You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Rant’ category.
Well here we be in 2022 and for some reason the news media seems to have forgotten some very basic facts about the human species. Humans are exclusively a sexually dimorphic species – that is males produce small motile gametes and have their physiology arranged around that aspect of reproduction while females produce large immobile games and also have their physiology arranged around that same biological aspect.
Jessica Robb, the author of this propaganda piece on the CTV website either does not know the differences between the sexes or is unwilling to state them. We certainly cannot have factual information intruding on a news article – heavens, that might just incur critical thought, and we all know that’s not encouraged these days.
So instead of presenting the situation with arguments from both sides of the issue we have to suffer through a woe soaked piece that entails how hard it is coerce the rest of society conform to the dictates of mental illness and what hardship this ‘struggle’ happens to be. The amount of bullshit per square centimeter in this article has sent the Red Pen of Justice a-quivering in anticipation of a thorough Fisking of gender identity and the vortex of bullshite that surrounds it.
And here… we… go.
“Advocates are calling an email sent by United Conservative Party leadership candidate Brian Jean as transphobic and dangerous for members of the LGBTQ2S+ community.”
Ah, jebus lord on a cracker! Bringing out the big bullshite right out of the gate. Apparently sending an email containing truthful statements about the reality we all share is both “transphobic” and “dangerous“. One of the fun games to play when you see the word “transphobic” being sprinkled into a conversation is to get the individual to define exactly what transphobia is and how it applies in the context of the situation. Because more often than not something being “transphobic” simply means that argument /situation/context “X” is something the person in question doesn’t agree with, but has no cogent argument to tell you persuasively why statement “X” is wrong.
“Jean’s campaign sent an email Friday morning to supporters that challenged letting transgender and non-binary athletes compete in sports using their preferred identity.
“There should be two categories in sport,” the email read. “One for biological men, and one for biological women. Going through puberty as a male makes changes to your body that are permanent and cannot be denied.
“This should not be a controversial thing for a common sense person to say,” it added.”
Men should compete with men and women should compete with women. This is the commonest of senses dictated by the reality we all share. Nothing controversial to see here unless you under the auspices that human beings can somehow change their sex category because they “feel” like it.
[…]
“Anna Murphy, a community advocate for 2SLGBTQ+ and women’s issues, said his transphobic comments were not only “unacceptable” themselves, but disappointing to be used as a way to fundraise.”
Parse this sentence. The statement that men should compete against men and women versus women has been deemed “transphobic”. Here we see how the gender-religious work their word games – denouncing anything their religion doesn’t like automatically is transphobic.
“We are not just going to talk about it, but we are going to fundraise off of rolling back your protection,” Murphy said. “What Mr. Jean is doing is dehumanizing and completely coming at this from the base of complete intolerance and ignorance. It is hurtful.”
Rolling back protections? What? How can stating basic biological facts be ‘rolling back’ protections? Furthermore correctly stating that categorization in sports is necessary in the interests of fairness and safety for its participants is neither dehumanizing nor intolerant – rather it is an *entirely sensical and ethical* notion.
And of course it is ‘hurtful’. Because when you behave like a vulnerable narcissist everything is an attack. It also a ploy to play on your empathy which allows them to maintain their bullshit point of view while you have to change yours in a attempt to ‘be kind’ and ‘show compassion’. It just one ploy among many deployed by the gender religious to avoid critique and discussion.
“You have to imagine that you are getting an email that your identity, that your existence is invalid,” Murphy added.
Welcome to the next ploy. Validation and Existence. This ploy is on page one of the gender religious handbook. It is (yet) another rhetorical subterfuge to avoid honest discussion and debate.
Here is how to avoid being invalidated by a nasty fact based email from Brian Jean.
1. Scroll down to email in your email client.
2. Use your mouse to find the trashcan icon.
3. Press the trashcan icon.
4. Celebrate the fact you’ve dealt with a statement you disagree with like a normal well adjusted adult.
These people…
No one is obligated to validate you or any of your bullshit queer identities. Making others responsible for your feelings is recipe for a mental health disaster. The rest of society seems mostly quite able to handle life without being held by the hand and given validation cookies whenever they have a sad. If you are this mentally broke – seek qualified professional help – because the problem is most likely *you* and not the people around you (see vulnerable narcissism).
“April Friesen, Trans Equality Society of Alberta president, told CTV News Edmonton that the email showed he doesn’t care about vulnerable trans youth and adults who already face barriers to acceptance.”
Imagine actually believing that human beings can change their sex. It is up there with the Flat-Earthers. The belief in gender-magic SHOULD be a barrier to acceptance in greater society. We need public policy grounded in factual, objective reality, not the subjective gender-whims of small minority whose voice is currently being unreasonably amplified in society. Please, in your private life, do what you will, identify how you would like. No one cares. The expectations of others to take on the tenets of your gender religion are unrealistic and unacceptable. So no, Mr.Man your gender feelings do not make you female, not ever. Stating that opinion is neither hateful nor is it bigoted – it comports with the material reality we all share.
“He’s not having real empathy here for the people who are affected by it, and he’s showing that he doesn’t understand the science because the science is not with him on what he is saying,” Friesen said.”
Disagreement (or stating facts for that matter) does not preclude empathy. See what is going on here – ‘If you disagree with my feelings on this matter the problem is *you* and you being *mean*; regardless of the objective truth status of the claim being made. Facts really do not matter to the gender-religious, especially ones that contradict their gender edicts.
