Capitalism makes abundance problematic.
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 263
- Joined
- 1 yr. ago
- Posts
- 0
- Comments
- 263
- Joined
- 1 yr. ago
Not just one of the worst but arguably the worst.
One day Trump wont be president but his supporters will continue to be around after him. They'll continue to make up 31% of the voter eligible population.
Like, I agree with the tit for tat. But don't let your cat outside.
Trans people seem to have a knack for hating men huh.
I'm not trans. I'm a cis male. (edit: well, mostly. TBH on a higher rational level I might as well be genderless, I'm a cis male by convenience)
Go on, try it there’ll be no tolerance for people who advocate for this levels of evil
Evil? I'm suggesting such not to punish males. Its to minimize loneliness and sadness in the world.
Trans man here to say that nobody needs to give any extra cred to MRA bullshit just because a trans person is saying it. I have also been through the full dude experience including profound loneliness. I likewise thought I was prepared but wasn’t. Its hard. I miss how things were before too.
I don't think the author was giving credit to MRA bullshit. MRA's seem to often hate women and I don't think the article implies any hatred, if anything he still tries to essentially that men are the ones that need to put in the effort to push past toxic masculinity. Describing it as a problem to be fixed at the individual level rather than at systematic level. Saying "If I could advise men, it would be first to look inward. "
I also know that in general, in 2025, all people are more isolated than 20 years ago. Furthermore, it is a known phenomena for a longtime that friendships are more difficult to cultivate as an adult. I doubt how different things would have turned out for me had I not transitioned.
Suicide rates differ for a reason. It is far more painful to be a lonely man than a lonely woman. Men are very quick to self loathing.
I also know that the “distance” I now experience from women is a direct result of 20,000 years of patriarchal violence. Of course women relate to me as a potential threat; I am one. And without the presumed vulnerability I possessed as a woman, men relate accordingly. Of course.
We should have fewer male babies. It seems like it'd reduce the amount of fear and alienation in society. (I'm saying this in good faith, I'm serious.)
At some point, as a trans guy, you need to stop leaning on your experience “as a former woman” to compare your life to, especially in the negative. Being 22 is not the same as 42 no matter what your gender presentation at any point. Many people experience nostalgia for their youth.
Based on my own reading/discourse, trans women usually seem to feel very little youth nostalgia in comparison. They might complain that they're older now, but that's usually more of a melancholy over "what could have been" had they been AFAB.
Just as when cis guys make these complaints, I question this person’s definition of “you dont get to”. In fact the article describes him making a career out of doing so. Even specific instances of “going viral”, and the affirmative feedback he received. It seems that you do get to.
I'm pretty sure he was talking about social pressures. Sure, he got to because he was very motivated to push against that societal expectation, that doesn't really mean that average men can get away with that unless they dedicate their whole career/life to it.
Which leads to pointing out that the whole thing is an advertisment for the author who is “a Professional Corporate Speaker and Stress Management Coach”.
I think calling it an advertisement is a stretch based only on that, but even if it was that doesn't invalidate the point being made.
And it has anti-trans hate material suggested items in the middle of it:
I think that's just because those are controversial yet related articles on Newsweek so their algorithm picked them. But yeah, those do seem to be especially trashy and obvious anti-trans articles. Its kind of gross that they ever ran on Newsweek to be honest...
Transitioning to a point of passing in my understanding (mtf or ftm) comes with pros and cons.
I often think about this article as well when it comes to trans men's negative experiences once accepted as men: https://www.newsweek.com/trans-man-broken-men-1817169
Unless... it keeps dropping...
This blog isn't written by a bot right? Its literally a blog called "post human posting"...
If Valve was planning on releasing hardware soon they're going to postpone given the tariff threat.
The majority of the voting population answers this question based on name recognition alone.
Yeah I read the article, that headline is almost misleading in its support for Harris if anything. AOC has the best net
NOT complain and whine that everything isn’t handed to us on a platter.
She’s in second place and we have 3 years to move her into first, that sounds worth a shot to me. But go ahead and throw your hands up in the air, tuck your tail, and say there’s nothing we can do.
I shouldn't have to educate grown adults on shit this important they ought to desire to learn on their own. They should know who the hell AOC is JFC. So I'm still disgusted, just significantly less so. And like, I'll inevitably try to promote AOC, but I don't owe this country shit. I want to leave, I only can't thus far due to money/resources.
I jumped the gun, its still bad but AOC has the best net favorability out of them all. Harris has the most support by sheer name recognition. Its bad that people don't know who AOC is though.
The important takeaway is that AOC, and presumably progressivism more generally, is getting more popular.
Embarrassing (for me)... upon actually reading the article, the headline is almost misleading. AOC has the highest net favorability of them all, and Harris is only past her due to name recognition.
I'm baffled how there is that many people unaware of AOC though.
Second place to Harris??? Holy fuck we deserve our fate.
Edit: upon reading the article (I know...) AOC has the best net favorability. So a little more hopium there.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Originally I never wanted kids because it sounded like it'd get in the way of all the other stuff I want to do in life.
Now I don't because I see it as unethical.
I specifically remember the woman that complained that "female" was dehumanizing so that mostly tracks, but the issue with that perception is that people purchase male animals for breeding and people (men or women) who heard me using the same terminology never complained about the dehumanization of calling them males. I get that the social dynamics here are complicated of course. I suppose men typically are socialized to not care about being dehumanized or even perceive dehumanization as much. The asymmetry irks me.
I'll repeat that I don't use the terminology anymore for the sake of politeness but my thoughts remain nuanced on the matter. Where some see dehumanization, I see on the opposite end a coping mechanism in the form of a base level of romanticization. Implying we humans are free of our animal instincts or that we ought to be ashamed of the best aspects (IMO) of our animal nature.
Men who use the term "female" as a means to purposefully dehumanize are of course not only assholes but also annoying to me in the same way just inverted: I dislike debasing things that are neutral/positive for the sense of elitism or superiority. Or making something innocent and ordinary out to be crude and gross. I've never really related that well to men telling sex jokes for instance (and I've had some male friends who did that constantly and it annoyed me but I mostly just rolled my eyes at it).
I don't like crudeness at the same level as romanticization because that crude attitude also implies a sacredness that they're purposefully defiling. I don't like the implication of existing sacredness OR the desire to get under people's skin about it since that just contributes to the sense of taboo around sexuality and gender.
You need some G.I. Joe sized action figures to go with.
But humans are an animal.
Some of these men call other men "males" as well. I used to call both genders by such "technical" terminology because I did not think it was offensive until a woman complained in a forum I frequented like 15 years ago.
TBH I feel annoyed that I can't use those terms because I know some guys use the term to intentionally dehumanize specifically women and I am not that sort of guy. But also I really tend to embrace neutral/technical/clinical language a lot because of a general disdain for romantic thinking and language.
Things are not more than what they are.
Impeachment on its own I can't bring myself to care about. It needs to come with "and removal" for it to matter.
And even then that means president Vance. It would still matter because Vance is a weaker villain lacking the full undying support of the MAGA death cult but shit would still suck, just suck in a way where there would be more hope.