- Dołączono
- 29 Sty 2021
I think this starts getting into issues of how virtue singling kind of shit just doesn't make sense once you get into the brass tacks of it.I've been trying to wrap my head around this for a few minutes. Especially his claim in the center about bigotry if you proclaim someone unattractive. There are so many unspoken assumptions doing most of the heavy lifting here like especially whether or not you can consider someone outside of their sexual attractiveness. If you're not a coomer who can view people as people outside of their sexual attractiveness to you then it starts to blur.
To make an example and not show my hand about my specific tastes, I'll take someone off the first news story I click on. I can understand why certain people are attracted to Amy Comey Barrett (and I wouldn't describe her as ugly or anything like that) yet I'm not sexually attracted to her. His claim is basically that I'm now being bigoted, namely misogynistic, towards one of the most powerful women in the world because I publicly said I don't have sexual thoughts about her. It also seems to undermine his point if I were to claim that I could hypothetically find a trans person attractive, just that I have yet to find one. His central claim seems to be that if you don't find ALL people sexual attractive, it's solely in the purview of bigotry. But that claim is so broad as to be useless as analysis. Are these really the types of claims he's trying to make? It seems rationally impossible, but then again... He may actually believe that people are little more than their sexual mores. But that would be a highly regressive view of people, certainly not a very progressive one and I'm not sure he's examined it to its rational end point much more than putting the claims onto Twitter for claps from generally white male coomers.
If I were to say that a heterosexual woman for example wouldn't be attracted to women it would only make sense to someone. It should also only make sense that homosexual men wouldn't be attracted to women as well. Then, we have claims that transmen are men going on but since homosexual men deny attraction to them on the basis of their biological sex and won't budge on it nor retreat from their own spaces the way lesbians will they're trying the misogyny angle.
That creates another issue though which is that according to them transmen aren't women at all. So logically the statement he makes there doesn't make sense from their own PoV.
TLDR: Trans-attraction policing doesn't work on gay men so they're trying to move goalposts around in a way that isn't internally consistent.
EDIT: Reading it again, I think he may of meant women were marginalized I guess in which case my issue with his statement isn't accurate. I'm still leaving it though.
The idea that women's attractiveness not being there for you is misogynistic implies their value/worth as humans would be related to how fuckable you find them and thats pretty sexist.
Ostatnio edytowane: