What does leftypol think about gender?

It might be a bit hard for him to think about class struggle since he IS a Zig Forumsyp with the daily shit idpol thread
Stop taking the bait you retards

I think trans people should be treated with respect like anyone else but other than that I don't really care one way or the other. It's just an uninteresting question to me and I don't think it's strategically smart for the left to focus so much of their energy on this when it concerns like 0.01% of the population.

She's comrade in IdPol and opponent in economics, much like how I consider the USSR to be a comrade in economics but an opponent in IdPol.

Really just trying to start a conversation here, I don't know what position you think I'm coming from.

Zig Forums has been on a raid lately, so people are on edge

i don't god damn care

I actually don't frequent imageboards, I'm kind of out in the woods right now with this

Oh man. Idpol is not something that should matter

I have nothing against trans rights

How can we turn lgbt people off from liberalism and rainbow capitalism?

Thank you for telling me that I shouldn't care about the fact that I could be beaten to death in the street for something I have zero control over

The thing is, we've had quite a lot of these threads lately, so you must understand why it kinda gets this reaction.
It's been either idpol, REDPILL ME ON LEFITSM or "UHM WHY DID SOVIETS DIE"
so yea, sorry if I came out a bit rude but it really get's boring when these things clog up the catalog.
All in all, like most already mentioned, it's not something that should matter
You acknowledge that certain groups are abused because of their identity, but at the end of the day, that's only the case because of their place in the class system.
Like many other struggles this can be traced back to the root of the problem which is the current system. And idpol distracts from the main problem.
(I apologize if my english turned to shit, since that's mostly the case when I try to write anything longer than a few sentences.)

Attached: 13659074_10153926912774401_4647898598160665446_n.jpg (480x402, 47.55K)

Fair enough about the threads, like I said in another comment I don't frequent image boards so my bad for not knowing what I was walking into. Not trying to GOTCHA anybody here at all.

I'm not going to wait for a fucking revolution to try and secure my basic rights as a human being. These are two fights that can be simultaneously fought.

You have control over not dressing like a fag in public.

Honestly, if you're not a TERF yet, you're doing something wrong.

You have control over not getting my thumbs in your fucking eyes, I swear to god

What is she then?

You will never get basic rights as a human being without a revolution. None of us will. Accept it.

That's why I'm ALSO supportive of a revolution, but I refuse to put all my eggs in one basket. A revolution might not even happen in my lifetime, so I'd be fucking stupid to depend entirely on it without any plan B's.

oh come on don't be such a baby, capital will soon assimilate you when you become a big enough of a force, liberal versions of your movement will be propped up, and whatever struggle is left behind will be over economic issues, this is why acting as though this struggle is revolutionary is not solid, it's a struggle, but i fail to see how it and communism should be combined besides just platitudes about how you will have all the rights you desire in communism

Then you are not my comrade.

Somewhere in the 40% range suicide attempt rate.

Shit's not healthy. Get them on some meds and let some psychiatrist tinker them back to normality.

To be honest I don't really think about it that much. Seems to be really arbitrary. I will fight you if you claim that sex is a social construct though.

Eh, that varies. You can be non gender essentialist but still feel more comfortable being addressed as a woman/man. Not many would try to claim that they feel as tho they are an opposite gender because of some quasi-spiritual essence that belongs to that gender. And regardless of all that, a lot of transfolk also happen to be socialist/anarchist.

No one does tho, they claim gender is, obviously a cock isn’t a social construct. But the mannerisms commonly associated with that are contestable.

It's liberal bourgeois nonsense meant to distract us from real problems.

It's also incredibly insulting to the women who have been fighting for decades to get sex-specific rights, which are being eroded because "men" can now participate in women's sports, get pregnant and "chestfeed" too.

Attached: 1490485726174-08.png (669x1087, 481.74K)

She does defintely have communist sympathies, I don’t think I’ve seen her for sure say what she even is, but she’s always focused on debunking things we hate so…

No it’s not, cis beckies have gotten far too much attention while leaving their minority and lgbt peers behind. Fuck em.

