you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (51 children)

No shit, but there are transphobic Democrats supporting the ideology of gender segregation and trans genocide. If one of those bluemaggots gets the 2028 nomination, I'm as good as dead already, I might as well just skip the painful and humiliating part.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 51 child comments
  • [+] -12 points 1 month ago (47 children)

    Democrats say things that flirt with transphobia because they are trying to win over Republican voters. (Dumb idea but that's their strategy)

    Republicans say they want trans genocide because they want trans genocide.

    They aren't the same, and at least one of them can be pressured into changing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 47 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    They aren’t the same, and at least one of them can be pressured into changing.

    weird, i just had a bunch of comrades get arrested for attempting to protest for a democrat to not comply with trump on trans kids.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (15 children)

    Bluemaggots say things that help build the argument for my extermination because they're worthless fucking opportunist cowards that don't stand for anything. I'm sure, in their heart-of-hearts, they don't even care about trans issues one way or the other.

    However, that won't stop them from "reaching across the isle" to vote for it in a big bipartisan compromise to show how reasonable and moderate they are; they'll trade away my rights for idk canceling up to $20,000 in debt for Pell Grant recipients who open a business in a disadvantaged community and operate it for at least three years. Either we nominate a progressive or I die.

    Every single Democrat that supports any form of gender segregation supports sending me to men's prison.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [+] -10 points 1 month ago (14 children)

    Well, I was trying to give you a hope for an out but I guess that's a no go.

    I'd rather you didn't kill yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago (13 children)

    I already have hope for an out; we nominate a progressive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 month ago (11 children)

    It's September 29. AFAIK most, if not all, of the primaries are over now. Either you got your ideal candidate or you didn't, but either way, there's only one way to keep the guaranteed-to-be-trans-genocidal Republican out of office at this point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago (9 children)

    I said 2028 in my original comment, didn't I?

    Also I notice you used "ideal" as if not wanting to be r*ped and murdered in men's prison is idealistic. That's the bare fucking minimum. If you nominate a candidate that supports the ideology for my genocide, I'm not sticking around to see how it turns out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 1 month ago (8 children)

    I said 2028 in my original comment, didn’t I?

    IDGAF about your fig-leaf; this thread is about 2026. That one sentence may have mentioned 2028, but don't try to pretend you weren't speaking more generally in the rest of your comments.

    Also I notice you used “ideal” as if not wanting to be r*ped and murdered in men’s prison is idealistic.

    Fuck off with putting words in my mouth. I used "ideal" as in "better than the alternative" -- WHICH IT IS! -- and you know it. You are not fucking entitled to attack me for your own hyperbolic interpretation of some imagined different word that I didn't say!

    If you nominate a candidate that supports the ideology for my genocide,

    Do you realize that, by being incredibly accusatory and hostile to people who are trying to be your allies, you're only making the worst outcome for yourself more likely? Don't blame this shit on me!


    Here's the real bottom line: even if your 2026 Democratic candidate isn't pro-trans, some candidates in other jurisdictions are. For there to be any hope of protecting trans people those other pro-trans Democrats need to be able to form a coalition with the rest of the party powerful to stand up against the Republicans. By refusing to vote and denying them that coalition, you are actively harming other trans people. Where's your motherfucking solidarity, qomrade?!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    i sincerely hope that you never interact with another trans person again. we all deserve better than this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

    Gender doesn't excuse being disingenuous. What would you have me do, treat her differently because she's trans? What are you, sexist?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (5 children)

    ...i think i'm going to go find somebody to hug.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (4 children)

    I'm sorry that you're upset by my lack of sexism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    it is reasonable and compassionate to treat an oppressed minority with grace, even - especially - when they criticize their oppressors. being "accusatory and hostile" is a normal, expected reaction to lifelong persecution. putting extra effort into engaging compassionately is moral even if you disagree with them.

    it is reasonable to expect this from you.

    when you frame this - extending grace to an oppressed, suicidal woman - as "sexist," you are flattening gender relations into an imaginary "all lives matter"-esque concept where all genders exist under the same conditions. this is literally an anti-feminist dog whistle of men's rights activists.

    you should treat her better because society is biased against her and has instilled that bias into you. you are obligated to correct for it.

    this means you do not fucking tone-police the oppressed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    She attacked me. She delusionally tried to lump me in with her oppressors just because I used the word "ideal," for fuck's sake!

    So no, it is not fucking reasonable to expect me to shut up and take that abuse just because of her gender! What the fuck is wrong with you?!

    you are flattening gender relations into an imaginary “all lives matter”-esque concept where all genders exist under the same conditions. this is literally an anti-feminist dog whistle of men’s rights activists.