This emotional ploy is followed up with a straight lie. The science is indeed in and it demonstrates the need for distinct categories in sports to keep it fair and safe for all participants. So, we know objectively, that April Friesen is lying or horribly misinformed.
“He’s engaged in all this disinformation and arming all these people with all this stuff that isn’t true, and they’re now going out into the world and acting on it.”
James Lindsey created a Law for this – The Iron Law of Woke Projection. And indeed, it never misses. Gender acolytes are notorious for their poor grasp of what the actual science is on relevant matters and for muddling the waters in the name of their ideology. There is no reputable scientific paper stating that humans can change sex – yet the transactivists (aka the gender religious) just keep doing what they do (confabulating on a grand-scale and cry-bullying their way into positions of institutional power).
Kristopher Wells, Canada Research Chair for the public understanding of sexual and gender minority youth, said that Jean of all people should know that gender identity and expression have been protected by the province’s human rights legislation for nearly a decade.
Kristopher Wells should know that gender identity runs headlong into problems when faced with the realities of the biological implications of sex. Gender is mostly a social construct and its dictates change with the context and society it happens to exist in. Sex is firmly rooted in objective reality and *must* be deferred to when making important decisions in society.
“(He is) making an issue where there is no issue,” Wells added. “Trans young people have been able to participate in sports in this province and in this country for many years without the kinds of incidents or hysteria that Brian Jean’s email claims will happen.”
“Brain Jean is just really opening an issue that has long been settled in Canada through policy and the governing bodies of sport.”
Calling Bullshit on this Kristopher. Children have always been welcome to fairly compete in the correct sex category. There has been no public discussion on whether children can participate in the sex category they feel they are as opposed to what they are in reality. That sort of debate would bring with it public inquiry and force discussion about the bullshit that is gender identity and the fatuous claims it makes. There has been no discussion and you know that Kristopher because if exposed to the light of day and actual critical analysis your ‘case’ would fall apart like the rotten house of cards it is.
“Wells, also an associate professor at MacEwan University, says Jean’s remarks can help legitimize harmful rhetoric and reintroduce stereotypes.”
Woke Projection never misses. At the very core of the gender ideology religion is the notion that there exists the notion of “Feeling Like a Woman” or “Feeling Like A Man”. How they characterize these “feelings” is to reiterate the gender stereotypes (you know the ones actual Feminists have been fighting against) and say because I emulate these gender stereotypes that – in reality – makes (insert magical gender-wizardering sounds here) me that gender.
Transgender ideology – the woke religion – is hair on fire super-crazy-regressive nonsense. You are not a woman because you like cooking, wearing dresses, and nurturing. Just like you are not a man because you like sports, wearing suits, and being emotionally distant. These are just arbitrary features we’ve assigned to people who happen to be female or male. All it takes to be a woman is to be an adult human female the same with being a man, all it takes is being an adult human male. No gender-anything required. Let’s represent what I just said in picture format.
“This is about trying to score cheap political points at the expense of vulnerable people,” Wells said. “It has real consequences because it legitimizes discrimination and, in some cases, violence.”
No, this is about stating objective facts about the reality we all share. If certain people do not like or want to share that reality, then indeed it is their problem and thus, the rest of society should not have to reorder itself around a fatuous set of ideas that do not comport with material reality.
Acknowledging objective categories for the sake of fair play and safety isn’t “discrimination”. Again, witness the ‘if you don’t agree with me you are causing violence’ ploy. It is exhausting having to deal with hyperbolic emotional coercion.
“It’s blatantly false. It’s disingenuous,” the professor added. “These kinds of comments are harmful and have no place in Alberta politics.”
The good professor here demonstrates that even with a degree it is entirely possible to have your head up your ass and make erroneous straight faced statements like this one – stating that categorizing sports via biological sex is a false and disingenuous notion.
That degree you have shows that you once maybe had use of intellectual rigour and standards – try and find those things again try again soon.
“For Murphy, who identifies as a transgender woman, the real consequences are on kids who are growing up and learning about or questioning their gender identity.
“I remember what it is like to be them,” Murphy said. “I’ve got the scars to prove it.”
Childhood and growing up isn’t easy for everyone in society. We all are shaped by our experiences. What makes childhood more difficult is having adults trying to take advantage of your insecurities and groom you into a regressive way of thinking and dealing with the world.
“It’s important that we challenge that ignorance,” she added. “So ultimately, we can become better neighbours with one another in the community that we all have to inhabit.”
Bullshit. If coexistence and integration were the actual goals of the trandgender/queer movement we would not be having this discussion. When the mottos of your movement include “No Debate” and “Acceptance without Exception” it becomes very clear that you do NOT want to be part of existing society, but rather you to burn down the present society and then cobble together a ‘better’ one it with your values centred in it.
Not. Going. To. Happen.
The transgender religion and its denial of reality (of sex and of categories), the policing of others thoughts, and the erasure of women as a class in society will not be tolerated.
When you are ready to actually integrate into our liberal society that values freedom of thought and free speech and the exchange (and critique) of ideas I’ll be the first to warmly welcome you into the fold.
Until then, not so much.
Sincerely,
The Arbourist – brought to you by the RPOJ.
Only men would have this much success pushing an ideology that is corrosive toward woman’s rights, boundaries, and safety all the while under the guise of being inclusive and progressive. Patriarchy 2.0 sucks.