But would they make the distinction between saying they FEEL like the opposite gender and saying they ARE the opposite gender?

Nah I've definitely heard arguments (more recently) about sex being a social construct because of the existence of intersex people

Gender is a fuckload of ideology that covers a lot of different things. Everybody uses a different definition, making discussing "gender" per se impossible. Identity isn't something you should worry about past wanting to stop someone from dicking people over because of an identity they don't like.

Well they’re the same thing if one accepts that gender is a social construct.

From… where? I’ve literally not heard or seen this anywhere

Gee wonder why a low effort Zig Forumslack joke would get you banned here

Attached: bannedagain.PNG (746x578, 151.23K)

our BO is a tranny - how do you think we feel about the subject?

Attached: leftypol_bo.jpg (191x255, 15.3K)

Butthurt tranny spotted.

I don't experience dysphoria so maybe I just won't get this. But how can you experience dysphoria over not being something that is entirely fabricated?

I've heard the argument about sex from a girl I know recently. I know not super reputable but she also parrots everything else from liberal feminism. She said "male and female are just categories that have been useful but are too inexact now". I think I read a buzzfeed article recently that said something similar…

send him to the bog

the problem with that quote is that liberal black rights activists try to use it to justify their deeply triggering and problematic racism.

There's no evidence that person is the BO.

Well it’s the same for a lot of things for those who live in modern capitalist society. Sure I can recognize that things are ‘spooks’ as egoists would call them, but it doesn’t change the fact that all my friends and family believe in them or at least adhere to them.
As for that argument, it doesn’t seem to actually be an argument for sex itself not being real. Just questions the gender aspect of it(there being only two clearly defined things you can be, not there being two genitals you can be born with).

Why be a feminist at all assuming you're male? Serious question. I am not conservative in the slightest before you assume that's my angle here. TERFs just like liberal feminists don't really give a fuck about how gender norms negatively effect men since they don't want to give up the perks they gain from gynocentrism, so I am not sure why you would align yourself with people who don't give a fuck about you. If muh trannies concerns you that much you can criticize them on your own terms, though I personally don't have too much against them. I will admit that some trans activists/ideologists do reinforce gender essentialism but radfems aren't entirely free of this either for the reasons I stated above.

Is the BO actually trans even, I remember the first ban drama was actually over trans issues and not anti imperialism but you know people change and I haven't heard any statements from the BO since then about trannies

Attached: 1434220880470.png (690x720, 879.08K)

Nope, straight man

one day you're going to regret spending so many hours into making people think that pic is the BO

Yeah that’s the thing, it’s usually reactionary feminists and some liberal ones that engage in that gynocentricism and TERF shit. In fact TERFs frequently worked with conservatives. You’re a sorry excuse for a communist if you actually like TERFs, and prob just a crypto-fash.

This is true, they worked with fundamentalist evangelicals

why do you care

The problem is not with people in LGBTQ category, the problem is LGBTQ category is not a revolutionary category. The current structure of LGBT group is just telling them to stay comfort and loyal towards the mothergod so things can get a little better under capitalism. They can only be radicalized after they break out of this category.

ah yes very good
ah yes this is definitely being kicked out and not leaving voluntarily

What a stupid fucking post

Dude, it's a women shelter for fuck sake. It's normal to not feel comfortable if a men comes. There a cases were trans actually look like women, but there is also shit like CWC

I'd rather be in bed with liberals than right wing reactionaries like you TERFs are.

All sexual politics is bullshit.

Troll harder faggot.

stop retreating from the original headline, nobody was kicked out.

Not the guy who posted the headline nor I care about that. I'm just tired of trans not understanding how uncomfortable they make women around them

"trans rights" are peak liberal postmodernist metaphysics and a deeply reactionary concept. read some theory

and this is a regular issue for you? something you encounter in your daily life?

maybe
what???

got any more buzzwords?