    I am really getting sick and tired of being libeled like this. I am the furthest thing from a goddamn MRA!

    But you know what's really a dog-whistle? Your white-knighting! Everything about my response to her was about the content of her speech, not some kind of gendered criticism of her as a trans person. You're the one who brought that into it.

    this means you do not fucking tone-police the oppressed.

    Self-defense is not tone-policing! You do not fucking bully people who are already being attacked!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child)

    She attacked me

    no she didn't. you are having a conversation on the internet.

    She delusionally tried to lump me in with her oppressors just because I used the word “ideal,” for fuck’s sake!

    no she didn't. she said that you were framing a lack of transphobia as an ideal rather than a floor by using the word ideal.

    I used “ideal” as in “better than the alternative”

    no you didn't. you couldn't have. ideal doesn't mean that.

    I am really getting sick and tired of being libeled like this. I am the furthest thing from a goddamn MRA!

    no one called you an mra. i pointed out that you were using an mra dog whistle.

    You’re the one who brought [gender] into it.

    gender isn't some vampire that's only relevant to the conversation once someone invites it in, it is a societal force that we live within. it is always relevant. this is basic feminism.

    Self-defense is not tone-policing!

    this is not self defense because you are not being attacked. you are having a conversation on the internet.

    Do you realize that, by being incredibly accusatory and hostile to people who are trying to be your allies, you’re only making the worst outcome for yourself more likely? Don’t blame this shit on me!

    this is tone policing and victim blaming.

    attacked

    delusional

    abuse

    self-defense

    bully

    attacked

    it seems like you aren't differentiating between what someone says about your ideas and what they say about you. it also seems like you aren't differentiating between feeling attacked and being attacked.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    no one called you an mra. i pointed out that you were using an mra dog whistle.

    You can't use a dog whistle unless you know it is one. You didn't say "writing something that resembles a dog whistle," you said "using" it, which implies intent and is therefore an accusations of being in that group.

    it seems like you aren't differentiating between what someone says about your ideas and what they say about you.

    No, that's the entirety of what I'm doing. In reality, I was scrupulously careful only to address the argument, not the person, while you're insinuating all sorts of heinous lies about me. Fuck off with your DARVO bullshit!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago (27 children)

    Yeah, but when someone is trying to pressure dems into changing, people like you appear and cry that by pressuring them to change they're basically supporting republicans

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [+] -11 points 1 month ago (26 children)

    What kind of pressure?

    All the anti-D sentiment I see on Lemmy is from lemmy.ml people saying that Ds are just as bad as Rs (therefore don't bother voting).

    Which of course convinces people who would vote against Rs to stay home and convinces Ds not to bother appealing to that kind of person because they'll probably not vote anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (25 children)

    i vote in primaries and municipal/midterm years but whatever you say, officer

    democrats are more likely to call the cops on me than appeal to me in any way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 month ago (24 children)

    i vote in primaries and municipal/midterm years

    I'm glad to hear it, but I clearly wasn't talking about people like you. That view isn't shared amongst the legions of people pictured in the OP who screech that voting for a Democrat under any circumstance is the exact same as voting for a Republican.

    Red Herrings not quoted for obvious reasons.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago (23 children)

    That view isn’t shared amongst the legions of people pictured in the OP who screech that voting for a Democrat under any circumstance is the exact same as voting for a Republican.

    that's cause it's a caricature constructed for the purpose of engagement baiting

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (21 children)

    Absolutely not. I run into people like this on Lemmy all the time - usually from lemmy.ml like yourself.

    I strongly suspect you're intentionally being obtuse to propagandize, as befitting of your home instance and likely political beliefs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago (20 children)

    it's literally a caricature though, just because you feel like it applies to everyone you talk to based on instance tribalism doesn't make it less of a caricature

    I strongly suspect you’re intentionally being obtuse to propagandize, as befitting of your home instance and likely political beliefs.

    you are projecting your own motivations, i'm just a girl in the world

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (19 children)

    it’s literally a caricature though, just because you feel like it applies to everyone you talk to based on instance tribalism doesn’t make it less of a caricature

    Caricature implies exaggeration; as I said, there are plenty of people like this, and 90% of the time they're @lemmy.ml, like you. I didn't decide to dislike people from other instances. I keep running into tankies from there saying the same propaganda, and pointed it out here today because it doesn't surprise me at all that you pretend none of them are like that - you're simply biased.

    you are projecting your own motivations, i’m just a girl in the world

    In true tankie fashion, "I couldn't possibly be arguing in bad faith, therefore if you point out that I am, it must be that you are arguing in bad faith."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago (18 children)

    you are so quick to stereotype i can see why you became a cop

    i'm an anarchist and toxic liberals crying about the instance i'm on does not give me incentive to change, i certainly don't want to hang out in places dominated by you guys catgirl-sorry

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (17 children)

    I'm not crying about it, I'm just pointing out it's another anecdote in a large pile of anecdotes - mostly for the benefit of people new to Lemmy who might be unaware that people defending tankies tend to originate from lemmy.ml.