Give us a break indeed. :/
So the NDP lost the last election and the UCP has formed the new government in Alberta with Jason Kenney at the helm. Old news. So I’ve been pretty demoralized about this because I see a lot of bad shit coming. So I’ve decided to share it with everyone, here, in an ongoing series where I personally thank all the UCP voters for the shitty things the UCP are going to do to the people of Alberta; all the shitty things the UCP voters have done to Alberta. So without further ado, here we go!
- UCP cancels gay conversion therapy ban working group. Why? Because bigots love torturing gay kids. That’s it, that’s all. Just pure, unadulterated evil. It also comes as no surprise that Jason Kenney’s brother runs these torture chambers. Now to suggest that this is solely fueled by nepotism would be wrong. Because it isn’t. It’s fueled by nepotism and the party’s deliberate choice to cosy up with bigots (and electing one of them their leader).
So there is my first entry. Don’t expect this list to be exhaustive because I’m exhausted by all this. I will try and update with anything worthy of such a list though.
The RPOJ comes for thee RPF.
Wow. Do any of you remember the first Indiana Jones film? Raiders of the Lost Ark? Remember the beginning the tense action sequence when Indy switches the statue for a holy satchel of sand and then all hell breaks loose, Indy has to run for his life, avoiding darts, boulders, and irate local inhabitants. It was a tense and glorious romp.
What we are about to partake in, isn’t like that at all.
Imagine if you will, that very Indy-esque moment happening here in the blogosphere, but instead of a golden statue, a freshly polished intellectual turd, a veritable extruded husk of bullshit argumentation. And the satchel, instead, a thread bare mouldy hassock filled with a funky-spunky hash of whingy-cringy manspination. The switch is made, the anticipation rises… then falls limp in its sublimely uninteresting putrescence. There is no heroic dash to safety, no hairsbreadth escape, only the grim realization that there is no where to go, but down.
This article is from a genuine RED PILL FATHER (see also Reactionary Pile of Fuckery). He has taken the path of seeing feminism, as only a man can see it, and since it is how a man sees it, it MUST BE true. What is fascinating is the asymptotic nature (he comes close to having a clue on at least one occasion) of his knowledge of feminism being put on display – this RPF, has read things… things on the internet no less, that describe what feminism is, but evidently information written by people who know sweet fuck all about what feminism is.
Let us begin.
“As a Red Pill Father, one of my main goals in life, beyond making my life, and as a consequence of that, my marriage better, is ensuring that I prevent, to the best of my ability, the tainting of my young daughter’s minds with modern day Feminism.”
Because a base level of narcissism is required to be a douche, thus I will make it a requirement, perhaps even to the level of necessary ‘background douche-radiation’ (see male socialization), for ‘being successful at life’. And apparently allowing your daughter access to the philosophy/praxis that seeks to ground her humanity into the fabric of society is a compete and utter non-starter. Sorry hunny, no human being status for you.
“This is part one of a three part series of posts I’ll do depicting how Feminism is lying to both men and women”
It’s kinda creepy, yet edifying to see RPF mistakenly categorize feminism as monolithic singular totality. One might surmise that RPF is a fan of morally simplistic binary thinking and all of the sound and fury that emanates from such etymologically denuded intellectual black holes. Because fuck nuance and attention to detail; it makes wrapping the tinfoil around one’s head so much more difficult.
” and how fathers today can combat it so their sons and daughters don’t end up buying into the modern Feminist lie at their own expense.”
Ah, RPF is a tinfoil wrapped holy crusader of man-justice, ready to dispense wisdom and shield his property children from the great evil feminist satan.
“Classical vs Modern Feminism
Not everyone will agree with me on this but Feminism, in it’s earliest iterations (I’m talking late 1800s suffragists), started out as a movement with honorable intentions, back when actual inequality of opportunity between the sexes existed.”
Oh thanks RPF dude. I’m glad you approve of women striving to be recognized as human in society. You’re not going to qualify your approval of women’s struggle are you? That would be a dick move…
*
*
“However, […]”
*
*
**facepalm**
*
*
“However, even with that goal, the feminist narrative of equal rights and suffrage was tainted as it didn’t come with “equal responsibility” for women. For example, women were not subject to the military draft, even to this day, but were granted the right to vote. It wasn’t until the promise was made that women wouldn’t be drafted that more women got on board with the suffrage movement.”
Ah, the vernerable draft chestnut. If you can’t serve the military-machine then its completely obvious and follows that you should have no say in how the county is run. All aboard the shit-boat of stupidity. RPF is also no longer subject to the draft circa 2019 thus he also qualifies as lacking in ‘responsibility’ and therefore by his criteria, have no voting rights.
*
*
“So from the start, even though the intentions were good, the stated intention of true “equality” is a lie.”
I suspect that RPF would not know equality if bit him firmly on the ass, but we should let his assertions demonstrate, rather than me, your humble host tell you particular fact.
*
*
“They wanted all of the authority given to men with none of the responsibilities, and they got it.”
Ah yes, I can recall that golden age, where women could work where they pleased, in any profession, open a bank account, hell… even marry and divorce whomever they saw fit back during the days of first wave feminism.