That's certainly an interesting point and it really only raises questions for me.

1. Is there no difference between feeling like a woman (female sex) and feeling like the social idea of a woman? This seems hard to believe.
2. Does moralizing the acceptance of ontological propositions such as "trans women are women" not reify an oppressive immaterial essence?

Mostly I'm just curious about the ontological side of it and wanted to know what the real leftists thought about it

Which theory?

Fun thing is that I never met a fucking trans in my life (crossdressers and drag queens yes, but they are rare). In fact in becoming convinced that transexuals don't actually exist outside of America or even the internet.
There are more people allergic to penuts than trans in the world, somehow trans rights must be always discussed tho. It's a fucking joke.
Like those lgbt parade. You think there are loads of queer around but when you listen to them you find out that most of them are from outside your country.
It's a fucking joke and I don't usually care nor post in these threads, but then I read stuff like
and I remember why every two months I have to leave this board.

To elaborate because I realize my last post sounded kind of TERF-y, I also find studies of the brains of cis and trans men and women that suggest trans peoples' brains behave more similarly to their identified (opposite) sex compelling. That's why I'm asking about gender essentialism vs social constructionism. I have no dog in this fight

reinforcing the concept of gender roles and reifying it as material reality is reactionary.

flag related

marxist theory

I was wondering if you had anything specific in mind

This really sounds like a Jordan Petercuck fan larping as a lefty, what book ya tryna get us to read there bucko? Twelve steps to life?

Trans rights was supported in the DDR and is supported in Cuba today, I guess they were a bunch of idealists.
The reality is that subjective idealism is the norm in all liberalism, and as liberalism dominates in the Western trans movement, obviously they would depend on idealist explanations for the trans identity. Even "trans" itself is a basically wrong term, implying that people are just changing back and forth between sexes, which is the exact opposite of what most trans folk would argue.

The very, very obvious materialist explanation of sex dysphoria is that people's brains are of the opposite sex to their reproductive systems due to some mutation.
But idealist liberal dogma attempts to dispute, against all the evidence, that there are any differences between a male and female brain. As well, it disputes, again against all evidence, that unusual sexual orientations or expressions are the result of some mutation process.

a general grasp of marxism will let you understand why "queer theory" is anti-dialectical and metaphysical in nature.

no idea who that is, i don't bother with e-celeb writers. read marx, read vaziulin. read luria and vygotsky if you're interested in psychology

You need to re-read some Marx, Engels, and Lenin. Key points you need to understand:
- social constructs are a material reality
- consciousness is a material phenomenon
- societal roles for the sexes are built on the base of sexual reproduction roles
- sex differences exist, abundantly clear in the writings of Marx, Engels, and Lenin

Quick rundown on Contra's politics please

a spook. so transphobia is really fucking stupid tbh.

I don't care, I just wanna fuck Contra's ass.

Cuba is trying to defend itself against one of imperialism's biggest "x people are savages" brushes. I know DDR had some institutes studying homosexuality, but that does in no way equate to the modern idpol "trans rights" movements.

I happen to be a neurobiologist, so your layman musing sound even more retarded to me. Gender dysphoria obviously exists and no one is denying that. To go from there to supporting chemical castration and surgical mutilation for mentally ill people, denying sex as a biological reality and escaping to some abstract metaphysical plain of "gender" to justify it is a long long step.

my dad works at nintendo's neurobiology department and he said he's going to get you fired

I mean as you can see in:

I think I already get what you're saying? But I'll check out those writers

Based on this position what would the ideal "treatment" for dysphoria be?

So would a position such as "trans women are women" be cohesive given these axioms?

