Paul Cockshott: Traps are gay

Breaking news: Your god has forsaken you.
This is what a basic Marxist approach to the issue looks like.

Other urls found in this thread:

No shit. It's one thing to be attracted to someone who looks like a girl only to find out later that they're a man. But if you conciously and knowingly want to have sex with a man who looks like a girl, you're so far in the closet you must be in Narnia.

This can't be happening… I'm supposed to be in charge here!

Thank GOD for Cockshott for real. Good to hear sense.

Cokshott is Sraffian shit praise Kliman.

is this the power of cybernetics?

It is my belief that feminine men and masculine women should constitute their own genders, instead of only being considered guys or girls or transsexuals, because none of those other descriptions fit.

Just have sex with who ever, who cares.

Traps are gay, but only SORTA gay. Like, maybe 20% gay at the most.

I will not have these disgusting straight men, who just want a cock to fondle while they fuck a girl up the ass, to corrupt the REAL gay.


what a fucking waste, why can't he stick to talking about economics

I'm a fag and i only like effeminate boys. Masculine men, traps and thots begone.

Aren't effeminate boys literally the same as traps?

It is possible to confuse a trap for a girl but even if he have feminines manners, an effeminat boy is usually not mistaken for a gril or so i think.

Originally a trap was meant to be a boy who looked like a girl, frequently also trannies with breasts and other such things. However the homosexual undercurrents on the chans led 'trap' to mean literally just any twink in a dress with a prominent bulge. 'traps' are nice as long as they're boyish, flat-chested, etc. Actual traps are as trash as girls. I am for cuteboys.

Haha wtf did he just endorse TERFism?

TERF is the correct line. Trans ideology is an attack on women.

wtf i love trannies now

How is this even real? Is this an argument against trans folks or for ethno-nationalism?

inb4 this is the thing that will bring down Cockshott

So much for the non-idpol left.

He is 100% right

congratulations you've spooked yourself
if it's cute then fuck it, any further analysis is reactionary

Check those fucking links:


So, TL;DR, Cockshott struggles to understand the concept of 'subject' in philosophy and attempts to 'debunk' it by referring to different (non-philosophical) connotations of the word he understands: grammatical subject, legal subject, subject of power [subordination]… What is more striking than his clear-cut ignorance is his zeal to portray it as a virtue.

Some of the worst of his Hubris:

Biopolitics par excellence [as implied by his technocratic project]:

This has got to be the most idiotic sperging out I've read this month. Btw, his blog has a previous "btfo" entry: an algorithmically generated theory text – something Cockshott probably thinks speaks for itself, but reeks only of "le Sokal affair":

And I don't even like Butler.

literally read basic economics to understand why this is stupid.
or was it debunking economics.
something to do with economics made the point that economists love to wank themselves raw over stupid analogies that don't tell you anything about the point at hand. i think it was debunking economics. it was fun, anyway.
consider here the obvious fact: transgender people aren't credit card fraudsters. stop and think for a moment how stupid this is, on that basis alone. similarly - just stop and think for a moment - is the American banking system really analogous to a man on an island who has to choose how many coconuts he's going to eat and how many he's going to cut a hole out of in and stick his dick in? No, but an economist would try and pull that one on you.

so in conclusion: Paul Cockonut is an economist, thank you.

tbh think it's a good thing
transgender issues are flypaper for people with too much time on their hands and i'll stick to that until Steve Keen weighs in.

we must abolish women to build social[whatever u want]

Can you explain the concept of subject in philosophy?

homos who think they are heteros when they fap to traps B T F O
traps CYBERNETICALLY proven gay


No, seriously. He is not a Marxist (though, not as obviously as RDWolff). That said I'll need to read a few more books (Galbraith and others) to pin Technocratic revisionism on him conclusively.


Good job user.
This is pretty embarrassing. Poor Cockshott, it's like shooting your own cock. Why do people feel the urge to write on topics they have no knowledge of?

At worst, this is Cockshott's Jewish Nigger Moment. Something largely irrelevant to his theory that idpollers will attempt to use as an excuse to discredit his theory. Maybe not the best analogy because the Jewish Nigger thing was just a throwaway in-joke in a private letter and this is a full article, but this means nothing.

Plus he's right. Traps are gay. Hot as fuck, but gay.

'nigger straight from the bush' was his Jewish Nigger Moment
this is just speaking truth to power

Yes Cockshott just ignore the fact that Transwomen and Transmen(notice how transphobes always avoid talking about Transmen ?) are often discriminated against in society and that gender is a social construct(that doesn't mean it's fake, and if you think social construct means fake, you clearly haven't read Marx and/or did not understand Marx), as many cultures have third genders

Does this mean we're the largest leftist LGBT community on the internet?



traps are useless for the revolution and not my comrades



Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeew hilarious to see the trans reaction to this. Literally throwing a tantrum to try to discredit these ideas.