Actually, no. Women could do none of the above and the fact the RPF glosses over these inconvenient truths is proof positive he is filled to the brim with his own bullshit. Feminism is the female struggle for liberation from patriarchy, and in the case of First Wave, struggle for base acknowledgement as human beings. This talk of ‘authority’ and ‘responsibilities’ is but mere projection of your twisted view of society through your (a)historic lens.
*
*
“And it’s this quite unequal dynamic that persists into today and is causing the feminists to want more and more authority for less responsibility. Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile.”
One of the key features of the MRA/Redpill dynamic is the reversal of the dominant/subordinate roles. You see, we still live in a patriarchy, where men’s hands hold the levers of power and circumscribe how society functions. There has been no historical reversal of the power roles. No, what makes the MRA cabal’s fevered minds twist and spin is the mere notion that they cannot be the sole arbiters of power in society anymore. The gall of women to assert that they should have *any* say in society is a evil for them that does not sleep.
*
*
“I believe that women’s suffrage can coexist with women who vote in the best interests of our culture and society, but those interests have to be informed and framed by the masculine and with the requisite amount of actual authority given to those who carry the lion’s share of responsibility.”
You can vote Sweety, but only how I see fit. RPF is stupid as he is condescending. Nothing *needs* to be framed by the masculine. Most of the bat shit crazy that exists in the world today is precisely because we continue to frame issues in terms of the masculine. So no, you don’t get to dispense with the basic female rights to human being status, because of your misguided notion of responsibility (which so far is the right to be drafted into male initiated slaughter – I’m still trying to square how ‘responsible behaviour’ jives with participating in mass slaughter).
*
*
“Just as you will be the best father for your children by fulfilling your role as a masculine role model and wielding your authority for the good of your family.”
Have you missed out on the last 30 years so of sociological research that points to negative outcomes for children of parents that adapt stereotypical gender roles? Apparently so. Families thrive when there is trust, compassion, and empathy. Your notions of masculine authority are shit.
*
*
“It wasn’t the female vote that got us here today, it was the continued onslaught of overzealous Feminism in its false crusade for the elusive, and already achieved, “equality” sans the commensurate responsibility for women that got us here.”
Its good to know that men are responsible for the violent culture we live in, responsible for the desecration of the earth and responsible for the wars and senseless bloodletting that continue on, even as this article is penned.
*
*
“Classical vs Modern Feminism:
*
- Equal pay for the “same” work.
-
- Right to vote,
- Pursuit of happiness and liberty.
VS Modern
-
- [1] Women are to be celebrated and advantaged above all else, at the expense of men.
- [2] These expectations reign even over the right of an unborn child to live.
- [3] Believe all women all the time without verifying. What happened to Trust but Verify?”
Wow. So much bullshit condensed down into handy bullet points.
- Examples? Because women now dominate every facet of society. Women in key political office, captains of industry, they are everywhere. In fact they are the defacto status quo – all of literature is about women and their achievements. Pop culture is chock full of positive female role models that demonstrate talent and ability and determined effort are all societal sanctioned keys to female success (nay dominance, to believe RPF’s hokum).
- What? You mean women have a right to say what goes on in their own bodies and determine their productive futures as they see fit – like real human beings with rights and everything? You have no idea what pregnancy does to the female body, if you did, you’d stop saying fatuous bullshit like this.
- The fuck? What does this even mean? Women’s inferior status in society comes with a bevy of problems when accessing the political and legal systems within our society. Women are still fighting to be heard and working toward reducing the bias against them for reporting the sexual violence against them, because shockingly in a patriarchy, women are not encouraged to hold men accountable for their shitty behaviour.
“Feminism originally started out to correct actual injustices in society but has gone so far that it is now making both men and women miserable.”
Feminism has always been antagonistic toward male power and privilege, this fact makes you sad.
“Feminism today is not about equality, it’s about disempowering and emasculating men.”
As stated earlier, (effective) Feminism is about the liberation of women from the structures of society that oppress them. So, if by correcting male excess in society is ’emasculating’; so be it.
“Children are very sensitive to what is “fair.” Whether it’s the size of the piece of cake they get compared to their friends, how much time they or their siblings get to play with Daddy. They know and they keep score. One day this past year my young daughter became aware of “International Girls Day.” She asked what it’s about and her very next question was, “Is there a Boy’s Day?” Young minds, untainted by the Feminist supremacy agenda, can detect inequality.”
Probably the same reason there isn’t a white history month you slack-jawed oxygen thief.
“Take advantage of that now. Reinforce this. Feminists of today would say, “Who cares about Boys Day… they’ve had their turn.””
Well that and every other day happens to be ‘boys day’. Funny how that works when you happen to be in the class that is accorded personhood by default.
“Which is the other side is the “It’s HER turn” coin. It’s just reverse sexism or “Also Sexism.” Not a child. A child knows better and so do Red Pill aware men.”
Reverse sexism. Wow, those slaves sure could oppress their masters couldn’t they. Just like the people of colour regularly practice reverse racism against white people. *sigh*. Trying to make the playing field even when it intrinsically isn’t is the second play in the (‘oppressed’) white dude play book. Minorities can most certainly discriminate, but their prejudices are not reinforced and normalized by the rest of society. Apples and oranges my dear whingy faux-oppressed RPF.
“I’ll take Tolpin’s point a step farther and assert that Feminism, in it’s modern form, not only tells women they don’t need men but continues to assure that men are made into ATM-Betas through the family court system.”
