Category Archives: Links

Instead of buying into the transgender narrative, we need to abolish gender.

Samantha Rea discusses how unconscionable it is for gender to be enforced on children, leading them to accept the transgender narrative and dangerous, untested surgeries. What we need is to abolish gender.

There is no inherent reason why lipstick is for girls – if a boy wants to wear lipstick, he’s still boy: he doesn’t need his gender reassigned. There’s no innate reason for dresses to be deemed girls’ clothing – that’s just an (outdated) idea in our society, a cultural construction. If a boy wants to wear a dress, it doesn’t mean he needs his gender reassigned.

As a Madonna fan, in my own tween years, I’m pretty sure Madonna mentioned wanting to wee standing up. That doesn’t mean she should have been born a man and nor is it a sign she needs surgery to reassign her gender. If Catch wanted to wee standing up, then why not allow him to do that as a girl? Trickier feats have been accomplished.

At the end of the programme, Theroux says the choice to transition is, “a chance to exercise the most fundamental right we have – the right to be ourselves.” But the children are already being themselves – and we need to accept them as they are.

Other countries do offer foreign aid to the US. They just get refused.

Wait, you guys DON’T KNOW that we offer help to the US when you have disasters???????

Shit, down here in Brazil we not only offered to send tracking units and doctors to help in 9/11 but we wanted to send a whole lot of donations to help with Katrina (we have experience with floods down here so we knew what kind of medicine to send to prevent outbreaks).

We alone had like 2 army airplanes full of medicine and non-perishables like baby formula, diapers, bottled water, mosquito nets and other stuff that’s needed to fight opportunistic diseases that hit flooded areas, enough to assist a good few thousand people at least, ready to go the day after it hit, but your government refused the donations.

The same thing happened to the Canadians and Europeans who offered help, the US embassies around the world told us all to give money to Red Cross.

And so we did, we all gave hundreds of millions of dollars to them, and then this happened:

Red Cross scandals tarnish relief efforts

‘Breathtaking’ Waste and Fraud in Hurricane Aid

So please, don’t you go spreading misinformation and prejudice against the rest of the world, WE DID OFFER HELP AND ORGANIZED IT EVEN FASTER THAN BUSH DID, BUT Y’ALL REFUSED IT…

It happens, and has happened, far more than anyone talks about. It is not just now, but has happened throughout our history. I don’t have time for an in-depth google right now, and you’ll need to be persistent because all the usual ways of searching will make the US look like the benefactor every time. Here’s a start though.

http://listverse.com/2015/01/14/10-surprising-stories-of-the-united-states-receiving-foreign-aid/

An antinatalist song: Storken Kommer, by Mistro.

Lyrics translated:

welcome to what I call hell on earth
Forced into life out of the vagina on your mother
was not old boy until I saw that the battle was lost
and I prayed to everything holy that no more were created

naive in a scene played behind a facade
before I knew reality would come to my hurt
was just a kid, so it was no saying what
world is rubbish, calling a spade a spade

every second of every life is like a death sentence
parasites on the bones that we are born
give your sick gene to your offspring
For my part, I hope God gives us a flood

faked a smile as long as I can cope
fuck it, no longer afraid to say what
throughout our species is that accident considered
and our whole earth I will forever despise

HOOK
—–
stork comes, shoot it down
force it back, get it far away
we have enough as it is, we do not need to multiply
Stop it now so nobody suffers more

stork comes, shoot it down
force it back, get it far away
we have enough as it is, we do not need to multiply
misery as far as the eye sees
—–

VERSE 2
—–
we all die, so giving birth is to kill
your lack of wisdom makes you not see it
Prices you see fit if opting out to procreate
and you understand the burden it means to exist

the world will probably never be a happy place
the hope was extinguished like a candle under glass
see chaos in our future, a society in fire
I give it a short time before my fucking fortune becomes true

so why be responsible for that someone will suffer
why throw someone in the mill that I call life
to a place of evil in the broad and wide
I would guess that your ego is subject

it is my view on it that someone gets to
the injustice that affects your children it’s your own fault
for you were aware of it here before
so the blood is on your hands if your child dies

Is economics really a science?

The blog Real Clear Markets doesn’t think so.