Well Possibly, obviously there are hormones, but if those can be artificially extracted and given to others to mirror their effects in natural women/men, then their existence of a natural thing becomes irrelevant. Also I’d say that again, as transfolk are varied on whether they attribute their condition to gender essentialism or psychological/cultural reasons, just because something isn’t essential or natural, doesn’t mean it also is their choice. Take like sexual fetishes for example, I’ll do a personal one. I’m into sexual domination and light sadism. I wasn’t born desiring to make my partners submissive to me or inflicting pain on other humans in general, but later in life, towards later puberty, it developed, for factors and a near untraceable link of intertwined inner fantasies. Yet even if I recognize this, it doesn’t stop my desire to choke a girl in bed. So if you moralize that in general, we shouldn’t persecute someone for something they can’t help when they’re not causing damage to others, then from that one can reject gender essentialism and still support trans rights and recognize them by what they identify as(at least to their face). Make sense?

Hey funny, I happen to be the top chairman of the 18th international!

substructure shapes superstructure. a revolutionary marxist aims to change the substructure. The whole "lgbt rights" trend is neoliberal in nature, undialectical and revolves around issues that stem from the current subculture and will change after the revolution.

That it is

No, they are shaped by the current conditions and mode of production, read "the origin of the family, private property, and the state. Perpetuating current sex roles is reactionary by definition in any case.

sex differences rooting in biological reality don't equate to gender roles

I really am a neurobiologist though, electrophysiologist to be precise

I haven't seen transpeople be the ones reinforcing gender roles. Is this because they wear skirts? Men can and have worn skirts before. I partially agree with you here, in that as a gender abolitionist i'm divided on the subject of transgender. But I think that the negative reaction to trans people is what ends up doing the most harm
etc

Well sure I absolutely get being kind to trans people and advocating for their rights but It seems that denying the ontological propositions that usually go with that puts you in the category of "transphobic." The whole idea of recognizing them by what they identify as ONLY to their face is dishonest and I'm not sure what good that ultimately does other than delay this kind of conversation

Why are you a gender abolitionist?

Faggotry is way overblown and made into more than what it is. It's pretty sick because when you see enough, you realize that homosexual tendencies are still tracked, and for all intents and purposes it's still considered a disease, which was what the gay movement was originally so concerned about (rightly, because they didn't like being imprisoned or institutionalized for their behavior, which is reasonable enough).

I think a lot of the attitude towards faggotry, and sexual mores in liberal society in general, are a subconscious reaction to things people know to be wrong with the world. They know their leaders rape whoever they like with impunity and that there's nothing they can do about it. They know that due to physical factors beyond anyone's control, the sexual behavior of people necessarily adapts and more people are dropping out because sexual relations are too problematic for too little gain, and it's damn near impossible to fathom raising a family in the present environment - even moreso if you're poor as fuck and loaded with unpayable debt. They often know that their own sexual lives are unsatisfactory and that their partners cheat on them simply because that's the way things go in modern culture. They know that the old religions were always corrupt and are getting moreso by the day, that their pastors or priests or whatever are part of the same structure of power that rapes whoever they like (including children) with impunity. The rest of the world outside of sexuality is getting more and more unlivable. It's too much of a leap to really look at this honestly, so people get worked up over faggotry and issues that tug at them emotionally and psychologically. Some people become overly obsessed with these issues because it's too painful to look at the whole picture, or because they get caught in ideology and the hamster wheel keeps spinning.

Add to that the vampire castle effect in the left, and how sexpol is used for virtue signaling, and you get these gross distortions and nearly-religious views of sexuality, and we're supposed to believe silly things like there is no biological sex or that grown men can't control themselves and need their fetishes catered to. It becomes impossible to have an honest conversation about sexualism, which makes it a psychological hot button to manipulate the left, and allows the right to steamroll conversation by appealing to bullshit fundamentalism. It doesn't help that the retarded ideology of eugenics keeps informing every fucking thing for the past century, and really I'd look at that ideology to understand how and why the narrative has been shaped in this way, because they're running the tables and getting everything they want.

Simply the idea that behaving or dressing in x stereotypical way makes you the opposite sex reifies the perception that x way of behaving is inherently related to that sex. Claiming that this is a biological reality (i am a woman trapped in man's body tier logic) therefor reifies those behaviors as inherent as well. I am not blaming trans people btw, I understand the feeling they have of belonging to the opposite sex is extremely strong and real for most of them, what I am against is the whole movement built around this and the way certain industries profit by indulging these pathological obsessions.