Look my friends, gender is immaterial, it is idealism, an abstraction similar to commodity fetishism. If you honestly cannot grasp this concept then you're an assblasted brainlet. Genders are an arbitrary classification on the sexes to continuously reproduce social relations.

In short:


Two comments. One is a joke, the other is a serious one. I have problems making fully serious comments in this thread.

But mentioning Khrushchev is amusing: I consider Cockshott to have similar revisionist tendencies.

Go away Proudhon. There will be everything in Communism.

Just checking how far Cockshott got in Butler's 221 page long book (Gender Trouble, 1990) by searching for the quotes/paraphrasing in the original…

preface (xxiii)
p.182 – second page of the "Conclusion" chapter

Fishy, to say the least.

Ultra brainletism, there were no genders in primitive communism explain that one mate?

So basically he read some parts of the intro and some parts of the first chapter, jumped to the concluding chapter and read 2 more pages…

I thought he was a computer scientist?

Traps: self identifying males dressing up as women to fuck straight men

He is talking about transgender

Femininity and masculinity are social constructs, but as far as I know only dicks and vaginas exist is nature, so biologically speaking that would mean two genders. Having 57 genders as social constructs isn't really an issue - people can call themselves whatever they want - but scientifically speaking until we find a third reproductive organ there's no reason for biology to go beyond two.

how does the mere existence of chicks with dicks attack women as a whole?

sex: biology
gender: social

There are also hermaphrodites, chromosome variations (XXX), several other genetic variations, etc., so it already does.

Traps are just fucking stupid tbh. It's straight guys trying to be 'taboo' by engaging in gay thoughts whilst being unable to actually muster any attraction for the same sex.

Traps and trannies aren't the same thing so the Aristotle side makes no sense.

OP is a shitpost, and the 1st and 2nd parts of this series of articles aren't actually focused on the parts quoted

if sure if you keep saying it it'll become true

find me the third gamete


what recent science?

if I tried to explain it i'd probably make mistakes because i'm not a scientist but theres nothing stopping you from looking into recent research on sex and gender on google scholar and such.


If "gender" depends on social aspects, are there 4 genders between male and female aristocrats and plebs? Seems pretty stupid to reuse that word for it then as opposed to restricting it to nouns (which have no sex but can have gender).

you didn't read the article? it's actually a biological probability gene that makes you a social worker. also "spectrum" refers exclusively to the spectroscope you fucking postmodern queers


Cockshot is a TERF?

if u read TaNS there are hints at him being an eternal white knight


Holla Forums IS A /TERF/ BOARD NOW

I didn't realize we could get any worse

The first and last spot-on criticism ITT.

Excluding these connotations from "proper philosophy" is idiotic.

lol I bet when you read the Butlerspam-algorithm post you first thought Cockshott was your guy.

>trip poster who is okay with labour vouchers circulating calling others revisionist
You are much closer to Khrushchev than Cockshott is.

We will build the cybernetic COMPUTER GOD and there is nothing you can do about it lmao. Now, which of these programs was the one for the cyber-com hijacking *squints* 0h, it's probably this: *injects BUTT-l3r into Amazon servers*

At this point it might be better to just delete the board.

You misunderstand. Reading a text on Roman law, for instance, and not understanding that the term "subject" in the text refers to the legal subject, then criticizing the text as if it was referring to the grammatical subject instead is an error of the reader/critic and not of the author/text. I consider this common sense, don't you?

I read the first two sentences and immediately got that it was a fake. Then I cringed hard when I realized that Cockshott probably thought to himself: "I showed those pomo bastards!"

Parody has its uses, its limitations, and possible reflexive revelation of its user (pic related).

Explain how exchanging labour vouchers within market of consumer goods is going to restore private property.

It will be managed by "specialists" like Cockshott, who will start using it to gain more personal power. In the end, economy will be increasingly splintered by clans of specialists, who will engage in power games until Capitalism will be restored.

Agreed. Holla Forums was a mistake. I'm going to go read Keynes or something idk. Goodbye friends.

no, but the things I read about the article are sufficient evidence to form an opinion on it.
1. it's about trangsender people (this is the major warning sign that it was a bad idea to write.)

*me notes down "30% swing to SocDem gang in Holla Forums - SDG GAIN" in my opinion polling data.*

Not really. It's a (half assed) critique of Judith Butler's theory of the performative constitution of genders.