The most authoritative macroeconomic theories are those advanced by Nobel Prize Winners in Economic Science, to use the official title of the prize. The Economics Nobel Prize is awarded at the same time as the Nobel Prize in Physics, Chemistry, and Medicine, the three hard sciences. The implication is that macroeconomics has the same predictive power as the theories of physics, chemistry, and molecular biology. Indeed, we should judge the validity of macroeconomic theories in the same way we judge the theories of the hard sciences. If anything, we should demand even more rigor and reliability from macroeconomics, because it is far more important than any hard science. The failure of macroeconomic actions in the Great Depression led to World War II, in which many millions were killed, to say nothing of the vast misery caused by the Depression itself.

Years ago, I had a dispute on the comparative rigor of astronomy and macroeconomics with Harvard economist H. Gregory Mankiw, who from 2003 to 2005 was Chair of President Bush’s Council of Economic Advisors. Mankiw admitted that the predictive power of modern macroeconomic theory was abysmal. But he argued that astronomy was no better in the late sixteenth century, when astronomers were debating whether it was Ptolemy or Copernicus who was correct.

Are more men raped than women?

This inane claim comes from the Gamergate contingent. But Finally Feminism puts that claim to rest.

Looking at the population inside prisons and jails does decrease the overall difference between female and male sexual assault victimization rates. That’s because the male population of prisons and jails is much higher than the female population and because sexual assault is much more common in those institutional settings than in the general population.

But it doesn’t flip the percentages. The Daily Mail article is wrong: Self-reported rates of sexual assault are still considerably higher for women than for men.

The point of this post? It’s always good to know what the data actually tells us. With the general warning that we should be careful about comparing disparate data sets, collected in different ways, it’s pretty safe to believe that more women than men are raped in the United States.

Americans are not “polarized.”

The blog Occasional News and Commentary looked at a survey which shows that most Americans agree that capitalism has gone too far. This is not an issue of polarization but of people v the power elite.

“Fluid sexuality” for women, “straight sexuality” for men.

I’m not sure how to summarize this entry by Purplesagefem, because it’s about a lot of things, like the belief in women having a “fluid sexuality,” homophobia, men who have gay sex but want to stay “masculine.” Lots of good connections here. I will add that bisexuality is also part of this phenomenon: I think there’s a lot of people who would admit they are bisexuals if they weren’t so mired in homophobia and patriarchy (and I speak from personal experience on that one).

Although conservatives love to hate gay sex, it’s not really the sex act that pisses them off, it’s the non-conformity to the gender roles that uphold patriarchy.

If two feminine women kiss each other for men’s entertainment, their behavior will be almost universally approved of by men because they are, in fact, fulfilling their role as sex object for the male gaze. What the establishment really hates is unfeminine women who refuse their role in patriarchy by looking androgynous or masculine and opting not to become a wife and mother and not being sexually available or sexually appealing to men. In addition, same-sex behavior between women is viewed as less serious a problem that the same behaviors between men because there’s no penis involved, and there is no consensus that this can even be defined as sex, since the patriarchy defines sex as when a man puts his penis into a thing. Men absolutely love patriarchy-compliant women who have sex with other patriarchy-compliant women, as evidenced by men’s love for threesomes and “lesbian” porn. (And for an excellent critique of so-called “lesbian” porn, see this.) But if a lesbian wears comfortable clothes and wants to be treated as a full human being and sets boundaries that exclude men, then she’ll be punished severely.

“Pornography as a mirror shows us how men see women.”

This blog entry has a long quote from Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity, by Robert Jensen. I think it’s worth reading. A passage:

I look at my friends and tell them: “You realize what I just described is relatively tame. There are things far more brutal and humiliating than that, you know.”

We sit quietly, until one of them says, “That wasn’t fair.”

I know that it wasn’t fair. What I had told them was true, and they had asked me to tell them. But it wasn’t fair to push it. If I were them, if I were a woman, I wouldn’t want to know that. Life is difficult enough without knowing things like that, without having to face that one lives in a society in which no matter who you are – as an individual, as a person with hopes and dreams, with strengths and weaknesses – you are something to be fucked and laughed at and left on the side of the road by men. Because you are a woman.

“I’m sorry,” I said. “But you asked.”

In a society in which so many men are watching so much pornography, this is why we can’t bear to see it for what it is: Pornography forces women to face up to how men see them. And pornography forces men to face up to what we have become. The result is that no one wants to talk about what is in the mirror. Although few admit it, lots of people are afraid of pornography. The liberal/libertarian supporters who celebrate pornography are afraid to look honestly at what it says about our culture. The conservative opponents are afraid that pornography undermines their attempts to keep sex boxed into narrow categories.