The court system remains in favour of men. I know the notion that being responsible for children is tough (kinda funny that you state earlier your anti-abortion ‘ethic’, and yet here are decidedly anti-family-responsibility) and quite unpalatable for RPF like yourself.
“Our femcentric culture ensures that women still have full access to the resources and money that men possess, even if men choose not to play by their rules. So of course women don’t need men nowadays, the State has ensured, through the establishment of Feminist legislation, they get that support either way.”
I’d like to know when it because femcentric culture, because I think that it doesn’t exist outside RPF’s fevered dreams. Do note his keen yearings for the golden age where women had no rights and their survival depended upon the largess of men.
The notion that women share the same status as men must be truly horrifying to RPF. You mean women are not merely objects to be possessed and collected – the hatred of women must be intense to conjure up this opposite world fantasy the RPF spouts. I don’t see any other reason for it.
“I truly believe, and the social evidence supports this*, that Feminism is not only detrimental to men, it’s disparaging to family, marriage and is even doing women a disservice.”
*Citation needed
Also, how would full human being status for females damage society? The only artifact that looks threatened with female liberation is patriarchy.
“The lie has hurt many women who prioritized “moving up the corporate ladder,” while putting off having a family until they’re 40 only to find that at that age, attracting a quality man is difficult and their prospects for conceiving a baby naturally are severely diminished. “
Because baby making is the ultimate expression of female achievement. Fuck off with your misogynistic, antediluvian attitudes dude.
“This is not the future I want for my daughters.”
The mindfuck you are subjecting them to is darkening their future as you speak.
Thanks folks, and thanks(?) to the manosphere for providing such a bountiful harvest of stupidity.
The piece is jam-packed with stupid, so we’ll just hit the highlights here and dissect the inanity RPOJ style. :) Check out the original post here.
“Let’s get the most obvious out of the way first: TERFs are about as feminist as Jim Davidson. They’re also very comfortable with forming political alliances with conservative men, and indeed prefer to date conservative men as they have more in common with them politically.”
Can you see the fallacy here? I know I sure can. Rhymes with Fad Pomulem. Oh those dastardly radical feminists how could they even consider dating conservative men?!?!? Sounds like some serious shaming going on by ‘liberal feminist’ (NB: Shaming is what lib-fems do to shut people up when their faux-empowerment is shown to be a lie within the context of society: prostitution for example has been shown irrefutably to harm women, naming this problem for women as class angers the choosy-choice feminists to no end, as it illustrates that choices offered within a patriarchal context are quite the opposite of empowering) The irony along with the crappy argumentation is quite thick already.
“So it’s hardly a shock that they’ve been parroting patriarchal talking points.”
Which talking points exactly are you referring to? You don’t bother to mention it, so I guess we’ll have to take your word about radical feminists parroting patriarchal talking points. *rollseyes* Those radfems talk about how men should own up and take responsibility for their shitty behaviour – nothing but patriarchal talking points after all…
“Then we have the media transmisogynists like to pretend that trans women pose a problem for reproductive rights activism, which is a deliberately disingenuous misrepresentation of the fairly uncontroversial demand that when we talk about reproductive organs and human bodies, we’re gender-neutral about it, because that’s more precise. “
Read this fucking paragraph twice. First, the claim that ‘the media’ is transmisogynistic? Really? Transactivism is the new misogyny and finds near universal support in the mainstream media as it is not a threat to male power, or male preeminence in society. Transactivism is patriarchally approved, through and through and is treated a such.
Let’s look at the next nugget of wisdom. Trans identified Males (TiM’s) do not pose a problem to reproductive rights activism. Quite frankly, TiM’s don’t give a shit about reproductive rights activism because it doesn’t involve them because men (*trigger alert for those who don’t ‘do’ biological facts*) can’t get pregnant.
What I have seen the trans-activists push for is the removal of the mention of females regarding their biological processes – “Chestfeeding” “Birth Parent” and other female erasing poppy-cock.
So if your activism is includes erasing females and their biological processes from the public sphere it goddamn well is ‘a problem’ for reproductive rights activism.
Uncontroversial demands? That we separate the idea that reproductive organs (which generally determine biological sex) from the sex that they are associated from? How can disassociating male – has penis, and female – has vagina be fucking uncontroversial. The last time I checked I didn’t see any free floating vagina’s hanging around with a without a person of the matching biological sex attached to it.
You can fuck right off with your free form facts and redefintions of material reality. Your ideology is bunk, and you do not get to take me with you on your baseless twisted flights of fancy.
“It simply isn’t true that trans women are a block to reproductive rights. In fact, they’re doing more than any media transphobe ever has.”
Men are a barrier to reproductive rights. Whether or not they happen to believe they are women is irrelevant.
“How do we know this? One of the places to look is Ireland, where there is a huge struggle for access to abortion. I follow this activism keenly, and do what I can to support and boost their work,”
Handmaiden status achieved! You are so much closer to being regarded as fully human, just keep on supporting men and putting down females fighting for liberation from patriarchy – you will be granted human status soon…really soon, just around the corner…
” so I’m aware that there are a lot of trans women deeply involved in this crucial action. I’ve met many Irish trans feminists who participate in reproductive freedom work. And likewise, Irish feminists don’t want these UK TERFs anywhere near their work, having recently produced a widely-signed open letter telling TERFs exactly where to fuck off to.”
