VoxNihili posted:controlling cartels isnt really the same as "imposing" "rights." anyone concerned specifically about the US forcing its gays upon the rest of the world is not worth taking seriously
no one is accusing the US of "forcing gays" onto other people (although it sounds like a lot of fun!) but rather cynically using meaningless gay rights media stunts to try to pathetically "shame" other nations who dont go along with our globalist agendas while simultaneously funding the murders of millions of gay Africans
Sexual Congress for Cultural Freedom
roseweird posted:marimite posted:I suggest
that's cute
Hey, I'm just trying to help you see where I'm coming from. That you reflexively get offended at the thought that women could be complicit in their own oppression says more about you than it does about me.
roseweird posted:i think it's cute that you think you are presenting me with new ideas, and that you think i am reacting to your ideas rather than to your personality. i know where you're coming from. i'm just not interested. this is not an engaging discussion to me. you have nothing to teach me. i'm not intrested in your mushy-headed ideas about monolithic american culture or your weird obsession with people's personal grooming decisions, please stop trying to get me to take this discussion seriously
Ah, a narcissistic response. How ironic. I'm sure being a coward will get you really far in your feminist eugenics program.
marimite posted:roseweird posted:
hmm it's almost like maybe the u.s. is not actually a unified federation capable of making coherent decisions in its own self interest but actually a desperately schizophrenic and dangerously overpowered agglomeration of disparate and mutually contradictory agendas desires populations and histories
I think American culture is lot more monolithic than you're giving credit. However, what unites Americans isn't any sort of master signifier, but a common pathological narcissism that's fed by the media, which of course is indistinguishable from the good old military-industrial complex. So people have all sorts of identities, but we're all connected by a common feeling of a lack of self and disconnection from history. Figuring out what you actually want and learning how to be free is scary, so the media gladly sells us who we are and the political movements we're part of. For example, women no longer need to be threatened by patriarchy to use beauty products because the media already tells them that's what they want and so they not only believe, they feel empowered, they feel like wearing make-up makes them a feminist. This is why identity politics is so dangerous because it isn't politics at all, it's advertising.
maybe a lot of women enjoy using beauty products?
marimite posted:If you believe women wear make-up as a free and authentic choice, you're basically delusional. And, sorry guys, but that also means the women wearing the make-up. I'm not saying wearing make-up is bad, but if you believe it makes you free, well, I got some land to sell you.
who said anything about free? perhaps they wear it because they want to be attractive to men.
Ironicwarcriminal posted:marimite posted:If you believe women wear make-up as a free and authentic choice, you're basically delusional. And, sorry guys, but that also means the women wearing the make-up. I'm not saying wearing make-up is bad, but if you believe it makes you free, well, I got some land to sell you.
who said anything about free? perhaps they wear it because they want to be attractive to men.
Well, that was the entire point of my original post. Going from wearing make-up because men want you to to wearing make-up because you think you want it isn't progress, it's the opposite. And all identity politics is analogous to this. If you believe in shit like "personal grooming decisions" you've basically lost.
marimite posted:Ironicwarcriminal posted:
marimite posted:
If you believe women wear make-up as a free and authentic choice, you're basically delusional. And, sorry guys, but that also means the women wearing the make-up. I'm not saying wearing make-up is bad, but if you believe it makes you free, well, I got some land to sell you.
who said anything about free? perhaps they wear it because they want to be attractive to men.
Well, that was the entire point of my original post. Going from wearing make-up because men want you to to wearing make-up because you think you want it isn't progress, it's the opposite. And all identity politics is analogous to this. If you believe in shit like "personal grooming decisions" you've basically lost.
that's very essentialist of u i think
clearly not marxism and class definitely erased
roseweird posted:yes i'm sure i'm missing out on a real challenge by neglecting to engage your arguments or click your links. bye dude
marimite posted:Ironicwarcriminal posted:marimite posted:If you believe women wear make-up as a free and authentic choice, you're basically delusional. And, sorry guys, but that also means the women wearing the make-up. I'm not saying wearing make-up is bad, but if you believe it makes you free, well, I got some land to sell you.
who said anything about free? perhaps they wear it because they want to be attractive to men.
If you believe in shit like "personal grooming decisions" you've basically lost.
note: im not saying that communists are homophobes, im just saying that, at least in my experience, homophobia/transphobia in communist circles is a serious problem.
Edited by tsinava ()
tsinava posted:and please don't tell me i misunderstood what they said. i have been told to my face multiple times that the desire to have sex with men is an unnatural bourgeois feeling and it isn't real and these feelings i've been feeling all my life are not real and in fact decadent.
note: im not saying that communists are homophobes, im just saying that, at least in my experience, homophobia/transphobia in communist circles is a serious problem.
any natural communist would want to own the means of (re)production, clearly.
My reaction to the original article was to this ridiculous political maneuver. trumpeting America's freedom by sending two gay icons and the former head of one of our most intrusive and despicable 'security' apparatuses.
Doug posted:america is doing sick ownage on russia and its ftw because ilove sick pwn burns in everything
personally, i oppose the bombings.
tsinava posted:and please don't tell me i misunderstood what they said. i have been told to my face multiple times that the desire to have sex with men is an unnatural bourgeois feeling and it isn't real and these feelings i've been feeling all my life are not real and in fact decadent.
by who / from what organizations?
Agnus_Dei posted:I'm gay now
congratulations. keep fit and have fun.
swampman posted:tsinava posted:and please don't tell me i misunderstood what they said. i have been told to my face multiple times that the desire to have sex with men is an unnatural bourgeois feeling and it isn't real and these feelings i've been feeling all my life are not real and in fact decadent.
by who / from what organizations?
the first one i checked out was CPUSA Austin chapter and i met like one cool person but i remember the ones who said me being gay was incompatible with those beliefs. the other one was ISO with the city branch (I know ISO is bad i just figured it would be more gay friendly. it's not)
it's a pretty distinct possibility that i simply had bad luck in meeting communists but bad apples, etc. i guess the reason i mention it now is because i see some of that in this thread.
TG posted:damn, these texas communists werent accepting of my lifestyle. better give up on every actually existing communist
why do people have to dedicate their lives to boring ass politics. most people have families or cool art projects or gay sex or olympic athletic events or whatever.