Sorry, this is kind of messing with me as well. What I got from the Origin of the Family is that such division is less gendered and more sex based due to the female sexes role in reproduction.
Unpopular opinions thread
Charles Harris
Sebastian Thompson
I was shitposting late at night and didn't put it well in that post, sure. But my support for LGBT rights is simple, because I opportunistically like supporting "gender confusion" and promoting transitioning for people to hop between these social categories precisely because they're becoming so flexible in advanced countries. Does this negate the whole superstructure of gender relations? Nope, but I see no reason why a transgirl shouldn't occupy the social position of "being a female" if she wants to, since it is divorced from biological sex in the first place and doesn't matter. Maybe it's not a "principled" communist position but being a bislut myself I'd make use of liberal bad politics when I can tbh.
Why do you personally have a problem with trans people being acknowledged? I think the whole "durr you're still a male it doesn't matter what you behave like" a retarded reactionary view.
Oliver Hall
this buzzword is getting on my nerves
Colton Gray
Climate Change and Environmental direct action should be largely the single sole focus on the left for the next decade with the latest IPCC report. Everything else is literally a distraction with the fate of mankind basically being given a fucking 12 year time limit.
Eli Torres
fuuuuuuck
Chase Cruz
...
Chase Peterson
Shut the fuck up nerd.
Elijah Russell
You have to take over the means of production, to actually
be able to do the things necessary. Capitalism has reached an impasse, solving the problems means overthrowing capitalism, everything else is a distraction.
Colton Gonzalez
This, so much. Every time I go on half/pol/, every other thread with any decent amount of responses is a bait thread, and most of what gets posted is pointless name-calling and autistic screeching. There's no real discussion to be had, outside of maybe the Christfag and LARPagan threads, and even then…
James Harris
I just have a problem with the idea of gender in the first place and thus have trouble with the idea of transgenderism. A reactionary on the other hand would believe in strict gender roles which align with sex and that being a certain sex means you should follow a certain role, otherwise you would be upseting the "natural order" of things.
To clarify, I have trouble with the idea of transgenderism because it assumes that gender is a real yet metaphysical thing which you can "identify" with and is still very attached to the idea of what a man and woman "should" be like. It assumes that there are these attitudes of what makes a man or woman and that having alignment with such attitudes makes one of the male or female gender. For example, you are a man who identifies with the female "gender". But what exactly are you identifiying with? Are you identifying with societies view of what a female is like with long hair, a feminine figure, maybe a feminine voice? Are you identifying with your own view of what a female is and deciding that you fit such things so then you are female? What is the female "gender"? It's such a nebulous concept that you could get a large variety of answers with none of them having any relation to each other. A person could decide they like dresses and acting "girly" and decide that this fits what a female is thusly they are the female gender, and yet another could like the exact same things and come to no such conclusion. Is the first person wrong or is the second person just confused or ignorant about themselves being transgender or not? Why only two genders, why not four or six or two hundred or three thousand? Why not a billion genders for every single person? They whole idea of gender is so ridiculous that it can only ever end with an infinite amount of nebulous and nonsensical archetypes. Either gender doesn't exist, or there are an infinite amount of archetypal genders which exist outside of us "undiscovered", at which point it would be safer to throw the whole thing out as it would be simpler to say people have attitudes. One needs only to ask someone "What makes a female or male gender?" or "What makes you the male or female gender?" to find how whimsically idealist and subjective the whole concept is. I have no problem with a person dressing or acting as "feminine" or "masculine" as they want, but I do have a problem with the idea that being either makes one of a certain gender.