Yep, because chastising females for daring to speak against legislation that has negative effects on them is a completely feminist thing to do. Telling women to ‘fuck off’ and shut-up about their problems just resonates with empowerful female affirming action. Yeah, no.
“If you actually care about reproductive rights, you’d know this, and that’s how it becomes abundantly clear that your transmisogynistic bigots are simply using abortion access as a dogwhistle for “women are defined by reproductive organs and only that.”
Wow. It’s so nice to see the trans-rhetoric so powerfully restated with all relevant distortions intact. Radical feminists are not arguing that women are just vaginas, they are saying that the female class of people that happen to have vaginas are oppressed by patriarchal society *because* they possess these organs. One of the main axis of oppression for females in society is their biological sex. Funny how intersectionality when properly used never comes up when dealing with transactivist crowd.
“To me, feminism is always and has always involved liberating women from our biology. A refusal to define us by whether or not we can bear children. I’ve written before about how this biological essentialism promulgated by transmisogynistic bigot feminists is identical to that promulgated by misogynists. I’ve also defined my stance as pro-trans and pro-choice.”
Nice. Liberating does not mean erasing female biology from the public sphere. Acknowledging that biological sex is real and is a foundational source of oppression for women might be a start.
“But I want to say it once more, loudly, for the people at the back: trans rights and reproductive rights are intimately linked. You cannot have one without the other. It all boils down to bodily autonomy.”
Reproductive rights and right to self identify are not linked in any way. Females should have the right to determine what is best for themselves in terms of their reproductive choices. How the male ‘right’ to call themselves something they are not – even if they really really really really …really… feel it – isn’t even in the same fucking ballpark. It’s quite insulting to equate one of the most important struggles for female liberation with the insipidly desultory gender ‘self-identifications’ of men.
“Our struggles are the same, and scratch a transmisogynist, and it’ll bleed womb-botherer in the end. Don’t let them win, and let’s continue to stand shoulder to shoulder against these attacks.”
Just shaking my head. This is what happens when you let men centre themselves in feminism. This is why Feminism needs to centre females in their struggles to gain liberation in society, because once men get in, it becomes all about men and their problems.
Standing shoulder to shoulder with your oppressors! FML. This shambolic, inclusivity laced, Orwellian bafflegab that is masquerading as feminism needs to stop.
Welcome to part 5 of my in depth exposition on why I don’t want to have children.
I. Intro + Stage 1: Initial Shock
II. Stage 2: The Demand for Answers part A
III. Stage 2: The Demand for Answers part B
IV. Stage 2: The Demand for Answers part C
V. Stage 3: The Rebuttal + Wrap up
We’ve done quite a lot to show that reproduction is a very bad idea. Despite all the reasons explored in Stage 2, parts A, B, and C, The Breeder is resilient. Privy to the other side of the coin, they are ready to share all the reasons I ought to be poppin’ out youngin’s. Let’s look at the most common of these in:
Stage 3: The Rebuttal
“You change when you have one / it’s different when it’s your own”
To my ear, this translates to, “if you let biology mess with you, biology will mess with you”. Oh boy! Hormones will make me lower my standards, scramble my values, but make me think I’m happy about it? I’ll pass, thanks. The effect is analogous to that of heroine. Before you have any, you can clearly see all the negatives. As soon as you try it yourself, though, your biology gets you hooked on it. From then on your happiness is dependant on keeping up your habit. It doesn’t matter how objectively anyone demonstrates how much the child/heroine is detrimental to your life, nothing can make you give it up.
“You’ll regret not breeding/You won’t be fulfilled until you do”
This is just another version of the very first initial reaction back in Stage 1. Like responsibility, fulfillment can be realized in a multitude of ways. Your zeal for this one source does not devalue all others. Check your arrogance and tunnel vision at the door.
“What if the love of your life wants to have children?”
By now it should be clear that there is a pretty big difference between how The Breeder and I see the world. Thus anyone who wants kids cannot possibly be the “love of my life”. The Breeder might insist, ‘but what if, otherwise, she is THE ONE?? You’d be giving up life long happiness just because you’re stubborn’. No. Caving to values I don’t share would be giving up life long happiness just to get a constant companion to accompany me in my poorer life. Further, the entire concept of‘The one’ is total bullshit. Relationships are built, not discovered. That is, success depends on partners finding someone who is more or less aligned with each other. Then, through work, communication, and experience, each grows into the little gaps that used to separate them. The One perfect match is a naive fairy tale. Time to grow up.
“What if your parents thought like you do? You wouldn’t be here.”
This is pretty ridiculous, but I hear it all the time. My knee jerk reaction is to point out that people benefit from the bad choices of others all the time. That in no way obliges you or makes it desirable to repeat those bad choices.
Best bumper-sticker ever
For any shining examples of happy parents with happy children who all make the world a better place by their very existence, I point once again to the survivor bias. I consider myself unimaginably fortunate and I am filled with gratitude for the people and circumstances that have saved me from countless terrors that plague so many people. There’s no reason to think any foray into the child-rearing world I undertake will go anywhere near as well. And finally, the argument simply doesn’t follow. Let’s try the form with a substitution, say the first interracial couplings. ‘What if your parents went abroad for a mate instead of finding each other in their own country? You wouldn’t be here, thus it’s a bad idea’. Doesn’t sound so clever any more, does it? So much had to happen for me to be here, it would be impossible to respect and replicate all of it. Further, me being here isn’t that special. Sure, I personally think it’s pretty important, but I also recognize that that sentiment is quite heavily biased.
