Socialism and the new genders

Socialism and the new genders.

discuss.

They are not "new". They just have been suppressed by porky.

Genders are spooks. Adding more socially acceptable options to the list of strict categories isnt the solution, the solution is to lose the idea of gender and gender norms and let people decide and do what they wish, as long as it doesnt harm others.

What is there to discuss? That we need to 'liberate' queer labor aristocrats/bourgies from their so called 'oppression', while putting worker liberation on the backburner?

Fidel is a qt 3.14 in that pic though :3 Just needs less masscara

The purest ideology of all.

There are exactly zero genders.

Gender is a spook.

You fucking white male!

/thread

Things that harm me are against my interest.

I'd rather be harmed then live in an illusory playground, which isn't really a playground either, for there are enough who know how to use the reality of such a state.

You know, maybe Holla Forums are right. Maybe some people just aren't fit to live in civilized society.

No, "just do whatever as long as you don't hurt other people" is as illusory as anarcho-capitalism, which it is.

Thats what we have prisons fornatural selection

...

"Communists read Marx, anti-communists understood him." - Svetlana Alexievich. What did she mean by this?

Now I agree with the general idea of the picture but I think you mean gender, because sex is genetic.


"I didn't read Marx but I heard he is evil".

It doesn't really matter, I don't care what people identity as. Gender roles aren't gonna last in socialism or communism anyway.

...

The flaw in this idea is that knowing whether your actions hurt other people, or society in general, is just about impossible for most abstract choices until there are many people behaving this way. Only then do we start to see measurable effects, and by then it is usually too late.

To take a simple example, let's look at fossil fuels. In the beginning it was just people digging into the ground to extract a viscous product, or a soft rock, to burn. No one was being harmed by such a simple, mundane action as that.

Then it grew to become an industry. People became cutthroat in the pursuit of these resources. The harm began, but it was too late because now MONEY was at stake.

Then much later we saw that burning these resources created byproducts which were harming the environment, and look where we're at now.

All because some long-dead people discovered some rocks and oil, and weren't harming anyone by simply tinkering with them.

That would crate a dysfunctional society. We need genders and their roles to uphold our society.

like pottery

There is nothing fash about building society based on our instincts,social conditioning and evolutionary psychology.

That's where you're wrong, kiddo. Let me explain why:

During hunter-gatherer stages, tribes that made men hunt and women gather and housekeep we're more successful because men are expandable in reproduction. This resulted over time in slight specialisation so that men are better in physically demanding tasks due to the sheer length of hunter-gatherer times. During agricultural times the men did most of the farm work with the animals due to their physical power, while women did the housekeeping, making tools/clothes and feeding the "house animals" such as geese and chickens.

But during the industrial revolution, and more and more now, physically demanding jobs are starting to disappear. Society doesn't consist of 99% farmers, it consists of massive amounts of different jobs, with the vast majority of them not requiring physical prowess, but either just simple task performing or mental labour.

Hence, traditional gender roles, or even roles based on sex, are no longer necessary in our modern society. There is no dangerous jobs with high death rates that can have a significant impact on the reproduction cycle of our species, with perhaps the exception of soldiers, which dont make up a large portion of society. So there is no preasure to divide labour that way. There are also no widespread jobs that the majority of the populations do, so there is no reason to culturally divide tasks between gender. There is also no real argument for the majority of jobs to be divided up between sexes on ground of physical strength.

Social conditioning is cultural, so we can change it.

Not an argument.

In this case its based on our instincts and evolutionary psychology more than on social conditioning so no.

Men still make up 99% of all scientists and wast majority of engineers etc. the people who keep society functional on daily basis. Women are only filling supportive roles in our economy, such as position of social workers,nurses and 60% of medical doctors(not the surgeons nor positions of higher up specialists) and teachers.

No connection
No overlap

If people instinctively drift to certain positions like you say why do we need gender?

Ever heard of social conditioning? Oh yea, you just said it exists yourself. Cultural perceptions and ideas push people in certain directions.

But even if you we're right, like said, why do you need gender roles? Why force people into certain roles if these is no benefit from it? Why force technical women to become nurses and why force nursing men to become technicians.

Also teachers used to exclusively be men, as we're all the doctors, the reason nursing is "a female job" is because during the wars men get send to the front to die while women stay in the hospitals to cure the soldiers.

And ehm.

I think the nurse, car mechanic, cleaner, baker and grocer are more important than the scientists researching quantum physics or designing new CPU architectures. Maintenance and stuff are all supportive roles. A building is nothing without its support.

We can`t allow "free will" to confuse the instincts.