I've been browsing his blog for a while now and I think the guy is getting senile. Typos abound, worsening sentence structures and general formatting, fucked up links everywhere…

yeah but what's the purpose of it if not to weigh in on the transgender debate? (i.e. what's the root reason for him to write about construction of genders if not to make that political point.)

Having read Cockshott when he's trying to make a political point (TaNS, some of his blogposts) I can say with certainty that it doesn't look like this. This comes off as some kind of pathologically motivated rant.

Stop your transphobia, shitlord! This is a trans and reddit friendly board now!

He should perhaps have chosen a better hill to rant on.

Holla Forums is trash now, I wish things were like they used to be :🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

You can support Cockshott's ideas for practically organizing a socialist economy without embracing all his social views.

Traps aren't gay, but I don't care that he thinks otherwise because I'm not joining a personality cult and see no reason to value his opinion on this issue, especially if he's expressing it with such meme-tier arguments.


It destroys the vagina-havers' monopoly.

absolute cancerous state

I like to ask people how they observe gender to slowly bring them to this conclusion

It rarely works because people are dumb but at least I try

This is already false. We can already clone, reproduce at least partially without sexed (human) bodies and we already know that this is an unstoppable trend that we'd be idiotic not to recognize as potentially emancipatory, leading us towards the post-human.
If we have two exclusionary categories (either/or) by definition they can't be universal categories.


since this thread is already terrible I might as well drop this
Paul Cockshoot being interviewed by friend of Holla Forums Eugene on Bolshevik Bistro

Cockshott is a revisionist, and his analysis is going against BASIC MATERIALISM. The human brain is no less a physical object subject to physical processes than any other part of a person's body, including their reproductive system. If someone's brain tells them they're a woman, but their reproductive system is male, I think the materialist approach is obviously to prioritize their mental process over the rest of their physical attributes in the case of things that exist in the realm of the mind (dysphoria). There is no reason why someone can't have a female brain and a male reproductive system, even transphobes can't refute the fact that hermaphrodites assigned the wrong gender at birth have "valid" dysphoria. Other cases of dysphoria in trans folk could easily be the result of hermaphroditism.

no, fuck off.

You are naturalizing the problematic on the other end of the spectrum – a conservative move you share with Cockshott. For both you and him sex is written in stone or, rather, organs – you just compartmentalized a bit further – while the question at hand is if there's a social and constitutive aspect to human sexuality or no.

Going with your framework: a human is born with male dingdongs and a "male brain." Is it still possible for him to realize through social interaction that he feels more like a woman than a man?

You say Ck goes against "basic materialism" but whose? Yours has the same framework as his. Marx would allow us to think of "metaphysical subtleties and theological niceties" within the material – you and Ck don't.


I'm irrationally concerned about trannies subverting society somehow. First you give them basic rights, and next thing you know, the PC police can haul your ass to jail for refusing to have sex with Cat Man(Cat/Cats/Catself).

I read it as "lazily complacent with my preconceptions."


hence, children must be bred by genderneutral experts starting from birth in order to achieve optimum blank slate meritocracy of indistinct gray blobs, because everything else is a spook

this but with brutalism


Sex is a categorization of reproductive systems. It doesn't matter if you try to rename it or remove the names, there are two reproductive systems in mammals.

Gender is a spook, sex is not

what about books

if gender is a spook, can the transgenders please stop messing with us already?

So tl;dr, Cockshott said something dumb? Whatever man, just tell him he's retarded and move on.

that's because the reality is worse. their literally out there indoctrinating children! besides, it is entirely obvious that 99% of trans people are just faking it to virtue signal or being coached by their virtue signally liberal parents if they are kids. maybe there are some legit trans people, but the fad has gotten out of control, anyone who became trans after 2014 or so is probably jumping on a bandwagon.

are you going to tell me the poor kid came up with this on his own?

coming out as trans usually puts you at risk of being murdered or abandoned by your parents but sure most of them are faking it because its "cool" (even though most people in society, including most liberals, are pretty damn transphobic)
It's like fuckin 1% of the worlds population, hardly a bandwagon.


dummy, Internet Aristocrat's video features POZZing gangs in 2004 (!).

Once we eliminate gendered language and gendered stereotypes we won't need to give TomBoys hormones anymore.

It's a deliberate bourgeois plot to subvert radical leftism.


I think the real people are problem lies and stereotyping people according to their sex. Movies will often tell you that girls cannot do certain things and boys cannot do certain things. However if you like doing things that go against the stereotype of your gender and you aren't gay or lesbian this messes with your mind into thinking that you must be the opposite gender. Therefore the cure for most transexuals as is the cure for many things is to purge the spooks from their mind and just do the things in their interest.