Bullshit, Cuba has been far ahead of the USA in LGBT rights since the 80s, back before homo-imperialist propaganda become popular. Obviously the same for the DDR. Both gave/give free sexual transition treatment.

Weird how you aren't refuting it then. If, e.g., trans women do not have female brains, then why do they respond positively to estrogen?

The surgery is usually unneeded/unwanted. Hormone treatment and changing presentation treat dysphoria and make it go away. Just shrieking about "mental illness" doesn't work, if it was just another mental illness then why do hormones treat it, rather than psychiatric drugs? None of this requires denying the existence of sex.
As I have already explained, liberal idealism is the dominant mode of analysis in most things, trans folk included. This doesn't absolve you as a dialectical materialist of having to correctly apply diamat instead of just waving everything away and jumping to reactionary conclusions.

Hormones, as little surgery as possible/needed, presentation, and social acceptance. This is literally all that's needed to treat most of it.

Yes, saying trans women are women doesn't contradict diamat at all. The only thing in question is the origin of dysphoria. Presently we have plenty to indicate that trans women really are women, and the main indication otherwise is their reproductive system. Until the "true secret" of dysphoria is revealed, and there is actually a proven treatment other than transition, it is plain idealism to say that they can't actually have female brains.

Yeah obviously liberals don’t talk about it for the most part, but we can, doesn’t mean we should have to resort to fascist knee jerk “FUCKING FAGGOTS GRRR”, like a lotta dumbasses here. Also I meant that at the bare minimum, don’t go harassing transfolk or stubborn refuse to address them by what they want just to make a point, because its a volatile reactionary way of trying to engage the topic.

So is the only thing needed to be female a female brain? This is the ontological question.

This is totally tangential to what I said. As well, the superstructure does exert influence on the base.

These are not contradictory statements. Sex roles are built on the entire material base in society, of which reproductive systems are one of the major determining components. If women just laid eggs and children could fend for themselves, of course it would have resulted in vastly different sex roles even in corresponding modes of production such as feudalism.

No it isn't, the existence of sex roles or "gender" will never go away, it will only continue to change– for the better in socialism and communism.

Of course biology influences sex roles– primarily through the interaction of the reproductive system and the mode of production, and secondarily (in minor ways, not significant in socialism or even much of advanced capitalism) in natural mental biases on average.

isn't this just a terrible reading of it.
let's say that inherently both sexes are blank slates who'd happily wear anything, but society expects all men to wear hats.
a trans-man would therefore have to wear a hat to conform with social expectations of manliness, not because wearing a hat is inherently manly but because not wearing one would prevent them from meeting the expectations of manly behaviour, something they've already got reason to worry about since failure to wear a hat would make it look like they weren't even trying to live as a man.

now in a liberal personal morality sense, yes, by wearing hats all men help to reinforce the idea that men wear hats, but equally for each individual man, transman or otherwise, wearing a hat is a social expectation. Perhaps in Australia, women wear the hats, and there the mark of a transman is refusal to don headwear.

Absolutely, but I think the reason for this is because they are also part of a society that percieves X way of behaving is inherently related to that sex. And as we all know as marxists here, just because you know a belief is false doesn't let you escape from it. As much as I don't want any gender stereotypes, I can't guarantee that if I were to be trans I wouldn't perpetuate the stereotype if it made me feel more accepted by society.

Again agree, but it also the current discourse is moving away from the "man trapped in a womans body" to a more general fluidity. Which is what makes me think that maybe this is what we have to go through to realize the end of gender as a whole. When anyone can change from one day to the next their gender, gender becomes meaningless.

As far as I know, transitioning is the most successful form of treatment. Although there were some rumors of some new antidepressant that could relieve dysphoria but i dont remember where i saw it.