Last Post on the Forum

[Xonas Pitfall]

1 hour ago, Basman said:

You just have an utopian bias. Your in an adversial relationship with reality fundamentally. That's the crux of the issue. The pushback is against bad leftist ideas of what men and women are because they are not true.

Fundamentally you don't accept what women and survival actually are. Women survival is falling in love with your rapist and raising their kids, stockholm syndrome style. That's how a lot of women survived historically. Leftists see that and want to deny its even there. 

This is exactly what I mean. Why are you bringing this up? Has any of this even been relevant to the conversation?

This is exactly what I was pointing out: people will share some "truthful things" and then suddenly start talking about much more absurd conclusions that I don't even know how to respond to. Where has any of this been discussed? Who even mentioned the left and the reality they are trying to "deny"?

I could also say that children were enslaved in dark times, and that’s a "dark truth/reality" of human nature and the faith children are destined to experience and be. Hence, that's why I believe children should essentially be enslaved, but that's quite an absurd claim.

[Xonas Pitfall]

16 minutes ago, Human Mint said:

And also a lot of good points being made about gender realities. That's why I say it is important to care for the big picture, because you'll see the good points and avoid the obvious stereotyping. Caring for the big picture is like caring about exercising versus not and eating KFC. One is healthy for your sensemaking and the other is detrimental.

Also, where elsewere do you discuss these topics with such liberty? Be honest, probably not much and once in a while. Here you have the liberty to question a lot, and read a dozen different pov at the same time. Although granted that not every pov is going to be a diamond.

Yes, I agree with you here. Just to clarify, I didn't mean to come off as if the entire forum is horrible. Not at all. I'm simply pushing back against some of the things being said. I agree that, in all aspects of life, we should try to take the good, leave the bad, and learn from the latter where we can. So, no disagreement there. The forum has some genuinely great topics that I've learned from, and I don't mean to badmouth it. There are plenty of things I appreciate about it, and I've learned a lot from being here.

Whether someone chooses to leave the forum or come back is, of course, entirely up to them 

[Ulax]

9 minutes ago, Xonas Pitfall said:

This is exactly what I mean. Why are you bringing this up? Has any of this even been relevant to the conversation?

This is exactly what I was pointing out: people will share some "truthful things" and then suddenly start talking about much more absurd conclusions that I don't even know how to respond to. Where has any of this been discussed? Who even mentioned the left and the reality they are trying to "deny"?

I could also say that children were enslaved in dark times, and that’s a "dark truth/reality" of human nature and the faith children are destined to experience and be. Hence, that's why I believe children should essentially be enslaved, but that's quite an absurd claim.

Its clearly relevant

[Xonas Pitfall]

2 minutes ago, Ulax said:

Its clearly relevant

In what manner, exactly? I'd need an actual claim, a clear argument, and the evidence used.

No one here was talking about leftism or a supposed dark truth that people don't want to accept. Nor was anyone denying the reality that people have been raped and abused.

I'm not sure what point they're trying to make.

The "dark" reality of survival is that, depending on when and where you were born, you could have been killed, tortured, raped, sexually exploited, or trafficked, blackmailed, man, woman, child, elder, many things.

But I'm not sure what specific claim is being made here, or why any of this is relevant to the discussion. What exactly are they trying to argue, and how does it relate to what's actually being discussed?

[Ulax]

1 minute ago, Xonas Pitfall said:

In what manner, exactly? I'd need an actual claim, a clear argument, and the evidence used.

No one here was talking about leftism or a supposed dark truth that people don't want to accept. Nor was anyone denying the reality that people have been raped and abused.

I'm not sure what point they're trying to make.

The "dark" reality of survival is that, depending on when and where you were born, you could have been killed, tortured, raped, sexually exploited, or trafficked, blackmailed, man, woman, child, elder, many things.

But I'm not sure what specific claim is being made here, or why any of this is relevant to the discussion. What exactly are they trying to argue, and how does it relate to what's actually being discussed?

They're pointing out a reason why they believe others are mistaken about the past

[Xonas Pitfall]

1 minute ago, Ulax said:

They're pointing out a reason why they believe others are mistaken about the past

If their claim is that some groups of people have difficulty acknowledging the survival challenges people faced in the past, then sure, I can accept that. I'm sure some people do.

But how does any of that relate to the discussion we were having, or explain why I supposedly have a "utopian view"? And who else on this forum are they referring to?

I have no issue acknowledging that life was difficult in the past. If anything, one of my arguments was precisely that modern ideas of femininity wouldn't necessarily hold up in those historical conditions. Much of what we consider femininity today is a relatively modern conception. By today's standards, many people throughout history would probably be considered quite masculine, regardless of their sex.

So I'm genuinely not sure what point they're trying to make here, or how it connects to anything I said.

[aurum]

1 hour ago, Talinn said:

I mean, what are we doing here, we can't aspire to any other notion of femininity? You're chewing on metal and telling us all it's the only way to eat 

I 100% think women should. Obviously we don’t want to just go back to the old.

But what exactly is the progressive vision for masculinity and femininity? Essentially just to balance yourself, free yourself from traditional roles and functionally make relationships more gender neutral.

I fail to see this is as a long-term, inspiring vision for masc / fem dynamics. Fundamentally, it’s a reduction in polarity rather than an embrace of it. I see it more as a developmental stepping stone.

[Xonas Pitfall]

Just now, aurum said:

I 100% think women should. Obviously we don’t want to just go back to the old.

But what exactly is the progressive vision for masculinity and femininity? Essentially just to balance yourself, free yourself from traditional roles and functionally make relationships more gender neutral.

I fail to see this is as a long-term, inspiring vision for masc / fem dynamics. Fundamentally, it’s a reduction in polarity rather than an embrace of it. I see it more as a developmental stepping stone.

I don't really see why this has to be so black and white.

I think much of the conversation is about redefining some of the more outdated notions and assumptions we've taken for granted as objective truths.

To give a concrete example, people often hold rigid beliefs such as "Women are less logical and more emotional."

This is precisely the kind of assumption that can be deconstructed because it simply doesn't hold up as a general rule. We have plenty of examples of men becoming ideologically driven by online culture, politics, and regressive belief systems, displaying considerable emotionality.

The reality is much more nuanced and depends on the individual. There are intelligent and unintelligent people, people who are more self-aware and people who are less self-aware, more emotionally driven and less emotionally driven, impulsive or calculating, regardless of sex.

These distinctions matter because if people take regressive beliefs like "women are less logical and more emotionally uncontrolled" at face value, they risk developing biases that lead them to underestimate women and treat them worse.

At the same time, we can acknowledge that there are average differences in how masculine and feminine emotional expression tends to manifest. We don't have to deny those to challenge rigid stereotypes.

Pointing out contradictions in certain gender stereotypes doesn't automatically mean arguing that men and women are entirely interchangeable or that there are no meaningful differences in polarity between them.