Good thing we're spending tax dollars on sex change operations for kids while the proletariat suffers in squalor!

There's actually one reproductive system in mammals that includes two typical prenatally differentiated sexual organ variations and numerous non-typical (chromosome, gonad, sex hormone, genital, secondary characteristics) genotypic and/or phenotypic variations.

Biologically speaking. However, trying to formulate dress codes, desires, various learned movements and speech patterns, etc. as strictly biological phenomena naturalizing the social dimension of our lives completely and misses crucial aspects of what makes us human – or, in short: being autism.

this. end gender, end transgenderism.

the process of transitioning is incredibly difficult and expensive, not to mention you risk literally being fucking murdered.
There are other much easier ways to piss off your parents.

most trannies are proletariat. It's not an eithor/or decision.

Stupid voice to text. I meant "I think the real problem lies in stereotyping people according to their sex".

Sex change operations for kids is a bad use of resources, and you know it. Let's feed the starving kids first.

name one case in the last decade where this has happened or drink a quart of bleach on a livestream.

transgenders are the myspace emo kids of our generation

not really, maybe the dickcutting surgery, enlighten me, I don't think it's much harder than wearing braces. The people taking hormones look pretty fine and seem excited to do it, and transtrender weaboos are definetely a thing.
True, but it's mostly done to first world middle class kids. plus this massive increase in demand is good for the medical industry, it will foster competition, create new technologies and make hormones much more accessible in our Cyberpunk future.

I guarantee more than a few of these kids have some form of government subsidized health insurance, if not Medicaid.

Glug Glug.

What the fuck are you doing with that flag m8?

if your kid has gender dysphoria getting them a sex change operation sounds like the correct course of action.

I have my dengist moments.

No it fucking isn't you loons! Christ is psychology a fucked up field!


It happens!

Dank post, comrade.

Find a source or get glugging.


I already did find a source you goddamn secret agent.

IE, there are two systems that work as a whole system. Talk about autism.

But this is exactly why people differentiate between sex and gender. You're talking about gender.

holy shit what is this hysteria

can someone tl;dr to me why everyone is calling Cockshott a bigot, and when he argued for ethno-nationalism

what is wrong with you people

That isn't surgery. I asked for surgery. You promised surgery.
In the spirit of tortured masculinity, I recommend you sample the elixir of Mr. Muscle.

At least pretend to read what you cite beyond the headline.
>The drugs used by the clinics are approved for delaying puberty in kids who start maturing too soon. The drugs' effects are reversible, and Spack said they've caused no complications in his patients. The idea is to give these children time to mature emotionally and make sure they want to proceed with a permanent sex change.

Trollin' strong, I see

i'm sure we'll get a source
*notices the all-knowing market has foreseen this thread for decades and already priced it in*

Gee, I wonder why the child sex change doctor is defending his practice.

wonder all you like but unless you can prove he's performing surgery you'd better wonder over a glass of the ol' blue whitener.

can you reply to or were you just using emotionally charged language for impact purposes?
Also I doubt the homicide rate is substantially higher, the suicide rate is, but that's the fault of genderist ideology which you also propagate (as well as previous psychological backgrounds) .

bls explain

this unironically

This is just basic reading comprehension and logic, tbh. The original sentence that
>there are two reproductive systems in mammals
means "there are two systems for reproduction available for mammals (e.g. sexual, asexual reproduction – just like in fungi). Since we are talking about a sexed class of animals (mammals) from the perspective of this class' reproductive system there can be only one, shared, otherwise it would be either incompatible or multifaceted (as with fungi). In other words, a male chimpanzee and a female chimpanzee wouldn't be able to reproduce if they didn't share a common reproductive system.

Do you English?

So in other words, just DO what you FEEL like?

And for the record parents already give their children irreversible surgery-if a baby is born intersex it's common for parents to surgically alter their genitals as soon as their born.

Do these retards not realize that if sex and/or gender are socially constructed categories then they shouldn't just be blindly accepted? And if it's not then it must have a biological explanation which effectively contradicts their ideological position. Creating loads of new gender categories isn't a fucking solution to the problems gender categories creates. Submitting yourself to a bunch of new norms solves absolutely nothing.

great, thanks

Doctors are even hesitant to give kids hormone blockers even when absolutely necessary. Every child given HRT outside of blockers end up being part of the 40% of the suicide rate.

Libtards are just trying to say its "muh oppresion!!1" because they dont wanna be responsible.

I'm not gonna go full reactionary and say that dickgirls n cuntboys are men n women, but no doctor in their right mind will give a kid unnecessary surgery, esp a sex change op.

