come to is abolishment.
>>

 No.1376

Gender abolitionism is based. It is not necessarily possible right now, and perhaps ever. But "skirts are for girls" shit is retarded and should be abolished consciously.


>>1340
>>1340
>As you recognize, people who play with gender are not any less spooked, they just managed to move gender from something that is imposed externally on them to something that they impose on themselves, which makes it possible to "defang" it.
Oh, so despooking then. Dingus.
>>

 No.1379

>>1376
If it becomes widely accepted it can prevent gender from being used as a means of social regulation but it is still a spook since it is an essence that you separate from yourself and elevate as something more than you over yourself.
>>

 No.1388

>>1304
>>1376
not the anon you responded to, but i think that there is this trend i see in liberal circles (not radlib really theyre on a whole other level) of moving towards the meaninglessness of gender by making some obvious gender roles malleable, while still imposing gendered expectations based on sex
like "boys can wear dresses too" or "makeup doesnt make you any less of a man". It's really interesting, and to a large extent already plagues ftm dudes i know, this idea of like "aww look a cute tomboy", where acceptance inadvertently is rested on even stronger essentialization.
>>

 No.1389

>>1320
i think the new pronouns thing as far as ive seen isnt a huge change in gender, like they dont seem to represent something specific (yet?) so they come off as all like one thing, the neo-pronouner in-betweens and snowflakes.
But i do think that staying within gender categories and subverting them also isnt a great solution, at least you get a lot of shit as you put yourself in a box only to tell people that actually you're just there to break out of it, like people will still have expectations of you and idk i dont see the point really.
I think ultimately its up to society to decide (not like in a moral way, just in reality thats how it seems). Like gender, similar to property or some other thing that seems real but ends up just being social convention, is just a way of relating to those around you and signalling things about yourself. I think the real way out is gender impartiality, where you understand that there are gendered ways of doing things and looking, and then pick and choose in order to create yourself in the way you want, and also not giving a fuck about intersecting categories, like how a gay man, or an asian woman, or an upper class white tranny or whatever should act, because these also color things. So thats my bid. Stop telling people what you are or what you ought to be called, whether its to subvert a category or conform to it, and dont fall for the "expressing my inner truth", just fucking exist and exist conscious of your ability to self-create and the absurdity of the notion of self-creation (where there is no reason to be one way or another but you choose a direction anyways). At the end of the day gender is a language sort of, and we should be poets i think, and not let restricted language control us.
>>

 No.2108

we move farther and farther away from any progress towards the dissolution of gender. the trans phenomena both reinforces gender and patronizes the influences of being born a certain sex, going through the gender conditioning that ensues. A man/woman proclaiming that they are a woman/man only reveals that they are comfortable with assuming what the experience of the other is, and proceed to validate (conform) their identity to this assumption by donning the caricature of the other gender. Likewise for any self-proclaimed agender/asexual person. The celebration of the supposed absence only reinforces the construct that they claim to have overcome, as they have built their identity as a negation.
>>

 No.2109

>>2108
>The celebration of the supposed absence only reinforces the construct that they claim to have overcome, as they have built their identity as a negation.
Based take. People have chosen to completely divorced from their material reality because "meaning is subjective". Oppression is a real, objective force that is re-enforced by real violence and realer consequences, it doesn't disappear when you "choose" to identify as something else. All of these identities only exist because patriarchy requires people to be distinctly categorized so that people in power know who to oppress (and to keep them placated). The solution isn't to specify the extent that we are oppressed , to find how our existence is negated in society in tiny, individual ways, but to eliminate oppression together (gender abolition).
>>

 No.2158

>>2108
>>2109
So what you say is that enbies are the revolutionary subject?
>>

 No.2159

>>2158
Virgin Enby
>self-identifies
>uses discord
>cat ears
>obsessed with anime
>more fem than masc
>always thinking about gender
>they/them
vs

Chad GNC Identityless Individual
>never refers to themselves in any way
>doesnt have any government documentation, because that would make facets of their being explicit
>doesnt know what discord is
>probably doesnt even know the words "I, me, my"
>sees some cool clothes, wears them
>heard about hormones, decided to take them all
>fine with all pronouns
>was told about gender once, thought it was oppressive and then never thought about it again
>>

 No.2160

>>2159
What's wrong with cat ears
>>

 No.2162

>>2160
there's nothing inherently wrong with cat ears.
But they're associated with a certain scene and first of all I just don't like the weebs n furries n sex obsessed nerds who generally are into cat ears, but also it's just too much of a meme now. Cat ears got too big. We live in post Big-Ear world. Big-Ear controls our society now, so as an anarchist I oppose cat ears, for ideological reasons
>>

 No.2167

File: 1625627218840.gif ( 5.36 KB , 336x268 , anonymous.gif )

>>2159
The virgin imageboard user vs. the chad anon.

Unique IPs: 5

[Return][Catalog][Top][Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ overboard / sfw / alt / cytube] [ leftypol / b / WRK / hobby / tech / edu / ga / ent / music / 777 / posad / i / a / R9K / dead ] [ meta ]
ReturnCatalogTopBottomHome