    Honestly I'm a bit regretful I even brought it up, just because it gave you an opportunity to magnify the diversion and waste everyone's time.

    But yeah, in a thread about how toxic tankies are, it's no surprise there's going to be tankies coming in to pretend that's not the case. Hardly rocket science. I was just trying to point out that you're probably a tankie because 99% of the tankies I've met on here come from lemmy.ml.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (16 children)

    i show up because it's annoying having loudmouth liberals smugly talking shit without any pushback

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (14 children)

    Strange to see an anarchist go to bat for tankies, let alone proclaim to vote, but it’s at least interesting.

    i have plenty of criticisms for MLs, but i am willing to work with them on shared goals; it's kind of the fundamentals of a coalition. the problem is i don't really have shared goals with liberals and whenever i've try to ask liberal politicians to advance anything i care about i get either ignored or hostility.

    showing up to vote every year is not the same as engaging in electoral politics. i have no patience for political campaigns, and i usually just protest vote anyways.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago (12 children)

    but it seems like you’re letting rare anecdote drive your stereotyping into hostility towards a group - the exact thing you accused me of earlier.

    i promise you it's not rare, it's an ongoing phenomena. i literally just had comrades getting arrested by democrat politicians for protesting those politicians abandoning trans kids medically to protect institutions and placate trump.

    To me:

    1. Democrats don't want a boot on my neck

    2. Republicans want a Hitler-flavored boot on my neck

    3. Tankies want a Stalin-flavored boot on my neck

    this says more about you than anything else. democrats have had their boots on plenty of necks, just with more appealing branding. democrats built and operated the deportation machine before trump, have been bombing multiple countries continuously when in power, and out of power are arresting trans activists rather than opposing trump.

    saying that there's no boot requires a lot of selective vision or you're just the one wearing the boot.

    for me the boot is capitalism and its associated political economy and heirarchies.

    To me:

    1. Democrats want a boot on my neck, but with slightly slower and better managed extermination of undesirables

    2. Republicans want a boot on my neck, but with significantly faster extermination of undesirables.

    3. MLs want to get rid of the boot entirely, but we disagree on some details

    the choice for who i ally with seems obvious

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (10 children)

    Loads of details left out of this, so I can’t really say if I would be For or Against those arrests, but your ideology as stated in this thread is predicated upon tankies never arresting protestors, which is… how to put it politely… incorrect.

    yes i had a feeling you would be sitting on the fence about this officer.

    'tankies' are in no position to arrest me, nor is the prospect of them doing so anything close to an immediate threat. meanwhile if i give you more details about what i get up to you or another liberal would probably try to have me arrested all the same.

    is as that other meme from a couple days ago expressed where you have a tally board with 50,000 tallies and one with 5.

    dawg godric is always vomiting out dishonestly framed garbage, idk why you take it seriously. the tally board framing flatters democrats harms by only counting visible acts of harm while ignoring the structural harm they maintain and enable. for example the deportation machine, the carceral state, the warmongering, the genocide funding, the preemptive compliance with trump. counting those as 5 tally marks would be laughable because that's the infrastructure of harm that makes the 50,000 possible.

    You simply are completely unaware of the practices of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and their friends.

    i have probably read orders of magnitude more from and about those guys than you have, but thank you for linking wikipedia to me doggirl-lol

    however many skulls you attribute to those fighting against capitalism, the pile created by capitalism dwarfs that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] a comment that isn't shown here: deleted, from someone you've blocked, or on another page. view the thread from it
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (8 children)

    Okay so now that you’ve moved the goal-post from “There is zero despotism under M-L” to “Well, a little despotism is okay. We can exterminate certain people we disagree with,” you align with fascists more than you align with liberals (or anarchists, for that matter).

    i am in favor of being authoritarian towards capitalists, yes. you literally work/worked for the carceral state, you are in no position to accuse anyone else of being aligned with fascists.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (7 children)

    i am in favor of being authoritarian towards capitalists, yes.

    Then why the hell say "MLs want to get rid of the boot entirely" when you are advocating for that very boot?

    Are you just hoping someone gullible reads what you're writing?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (6 children)
    i am in favor of being authoritarian towards capitalists, yes.
    