Need the Lacanfag in here. I would like to hear what they have to say about transgender ism seeing as psychoanalysis is universally hated by trannys

i'm somewhat sympathetic to trans people, sure some of them seem personally nice, and I wouldn't associate myself with TERFs or religious homophobes, but I can't help but they are going too far somehow.

face it, you meme'd yourself into being 'trans' because it was trendy.

here's a tip user: being discriminated against and ostracized makes you more likely to commit suicide.

Actual gays (like me) don't like traps. It's exclusively a straight neckbeard thing.



that's what i don't like about trans people, they seem like sex crazed ppl who think they are entitled to have sex with anyone regardless of their gender or sexual orientations because muh social constructs you bigots

Obviously actual gays don't like traps because traps are girls. It's not exclusively a straight neckbeard thing though. I'm a bisexual chad and I like traps. Also wtf is wrong with the pecs on the guy in your picture? They are too high up. Also the way he is holding his testicles looks uncomfortable.

I like anything that has a cock and balls, who made you ambassador of the fag nation?

I don't get why leftypol is so anti-idpol, eg muh race baiting muh feminism etc, but stans in full force for trannies.

what does this mean

it's because leftypol is trannies or low t soy numales who might as well be trannies. If you ever felt the urge to become the opposite gender, snap out of it, stop watching anime, work out get swole and engage in healthy male bonding and vigorous outdoors activity

it's not idpol to suggest that trannies should just be left in peace and allowed to take whatever hormones they desire. Denying trannies equal treatment would be actual idpol.

I bet that you think you're being compassionate, instead of social darwinist

Daily reminder that trannies demand equal rights to your cock.

Gender nihilism is anti-idpol

Hot fucking take in the implication

Worthless crap.

Because they are Murican and Anglo liberals. That's all there is to it. Liberals on reddit, liberals on twitter, liberals on facebook, liberals on Holla Forums (yes, I know that socialism is supposed to be something else, and not extra-strong liberalism). Hell, even the racists on Holla Forums are of a liberal type, they watched liberal media and believed in Trump's antisemitism (except they saw it as a feature and not a bug) even though there was no substance to that allegation and one of his kids is married to a Jew. In the Anglo-Burger discourse, you have to be either a liberal or… not a foe, not an anti-liberal, but rather some sort of bizarro-version of the liberal that half the day is mad at some liberal over BS irrelevant to his own life and the other half gets the liberal mad over things that are also completely irrelevant to the liberal's life, the philosophy is: always be mad, never achieve anything.

When they say they support or oppose something, it never means a fucking thing. Likewise now: If one of these people now says they hate Cockshott and they will stop "supporting" him, it's not something he will feel in any way, because they don't do anything besides talking about authors they pretend to have read and being disappointed and shocked and offended and literally shaking worst day of my life blahblahbla, and five minutes later they pretend to be horrified about something else and that's all they ever do.

Let's actually think about issues the two articles raise (which less than 1 % of the butthurt shitheads have actually read; yes, if you have a presence online with your real name attached, these "comrades" will denounce you at the drop of one "like" as sexist, racist, a Nazi, etc. based on second-hand or even third-hand accounts): If you are a radical, why write like Butler? You can be a radical reactionary who believes change comes from elites and who only wants to address an elite, then I think you are a huge asshole, but it isn't hypocritical of you to write in a cryptic way. There is then a correspondence between your outlook and what you do. But how can somebody on the left write like that? Butler of course by herself is not that important, she just serves as an example of a general phenomenon of the "radical" academic "left" ass-cancer. Of course, some topics can get very technical, but what if your entire output basically looks like that of Butler? Do you think she actually cares about the world out there, talking in the way she does? Cockshott's stuff is technical in places where it has to be, but he still presents summaries and simplified versions (this is also what opens you up to attacks, he could easily build a wall of math around him Badiou-style) and makes his stuff available for free. You aren't a radical writer if your writing costs money (again, radical reactionaries are excused here).

The complaints are generic complaints about a generic phenomenon in academia that basically anybody who has come in touch with these "people" can tell you about. Using jargon for the sake of jargon, assuming an absurd power of mere words when it comes to explanations of what maintains or changes the world, and an extremely obnoxious and elitist behavior everywhere (while demonstrating no skills whatsoever that would merit respect).

In liberal thinking, the human personality is seen as something existing prior to society, and social constructs are considered a separate, lesser thing. The fixed and pre-set individual personality is considered the authentic real you, and the rest is basically seen as an illusion. But here is an example of a social construct: the language(s) you speak, and if genetically identical twins get adopted by different people, they might end up speaking different languages; and just telling one that this is a socially constructed thing about you doesn't make one able to speak another language at the blink of an eye. Social constructs can be very stubborn things and can have a longer life than humans. Now, somebody like Butler is certainly less guilty of pushing the liberal belief of personality in her writings than other libruls, and indeed you can find statements by "left" academics amounting to pointing out what I'm saying in this paragraph (it just takes them 200 pages), but they still come back to implicitly assuming that fairy tale again and again and again and again, because at the end of the day, they are liberals.