“Who will look after you when you’re old?”
The $250,000.00+ I saved by not procreating. Next?
“I think you’d make a great parent.”
And if you committed 20 years and $250k to scrubbing out portable toilets with your own toothbrush, I’m sure you’d get pretty good at that, too.
“You have no fitness, evolutionarily speaking.”
Yes, I’ve actually had someone say this to me. Why would anyone consider their own fitness from an evolutionary standpoint? One of the greatest side effects of the capacity for abstract thought that our species has developed is that we are now the orchestrators of meaning and purpose. Instead of being slaves to instinct, we have within us the potential to point our efforts in any direction, to any goal we deem worthy of our attention. There are no mosquitoes working on ways to reduce the spread of malaria, so as to treat their food sources more ethically. There are no angler fish fighting for the end of sex inequality. There are no stand up comedian squirrels. To reduce my ambitions to what my biology urges want from me is to deny my humanity. But on top of being misguided, this point is also uninformed. As a member of society I interact with a great many people. These interactions will leave impressions and influence future behaviour of those I encounter. Behavioural adaptation is just as key to evolution as its physical counterpart. If anything, it’s more important, as I will show in answering a related rebuttal:
“No one will carry on your name”
It amuses me when a group claiming moral superiority uses an appeal to vanity to justify their position. I can think of no greater example of hubris than the thought, “Humanity needs MY genetics, or the world is lost!” And it’s just so very stupid. Humans are all related and it doesn’t matter.
Milton Glaser poster
Like “races”, names are superficial and empty divisions. As a species, we get a common ancestor for all humanity every 2000 years or so. That is, a couple millennia ago there was a person that everyone alive today is related to. There is someone alive today that will be related to every single person alive in the year 4000 (assuming we last that long). On top of that, an individuals genetics is completely washed out of the gene pool in about 1000 years. For a species that’s around 300,000 years old, that’s a pretty quick reset rate. Thus, individually, you breeders will have about as much affect on future generations as I will. Or perhaps, as I go about my day trying to make the world a better place while you’re busy cleaning up poop, my life efforts will be more long lasting and beneficial to the species than yours will.
“If everyone followed your lead, humanity would end!”
This one overestimates my leadership to an embarrassing degree. It is never the case that everyone follows my lead. It doesn’t matter how often I’m right, or how much I support my position, people just don’t want to listen. Even if, somehow, this is the one time in my life I end up being a global trend setter, humanity will not be in danger. Biology will ensure there will still be accidental conceptions. The rare few people who actually should be parents and who want to be parents will still go ahead. The only possible result of my views being well received is that there are fewer humans born, especially fewer humans doomed to an existence of pain and misery. “Yeah, but what if??” Ok, fine. Humanity ceases to be. So what? It’s not like we’re the nicest species about. From a very interesting anti-natalism article, David Benatar writes, “If any other species caused as much damage as humans do, we would think it wrong to breed new members of that species”. Or, if you’re more inclined towards pop culture references
While this might be considered a bit pessimistic, the reasoning is fairly solid. The human race will eventually die out. The question of ‘when’ only really matters to whatever organisms that happen to continue to exist after our demise. From their point of view, would it be better if our inevitable extinction came sooner or later? And from our perspective, would we rather come to some abrupt horrific end, or gradually dwindle our population to zero? I’d say the latter sounds more pleasant by far.
Wrap Up
And there are the three stages dealt with. The Breeder’s grab bag of cookie cutter responses and anecdotal reasoning is nothing more than a flimsy veil, covering arrogance and insecurity. To the rare exceptions out there that actual do well at parenting and truly enjoy it, I must tip my hat. Their contributions to their children, and ultimately society as a whole, cannot be understated. But to The Breeder, I say this: those great parents are in the minority. Most people should never breed, especially if they must be coerced into doing so. The raising of children is just too critical a job to be placed in the hands of the inept. Forsake your romantic notions and myths surrounding procreation. At the very least, leave us non-breeders be while you mindlessly multiply us into oblivion.
Welcome to part 4 of my in depth exposition on why I don’t want to have children.
I. Intro + Stage 1: Initial Shock
II. Stage 2: The Demand for Answers part A
III. Stage 2: The Demand for Answers part B
IV. Stage 2: The Demand for Answers part C
V. Stage 3: The Rebuttal + Wrap up
So far in Stage 2 we’ve looked at why I personally don’t want kids and why the world would be better off if I didn’t. Today, we will look at one last key figure. I am ashamed to say, although I’ve had this discussion regularly, I was about to overlook this entirely for this series. Many thanks to The Intransigent One for reminding me to write of the ones who suffer the most from our culture’s addiction to procreation: mothers.
They are Life Threatening
I have never understood how a woman can look at someone going through a pregnancy, with all its aches, pains, discomforts, swelling, nausea, reduced mobility, exhaustion, hormonal imbalances, and think to themselves, “Now THAT is something I need to try”. And this is the best case scenario in a developed nation with some of the best medical care in the world. World wide, 830 women die every single day due to pregnancy or birthing complications. In Canada the maternal mortality rate is 7 deaths out of 100,000 births.
