Is War Machine, the mixed martial arts fighter accused of brutally beating his ex, a Men's Rights Activist?

Well I entirely missed this thread people keep alluding to. Perhaps I should try and find it, but I imagine it’s just the same stuff going round and round on hair trigger issues that obviously people won’t concede on.

Hopefully I don’t need to say this, but I am sad that Ally is gone. I hope she’ll be ok. Without sounding like some awful devils advocate* jackass I understand her point and also understand that she is very easily triggered, so while many can feel very comfortable here it isn’t a designated safe space.
Blah blah I dunno. Stupid wimmins with our hurt feefees.

*I originally wrote devils advocake. Mmmmmm.

And now I feel I’m being flippant when there’s been accusations of transphobia and all sorts flying about. From my understanding some of this mess has come about due to different peoples ideas of what constitutes transphobia, which literally couldn’t be more messy if it fell in a very messy thing.

So sorry for stomping on anyone. I know these are hecks serious issues.

Ugh. I fully expect a tirade of “LOOK WHAT YOU’VE DONE/YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF” directed at the evil bitchez shortly. Better take my leave.

You know, saying shit like this doesn’t actually help any kind of constructive discussion move forward.

I don’t think anyone involved in this discussion is evil, but I also don’t appreciate this kind of unfair framing of disagreement and stating an opinion as “holding people hostage” and tirades and all that.

Ok, I lied. I have a cat in a fishbowl before I go, because this is the only way a living creature should be in a fishbowl — if it’s fuzzy and can get itself back out! (Or not fuzzy and can get back out, I don’t want to prevent geckos from exploring [I want a gecko, I can no haz gecko cuz not fish, the axololt only got the okay since they’re fully aquatic])

http://www.funnykittensite.com/pictures/I_Has_A_Small_Jar.htm

So, why is the solution to trans women not being considered attractive seen as asking cis lesbians to examine their preferences, instead of attacking media representations and general social views?

I thought the latter was what we (we, here, including Ally — who didn’t even bring this subject up here) were doing.

Here’s what she said:

The issue here is that, when the focus is on individual’s preferences, many people here are afraid of the possibility that it will end up being a discussion wherein some people say that they have to be attracted to X or else they are horrible people. In other words, this discussion becomes one wherein personal preferences are politicized to the point of encouraging coercive shaming. And that’s wrong, misguided, and deeply contrary to the feminist/womanist principle of sexual and bodily autonomy. No one should be shamed into doing sexual things that they don’t want to do.

(Emphasis mine.)

What is the disagreement?

cloudiah, I’ve tried to stay out of the specifics, but maybe that:

‘you don’t get to decide who you’ll have sex with’
is terrifyingly similar to
‘you need to look more closely at who you’ll have sex with’

I have now found that old thread people were talking about and to be honest disagree with Ally that not wanting to have sex with someone based on the colour of their skin is the same as not wanting to have sex with someone based on their genitals.

If someone doesn’t want to have sex with someone with a penis it’s really irrelevant if that person is a man or a woman.

The cotton ceilling discourse is about bias against trans lesbians that cis lesbians never face due to cis privilege. It’s not about telling people that they have to change their preferences or else they are bad people.

And yet, when people here point out that they have literally seen it used in this way, they’re compared to Cathy Brennan. I have seen people actually argue that “Cis queer women not wanting to fuck trans women is transmisogynistic.” I have literally seen people tell individual cis lesbians that if they don’t want anything to do with penises, even on women, they are contributing to trans women’s oppression and should reconsider where their preferences come from. Is this representative of the mainstream of trans thought? Of fucking course not. Do I think it’s what you beliefe? I really don’t. But it’s out there and I don’t think you have to be Cathy Brennan to think it’s fucking skeevy.

“It’s become a place where it seems one person’s ideas and claims are sacrosanct (and treated as if they represent everyone in that person’s group, which they don’t).”

Thank you for saying so. I was afraid it was just me who felt that way.

Disagreement hasn’t been framed as hostage-taking. The fact that ONE person’s feelings have been paramount for so long to the extent those of others are readily thrown under the bus and if that person is stimulated in a manner that is at all negative, the whole forum is made to suffer, preventing meaningful discussion from occurring because goodness knows that may be triggering, is what I’ve described as holding the board hostage with one’s emotions. When one person’s feels are being used not only to silence those of others but to do so with the knowledge if there is pushback a meltdown will ensue, yes, people feel emotionally taken hostage and trapped.

WELL, I DISAGREE is not percieved as holding the board hostage by anyone.

That’s the problem, emilygoddess – so many of us have been afraid to say so. We’re literally afraid of the emotional consequences because we’ve all been conditioned to behave in a very specific fashion lest we want fallout. That’s not right. One person’s feelings shouldn’t be upheld as of more importance to protect than those of others. People shouldn’t feel silenced and be actively fearful to express their feelings because they might negatively stimulate one person. That works out great for the person being catered to. It sucks for several others though.

Anyways, really glad to hear you’ve seen the same thing we have.

I don’t think it’s possible to suggest that sexual minority a (who happen to be women, with all the sexual assumptions that brings with it) ought to examine what they do and don’t find attractive, in a context where everyone involved is some combination of leftist/progressive/queer, and the assumption that not being attracted to people in minority group b is probably influenced by some sort of societal bias has already been made, without that discussion being inherently coercive. There’s a quite clear sense there of what the ethically more correct set of preferences would be, and an implied critique aimed at the people who find that their attractions are not in fact reflective of that ethically more correct position. One would hope that in most cases it’s not intended to be coercive or being deliberately used to hurt people, but still, raising the subject implies that there is a correct answer, and that means things for those people who end up finding that that correct answer does not match their actual preferences. And, for extra messiness, having the request that patterns of attraction be examined and potentially reevaluated aimed specifically at women brings up all kinds of problems, especially if they’re young women who really really don’t want to lose the approval of their community. Which, as I said the last time this subject came up, is why I’m not OK with this.

All of this, with a side of being really skeeved out by people who want to turn not getting laid into an oppression issue (not that no one here has said this, but as Cassandra illustrated, that argument has been used on people – mainly women – before).

YES, we as a society should talk about who is considered “attractive” and who is considered “woman”, and so on, because both of those things are culturally determined, and falling outside those categories can make life harder for people. But when you start using terms like “cotton ceiling”, as though someone else’s underwear is a barrier to be overcome, you’re doing it wrong.

I’m in Adelaide, so it’s just gone 9pm here. Kittehs is at 9.30pm.

You have half-hour time zones? Neat.

So, why is the solution to trans women not being considered attractive seen as asking cis lesbians to examine their preferences, instead of attacking media representations and general social views? Even if it wasn’t a matter of asking women, and women of a sexual minority at that, to change their sexual preferences, the idea that anyone can do that would make me go “huh?” — we already know gay man can’t turn straight, why should any other preference be different?

I’m also not sure why the discussion keeps focusing on cis lesbians rather than on straight men. Aren’t the majority of trans women (like the majority of cis women) straight anyway? I don’t mean Ally specifically, because obviously as a lesbian she has a dog in that fight, but everywhere I’ve seen this conversation it’s been aimed at cis women (someone please correct me if I’m wrong!) and I think that’s what’s making some women so uncomfortable.

I feel like I want to be on here more so I don’t miss stuff. There should be a round up every month!