Milk-shops are gay. Co-op milk shops are double-gay.

that is what I see too, but I just wanted to see the rationale behind it by themselves since I am fucking dumbfounded.

All that Cockshott appears to be doing to me is pointing out the roots of these same social relations. They literally cannot stand on their own, they depend on some base material structures that enable these constructs to exist in the first place. No 'social construct' is so empty that it has been ass-pulled out of someones mind, it exists due to a specific set of circumstances, either contemporary or historical.

I've also spoken to Cockshott multiple times, I don't understand where the accusations of him being unpractical are coming from, or how he fails to account for social development etc.

Your post is just being mad at liberals… which makes you a liberal!

Who is "we"? What are you smoking? After technology like artificial wombs becomes available to the masses, we can expect the relations between the sexes will drastically change. Do you agree? Yes? Well then: This reasoning is entirely in line with how Cockshott argues. The way the side of technology and economy and the side of social mores, taboos etc. influence each other runs in all directions, but the stronger and more reliable stream of influence goes from the former side to the latter, which is Cockshott's position and exactly the viewpoint one should expect of an engineer or Marxist.

Don't make too complex models about what these people are thinking. People who comment on a lot of different issues and persons don't have much time to think about each, so the answer to the question what they were thinking is: likely not much.

not trans just hate the insufferable simple as

Read a science book, nigger

economics is a science


Indeed, but spurious one to the topic under discussion.

you just said a book, i'm half way through the general theory and you expect me to stop just because of your fuckup?

Your inability to grasp context is hardly my fault. Benevolent soul that I am, I'm happy to wait while you remove yourself from the discussion and complete both texts.

in the future, the government will be able to tell you who to have sex with

this is why trans people creep me out, they always try to guilt people into having sex with them in the name of political correctness.


as it should.

Plato is /ourguy/

ur right, most of them are probably harmless anime autists or more or less normal people who you wouldn't notice on the street, but you tend to get a distorted picture of trans people from media as either crazy sjws or sex pervs.

People say this, but no trans person I've met has tried guilting me into fucking them. God I wish a trans person would guilt me into fucking them.

You probably demand to be raped, too.




Butler is the holy book of sjw, you are not supposed to question it, just like the bible.

now, real talk, Butlerism has ascended to the level of state ideology precisely because it gives full carte blanche to neoliberal social engineers.The quest for 'equality' now goes beyond the subject. And 'equality' by necessity means total assimilation, everything is now an object of management, not only discrimination but also the formation of preferences, preschool toy choices. The neoliberal state is already in the process of cutting out the middleman and fully assuming the role once held by the family.

if it was a social democratic state doing the engineering this would unironically be a good thing to reduce the innate advantages of being born rich. (or spread them more widely.)
neoliberal talk of equality is like new Labour talk of equality. it's always prefaced in bizarre terms to avoid the impression that equality will ever mean hampering the progress of the already rich.
the idea that neoliberalism would want homogeneity is very bizarre given the artificial creation of divisions is a wonderful way of maximising the markets available for different products by altering them subtly, where the urge to buy the product comes from ingroup preference instead of "innate desire" (buy this shit game, show the SJWs who's boss!) something which on the whole doesn't work with a more homogeneous community. (See for example the declining threads of nationhood throughout the neoliberal era, even though by merging nations together - for example by creating 'European' identity - you have essentially the broadest base you can possibly build on, and once people identify solely with continental unions merging them becomes a thinkable task…)

Kudos for actually checking that, but consider the following: How books usually work and what people expect of them is that they start with an introduction of concepts that they then develop. (I admit that when I say books here, I mean non-fiction books, so you have an alibi for not believing that with respect to Butler's "work".) If these concepts are fundamentally bonkers to begin with, then of course a review written from a fundamentally critical perspective will cite again and again from the early pages. It rarely happens that people write non-fiction books with a big twist, developing first an argument for a position and then dismantling it in the last third or so, and when they do that, they usually give a warning in the introduction to avoid misunderstanding of their personal position. Butler doesn't give such a warning, and she shouldn't, because she doesn't need to, because she doesn't do that. She doesn't later shout PSYCHE and she does not take a big crap on what she said earlier. And as you yourself show, one quote is from page 182 (of a book that is less than 200 pages long when one doesn't count the notes and index).