Even for those fortunate to live in a developed country and not die, things can, and often do, go wrong. From the CDC, common health issues of pregnancy include anemia (low red blood cell count), urinary tract infections, depression, hypertension, gestational diabetes, and obesity. It doesn’t stop there. Other health issues can include ectopic pregnancies (egg implanting in the fallopian tube) causing bleeding pain and dizziness; hyperemesis gravidarum – morning sickness that doesn’t go away resulting in weight loss, faintness, and dehydration; and placental abruption (separation from uterine wall) causing bleeding cramping and pain. There are also a slew of infections to be on the watch for, including Bacterial vaginosis, Cytomegalovirus, Group B strep, Hep B, and Influenza. Each can pose serious risk to the mother and/or the unborn child.
And before you brush off that listing of depression, it is a leading cause of new mother fatalities, with violent suicides.
All that and we haven’t addressed the actual birthing process yet. It carries many risks of serious pain and injury which are often ignored or even unknown by a lot of parents (I’m especially looking at you, fathers). Let’s start by talking about labour pain.
You know what? No. Fuck that. Let’s start by watching some labour pain.
I told a bit of lie just now. That wasn’t true labour pain. The thing is, these guys were in control. The severity and duration of their pain was adjustable and avoidable. They could have opted out at any time. With a flick of a switch or a pulling of a plug, all their pain would immediately cease. Think of a time you endured pain because you wanted to prove a point. Contrast that with a time that you endured pain because there was absolutely nothing you could do about it. I can think of no way to precisely quantify that difference, but it’s huge. Recognize and respect that difference.
Oh hey, did you know there’s something called ‘eclampsia’? It’s a life threatening condition where high blood pressure causes pregnant women to get massive headaches, and get blurred or double vision. Or they could just suddenly go into seizures or a coma.
What’s that? You never heard of it? Neither had I until I was researching this piece. Just another horrifying thing that most people don’t know about going into pregnancy. Sure, it’s rare, but it still happens and an important thing to consider if one wants to make an informed decision about giving birth. There’s another thing that many people don’t think about, but this is far more common.
Tearing.
Or, iffin you wanna get all technical, Obstetric trauma: fourth-degree perineal lacerations; laceration of the cervix, vaginal wall or sulcus; injury to bladder or urethra; and repair of obstetric lacerations of the uterus, cervix, corpus uteri, bladder, urethra, rectum and sphincter.
It’s like this, but a little bit lower, if you know what I mean.
Now fellas, I really want you to think about this the next time you consider the ‘joys of fatherhood’. Imagine shoving a scalpel up your ass and slicing yourself open, sphincter to shaft.
That, my friends, would be the male equivalent of an episiotomy. It’s a procedure done in an effort to reduce the harmfulness of obstetric trauma. Again, that’s cutting yourself from your stink-hole to your pee-pee in an attempt to REDUCE harm. It is even more unpleasant and insane than you imagine.
After you’re done cringing and have composed yourself, recognize that serious obstetric trauma is a reality for 16.9 out of every 100 mothers giving birth in Canada. Probability wise, thats a little bit higher than a roll of a dice. Is that a chance you want to take? Is that a chance you want your significant other to take?
Such a serious injury does not go away quickly and can have some long term effects. For instance, postpartum urinary incontinence is fairly common yet rarely addressed.
Let’s sum up, shall we?
…except for one tiny little detail. Despite all the health issues that come with vaginal births, cesarians are far from desirable. The risks are as numerous as they are severe. There’s chance of infection (incision site, bladder, uterus), haemorrhage or extreme blood loss, injury to bowel or bladder, and scar adhesions. The list goes on, but you get the idea.
Now, this may be a bit presumptuous of me, but I feel that most people are at least amicable with those they are planning to have a child with. And if you care about someone, how can you want them to endure this kind of pain and take these kinds of risks? I wouldn’t even wish it upon an enemy.
And if all that wasn’t enough, it turns out that pregnant women are twice as likely to be murdered than not-pregnant women. This makes murder the leading cause of death for pregnant women. A societal fuck-you-cherry atop a biological shit-sundae women have to risk just by “playing their role” in biology’s plan for them.
I cannot fathom why anyone would voluntarily endure a pregnancy with all this physical and mental duress threatening their wellbeing. At the very least, I think we owe it to the future mothers of the world that information about these risks be more readily available, making their chances at an informed decision more likely.
They are Legion
I have one final reason to not have children before I move on to Stage 3. If I undergo a complete change in values and personality, as the Breeder often predicts I will, and suddenly have an uncontrollable urge to be a parent, there is still no reason to make my own. In fact there are millions of reasons not to. There are so many parentless, homeless children in the world all in desperate need of people to care for them. That is to say, there is already too much need for society to handle as it is. Why create more? It just further demonstrates how much the drive to be a parent is based on biological manipulations.
I think that about covers it. Some are powerful reasons why I personally would never want to reproduce. Some are excellent reasons I should not bear spawn even if I wanted to. Many are both – my case is iron clad. The Breeder, however, will not be dissuaded. Of course, the Breeder never tackles any of my objections head on. In the face of solid reasoning, there’s nothing for them to say. As denying isn’t an option, I’m met instead with an attempt to devalue and deflect. It’s time to look at the other side of the coin. All my objections, *cough* while technically accurate*cough* don’t actually carry much weight when compared to all I would lose out on by not having children. Next time, I’ll look at the Breeder’s most common reasons I ought to reproduce in Stage 3: The Rebuttal.
bleatmop
Mystro
The Arbourist
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…