There is also something that we call bell curve when it comes to intelligence.

Hands down easiest $90,000 I've ever made.

pls go

Deal with it.

don't prevent me from having this, spookfags

...

Still hoping on that submissive girlfriend lad?

I'm not the guy you were talking to just interested.

Lately I have been reading on Epicurus and drawn myself to the conclusion that this is not the thing that would make me happy, so I`m not sure.

read lacan

Nigga how can you have this little self reflection skills.

wow so scientific.

this shit is the real ideology fam.

like literally all of marxism

Read Dawkins.

...

I personally don't claim Marxism is scientific per se, I think Marx was kinda just reaching for the trendy term of the time, it's a moral imperative not a scientific one.

Just like how Social Darwinism isn't scientific either.

...

They are totally testable
They are tested and falsified
Look it up

I used to think Dawkins was a genius. Then I grew up.

Still waiting for the argument

One of the most important biologists of our time.
Why are people so buttmad about new atheists?

Exactly, he's a biologist, not a philosopher or a political scientist. Same for le black science man.

...

That's bullshit
Being a professional in one field doesn't mean you can't have a view in another field.
I know you know this.

Dawkins' hot takes on social policy aren't worth listening to

His career isn't an argument against or for a particular view of his outside his field

Bisexual libertarian detected

Referring you to

You're right we're more enlightened than our ancient compatriots, we should force women into forestry, fishing, oil rigging and coal mining industries. That way they can become big and strong like men, lets also slap a penis on them while we're at it and allow them to fuck our butch wives.

So why is your side saying 'lol how can you argue with this science genius'.

Stephen Hawking seems to be a lowkey democratic socialist (but doesn't like talking about politics much), you don't see me trotting him out as an argument all the time.

In a true socialist Utopia if you arent one of the two useful genders (male and female) your body should be broken down in to its constituent parts and used for the betterment of society.

Maybe some of them are as retarded as you. That doesn't change you being full of shit.

There's genuinely nothing radical or upsetting about non-traditional sexualities and trannies.
If you're not a delusional Holla Forumsack you should have had contact with faggots and realized that wow, it's all the same shit.

How about we worry about genuine material problems?

masochist pls go.

Gender identities are a fucking retarded concept.
They come from the ideas of masculinity and femininity which, in turn, come from the intrinsic sexes. People who identify as the opposite gender from their sex are literally just acting the way the opposite sex is expected to because "muh stronk independent tranny." This is, in fact, a limiting trait of trans people. They aren't trans because they like to do girly things, they like to do girly things because they identify as trans.


It's rather intellectually dishonest to assume anyone who doesn't like trans people simply hasn't met a tranny, is it not?
Give them the benefit of the doubt and actually listen to their arguments.

>>>/sjw/

gee, its almost as if you're spooked son

spooks are spooks.

Fucking hell, and I came into this thread expecting it to be cancer.

...

...

...

you the tumbling guy into guys? Link?

I remember you

with the glitchy stirners

Liberalism co-opted LGBT shit. Cuba's new policy towards LGBT people show that these aren't incompatible with socialism and that ultimately its in the best interest of sexual minorities to support communism, but the liberal version of LGBT rights gives us shit like the HRC taking donations from drone manufacturers or wealthy bourgeois homos advocating invading countries to "spread gay rights". As a communist tranny the shit liberalism has done to our movement is fucking disgusting to me, this isn't the spirit of stonewall, this is garbage bourgeois co-optation.

Nothing new, capitalism adopts identities when they're useful for making profit.
Gay culture is consumerist as fuck.

I hate that shit. I dislike that we've been co-opted into a meaningless identity politics that doesn't even challenge capitalism (much less attempt to destroy it). It's fucking alienating that most trannies in my home country (Chile) are fucking poor as shit, perpetually unemployed and forced into lumpenproletarian status and yet all the politicians will sell us is repackaged American identity politics liberalism. Capitalist propaganda has gone so far that our very existence is seen as pro-liberal, and the worst is that some of us even believe it.

I hope it's ftm since you write in a masculine way.

I probably write in a masculine way because english is not my first language and Chileans in general talk in a very harsh way, even the women.

Oh well, being a proper lady takes practice

you gotta upload it with the filename though

hello Holla Forums

To use sexual preferences as an example, it starts out as a person simply acting out on their attractions. Then as more people behave this way, and become a movement, you see politics involved, and in this particular example it becomes a tool by which to break people apart into increasingly smaller factions based on made-up ideas like transgenderism, gender fluidity, nonbinary and so on.

Bourgeois "lefties", take your idpol garbage elsewhere

Gringo estupido.