Is that a coded message saying that traps will be gulaged? What's next, will he say that homos are a product of capitalism or bourgeois decadence or fascist or some other retarded shit?

Also, he's not "anti-idpol", his feminist bias is obvious.

Nu-communism won't be the same as primitive communism though, to assume so would mean we just repeat a civilizational cycle where we go communism > slavery > feudalism > capitalism > communism >slavery > feudalism ad nauseum

Yeah, it happens to me all the time, trannies coming up to me and telling me i'm a transphobe if I don't follow them home to have sex with them.

this is the true meaning of samsara

Social relations will be similar, in any case primitive communism is still communism you can't argue against that.

If we can see that gender does not exist in primitive communism, and that gender arises only through class society. Then how can you expect to say that a classless society will still contain gender?

By that logic there won't be any electricity either

Read Marx, stop embarrassing yourself

Substantiate marx without begging the question by referencing to marxist assumptions.

traps is kool

stupid post
there will be lightening and static electricity which is basically all you need to have power without bourgeois shit like video games

The problem with primitive communism isn't categorical, it's that it has no means to defend it self.

TERF-type ideology seems to be quite influential amongst older UK leftists who see trans people as agents of an anti feminist movement that's out to subvert society. it's a cultural thing. 3rd wave intersectional sjw feminism is a recent import in Europe, so 2nd wavers like Germaine Greer and Julie Bindel still wield considerable influence and are often the media's go to 'feminists'. To outsiders it may seem as absurd and arbitrary as 3096 genders performativity stuff, ie. an ideology with little connection to reality.

Which it is. These people are delusional.



Ya'll liberals made about nothing.

Ever notice how ever non-fascist society eg the colonies and the third world never allow homosexuality?

Remember how the Greeks did and they were slave owning men who kept women locked up in cages and raped little boys?

Remember that the Romans did but only in the aristocracy?

I wonder what the fucking connection is… Surely the brown people are too stupid to realize the morality of bourgeois predation?

Like Afica and China are religious or even have a non-trivial presence of semitic culture.

cockshott's argument is partially rooted in the fact that feminism–which has been a bourgeois political movement since the first "wave"–doesn't particularly care for trannies because they are taking away feminazis' special snowflake girl card
liberals are whining about him because he himself is using liberal arguments, you reap what you sow

wew m8

So every position on identity is idpol now? Then what's the point in the term itself, it surely loses meaning.

No, that's not how it works. The proletariat is the one class that wants to change the state of affairs. Since the proletariat is the revolutionary class their interests are the revolutionary interests. Explain why it is that the revolutionary class unanimously opposes LGBT ideology without being racist. You will very soon find that you can't.

Marx and Engels. Nice try, you sound like a trot with that level of revisionism.

anti-Idpol: casual racism and misogyny all good!

anti-Idpol: don't you dare say trannies aren't women, my self loathing means they're the only women' i can spank it to. please just let me have this

technically yes, opposition to identity politics is not opposition to the identities that idpol tards claim to care about

trannies are gross but even they contribute more to society than the typical feminazi

I'm proletariat and I don't oppose LGBT rights. Off yourself.

The average worker is against communism.

Then give up your pro trans idpol. Your only self consistent position is quietism.

No one gives a shit.

No one gives a shit.

You should really stop using that marx head.

Idealism is thinking that they actually do oppose communism when they are the revolutionary subject. For you communism is a checklist of policies that actualize the promises of liberalism, while in actuality communism is the real movement to abolish class society that expresses the real interests of the existing proletariat. Idealism is thinking your minority dogmas define an actually existing movement.

It is of no consequence what you deduce to be emancipation. It is of real consequence what the masses want and they don't want LGBT ideology.

Please at least try to hide your disdain for the proletariat.

you're nothing but a half-baked pseudo. Really, take off the marx head.

Also that's not what "idealism" means you tard. Jesus fuck go read some fucking philosophy basics.

Typical really.

You have yet to prove that the world proletariat is against communism. It is simply an assertion, the simply fact that you would even believe such a thing is the charge of your idealism.

I await a single shred of evidence to back up your anti-communism.

Based Cockshott

for all the butthurt head-in-the-sand attack helicopters ITT

How can you demand living wage, we just got new trans-toilets, you racist!

What an amazing argument, except hermaphrodite humans are infertile and you can add these variations together with trans people and you get all in all less than 1 % of the population. So: There are two stereotypical identities, and it works out for almost every human that they get assigned to one and which is unambiguous to strangers at first sight. Even in societies with long-standing traditions of accepting a third gender in-between or two or three additional such identities, people do not expect a baby to be one of these, these special genders are understood as a niche phenomenon.