    Then why the hell say “MLs want to get rid of the boot entirely” when you are advocating for that very boot?

    as i said here, earlier in our correspondance

    for me the boot is capitalism and its associated political economy and hierarchies.

    please try to keep up

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

    Fair enough, I must've missed your niche definition of "the boot" (AKA authoritarianism).

    Bizarre, but I guess if you're doing mental gymnastics your worldview can definitely make sense to you, much like The Ice Wall is perfectly logical to Flat Earthers.

    So in sum, you think that anti-capitalist authoritarianism literally is not authoritarianism. If that's the case, we have nothing further to discuss.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    it's not mental gymnastics, all definitions of authoritarianism have ideological assumptions baked in. i am opposed to capitalism. overthrowing capitalism is going to be authoritarian from the perspective of the capitalists. i am in favor of that.

    i am opposed to a dictatorship of capital, which is what both republicans and democrats are in favor of. that is liberal authoritarianism

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (3 children)

    it’s not mental gymnastics, all definitions of authoritarianism have ideological assumptions baked in

    They really don't, but go on.

    overthrowing capitalism is going to be authoritarian from the perspective of the capitalists.

    Not necessarily, but that is one method.

    i am opposed to a dictatorship of capital, which is what both republicans and democrats are in favor of. that is liberal authoritarianism

    Right, but you're for dictatorship of another flavor, ergo you are not an anarchist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Right, but you're for dictatorship of another flavor, ergo you are not an anarchist.

    I am opposed to unjust and imposed hierarchies as an anarchist. Capitalists want to maintain and continue those hierarchies. A revolution which overturns their domination is authoritarian towards them, but liberatory for everyone else.

    All revolutions are going to be authoritarian towards someone, and you are acting as if the status quo isn't also authoritarian. Passively voting and trying to reform a system of oppression does not have a track record of success. It does nothing to actually challenge the system of oppression either.

    Also are a cop, incredible gall to call me not-an - anarchist lmao

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago* (1 child)

    A revolution which overturns their domination is authoritarian towards them, but liberatory for everyone else.

    Yet again, you're using a niche definition and acting as though readers should have known it.

    Passively voting and trying to reform a system of oppression does not have a track record of success.

    Not strictly true. You should instead say "I find the rates of peaceful reform for the better to be too slow and unlikely."

    Also are a cop, incredible gall to call me not-an - anarchist lmao

    So when kids on the playground said "takes one to know one," you understood that to be true and wise? I'm not shocked or anything, but it is kinda funny that you still think that way (but seemingly don't apply that logic to yourself).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago

    Yet again, you’re using a niche definition and acting as though readers should have known it.

    yes, i am using a definition other than the liberal moralizing version. if you actually read and engaged with what i have said i would expect you to be able to follow that, it's not the first time i've outlined that.

    You should instead say “I find the rates of peaceful reform for the better to be too slow and unlikely.”

    this is being pedantic. peaceful reform has a track record of being rolled back whenever capital feels threatened

    So when kids on the playground said "takes one to know one," you understood that to be true and wise?

    its more that not even other anarchists are in a position to dictate to other anarchists who is and isn't an anarchist. having someone who seems completely fine with the carceral state calling me not-an-anarchist just makes me laugh

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [+] -11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    Prisons are segregated too for the exact same reasons, which means if they decide I'm too manly to play in women's sports then I'm also too manly to go to women's prison. It's the same ideology, the same justification, I either kill myself or die in men's prison.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Prevent? We all know that men's prisons are r*pe dungeons! Everyone fucking jokes about it. Don't drop the soap HAHA SO FUNNEH!!1 Demonic shithole Nazi country run by fucking monsters. The r*pe is the point of US prisons. Death to Amerikkka

    The idea that it's "unfair" is based in the idea that women are weak and need protection, that hrt doesn't cause biological changes, that trans women are not real women, that trans women are pervert freaks that can't be allowed around women, it's all the same. There's a lot of baked in assumptions about sex in sports segregation, and they are the same assumptions for bathrooms and locker rooms and prisons. Once the door is open to this shit, it is inevitable that the next Republican regime will codify it.

    If the Democrats don't reach some fucking bipartisan compromise and do it themselves.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -7 points 1 month ago (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago

    We're still talking about the US, right? Because in this country the goal isn't to reduce incidence of SA. The goal is to humiliate men by making them r*pe each other. That's why it happens in the first place. Do you really think we couldn't eliminate it if we tried?

    And I favor the way the Paralympics already solved this issue. They separate athletes based on their ability, like how wrestlers are separated based on weight. Instead of just measuring sex, or hormone levels, measure things like weight and height and muscle mass and wing span and bone density etc etc. If we're going to separate athletes, let's make it scientific instead of based on some arbitrary social convention.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)