It is true that there are a few differences when it comes to what sort of behaviour is associated with which gender in different places and different points in history. Cheerleader used to be a man's job, and a much longer time ago high-heels were typical male fashion. What of it? What about all the stuff that barely changes? And where do the gender stereotypes come from? Should we look at media representations to explain what causes people to believe what they believe about gender? And what causes these media representations, hmm? Aliens? Culture is not a neatly separated plane from the material world. If pregnancy didn't take as long as it does, if human women could just lay eggs after a week and couples could just take turns sitting on them, the relations between the sexes would be very different from what they are. And men have more muscle. The physical differences explain quite a bit about the different roles. That doesn't mean that everything about these stereotypes is wonderful, but if you want to change something about the lot in life people have due to their sex, ignoring the biological physical side is not an option. On average, men are much stronger than women, so where do we go from here: Post some snarky bullshit on social media comparing a very old man in a wheelchair with a female kickboxer to "prove" that women are just as strong? Or face the reality and realize that usually a woman needs a weapon or an ally to have a good chance when being attacked by just one unarmed male.

There's literally nothing wrong with TERFs. The more theory you have under your belt, the more likely you are to be one.
Queer theory will be looked back upon as the phrenology of its day.

You didn't even read the article.

The first gulp from the glass of communism will turn you into an trans advocate, but at the bottom of the glass TERF is waiting for you.

hope the marxhead itt is also the one who posts his pornography in /leftytrash/ lol

Lmao at his saying nothing

I see a Butlerite psychotic who is unable to grasp that there is a fundamental disagreement in ontology here. Read Sokal.

Radfem is objectively the most retarded sub-ideology under feminism.

gender isn't real

Gender is literally a spook.

For gender to be a spook, sex differences must produce no differences in psychology. If sex differences produce no difference in psychology, why are the prisons so overwhelmingly filled with men?

Then stops making shitty thread about "Is trap gay or not XD XD XD" on halfchan ever again.

Gender isn't about what your brain thinks though, it's purely a social category that is imposed on someone by being deemed a man, woman, or "other" (I don't think it's a stretch for people to gender someone as neither male or female in most cultures, few people are so thickheaded to believe that the universe is defined by masculinity and femininity as fundamental forces, but still calling yourself one of the 54 or whatever genders in queer theory does not make it a social reality, nor does a law allowing you to gender as mayonnaise in of itself make it a social reality.)

I don't think you can get away from separating the brain and the mind so easily. It's been observed quite well that testosterone makes people moar violent and aggressive, based on observations where T levels have been observed and when they have been altered, but it's a fallacy to say that T has innate violenceness or that estrogen has innate emotionalness. Explaining why hormones or chemicals have an effect on the human brain, and what they exactly do mechanistically, is a lot more complex, and not very well understood by current science. Nor would a biological marker be the sole cause, because there are social reasons why men are imprisoned more often than women. Also, being punished and imprisoned and committing a crime are all different things, just as there is a difference between observed behavior and what we can only guess is going on inside someone's head.

lmao brb oppressing mother gaia

based Diogenes

I hate fags and all LGBTQ shit, does cockshott too?

Cockshott is taking basically the radfem trans-exclusionary perspective on this so not really.

Radfem is shit but on the trans politics issue they are basically right. The only thing I would say they do wrong is that they don't get that medical mis-assignment does happen, but babies are almost never assigned male by accident by a competent doctor or anyone taking a good look.

I'd rather abolish sex altogether, and I don't see any inherent problem with men masquerading as women or vise versa. (I do question whether SRS is a good idea, and certainly see the ramp-up of gender clinics as a moneymaking scheme targeting confused people.) The good thing about traps is that they move humanity a little bit closer to total abolition of sex and destruction of the so-called feminine mystique. Still, I often see mtfs and know there's some other issue going on with them, and when it comes down to it I'd never consider one an actual woman if I knew. (If SRS advances to the point where mtfs can bear viable offspring I'd think a little differently, but if we're at that point then we're pretty close to being able to abolish sex anyway which is far better than enforcing gender horseshit.)

there needs to be a link at the top for
incase anyone has the
to scroll down on this kind of autismocancer soybean caffeinated.. filth!

3D is never cute tho.


NazBol Gang wins again!

what are you basing this on besides some anecdote about a trans kid in the news

Cockshott needs to stick to economics because his take is completely retarded

I wish "Cockshottism" didn't sound like "Cockshitting" so much


The only reason to oppose radfem is that they oppose trans people. For fucks sake so obvious the anti-feminist bias in this thread and the fact that people only support trans ideology as an attack on feminism.

t. does not understand gender critical theory

it is the only materialist conclusion