Bad news, lesbians: You aren’t real, according to some dudes on the internet

According to bbhuntt:

Any ‘lesbian’ Is really a straight person who doesn’t like men and is willing to have intercourse with women rather than not have intercourse. …

Being a lesbian is the ultimate move of feminist and nothing more. It’s all a giant game

Mr. bbhuntt is sounding a bit reminiscent of political lesbians here. Oddly, I’ve seen MGTOWs compared to political lesbians, with the key difference that MGTOWs get very angry if you in any way insinuate that they might be attracted to each other.

Women who can find a top 20% man but also are kinky sluts become “bi”

Wait, so I’m not bi because I’m attracted to both men and women but because I’m a kinky slut who can find a top 20% man?

You have a dick and they don’t

And I’m guessing trans* women don’t exist to them either.

Wait, so I’m not bi because I’m attracted to both men and women but because I’m a kinky slut who can find a top 20% man?

Not only that, but were you a man you’d clearly be really gay and unwilling to leave the closet. Regardless of gender, if you claim to be bi, clearly it is all about the menz.

Oddly, I’ve seen MGTOWs compared to political lesbians, with the key difference that MGTOWs get very angry if you in any way insinuate that they might be attracted to each other.

You’d think they’d be more open to it since they all seem to think dicks are magical attraction devices. And how much they loathe their attraction to women. I’m sure their stance on asexuality isn’t particularly enlightened either.

Basically, lesbians are women coming their own way.

OT, but implicates neoliberalism and plutocracy:

I’m noticing a recent and disturbing trend in webshite misdesign lately. Seems to have been initiated by Facebook, natch, or at least they were among the first high profile sites to do it, but others are following suit, including Canada’s theweathernetwork.com site.

The affected sites have in common the following preexisting traits: they are generally relatively slow and “bulky” to load, and generally have key functionality that requires enabling Javashit.

What they’re doing that’s new and annoying: Punishing users who won’t just sit twiddling their thumbs and staring at the pulsating browser throbber until their site has fully loaded. They detect if the user focuses a different browser tab and retaliate in some way if they user does so rather than just sit and wait.

Facebook’s approach is just to drag out the loading process indefinitely, so the page can still not be done loading ten minutes later, so you will have to wait about as long after switching back to the Facebook tab as if you had just sat there waiting to begin with; thus, there’s no benefit to switching to another tab for a minute or so and back again anymore (before this change, the Facebook tab would have finished loading for sure by then).

TWN’s is rather more nasty: you’ll come back to intentionally broken functionality, e.g. the current sky conditions and temperature for your location won’t be displayed. It will work normally again if you reload the page and then sit put rather than switch away and back.

Both exhibit a clear desire to monopolize attention and have a captive audience. I’m not sure what the underlying business benefit is, if any — the ads will still be there (or not, if an ad blocker is used) when the user switches back. Perhaps they’re trying to maximize a time-on-site metric that affects their advertising revenues? Gaming it by starting the clock early in the page load process, then bloating up and dragging out the page load process to rack up time before the user can even start to do what they’re there to do (since sooner started, sooner finished), and then when users predictably react by habitually switching tabs immediately after (re)loading their site and coming back after a minute or so, acting to neutralize this (as presumably the advertisers’ time-on-site clocks stop running when the tab isn’t focused).

So, neoliberal capitalism meets domineering and jealous behavior, basically. And as usual the commonplace products in our lives center the needs of rich people like Mark Zuckerberg, who need added help the least, over the needs of us people who merely are the ones actually using those products.

Fortunately, there is a workaround: the scripts being used to pull these shenanigans don’t seem to be able to detect the browser itself losing focus, so you can leave it on the FB, TWN, or whatever tab and alt-tab over to an entirely different app without the site slowing down/misrendering itself to force you to still spend as much time waiting and watching it load. The other app can even be another browser (I don’t know if a second top-level window of the same browser will work, or will be detected like a tab switch). So: install e.g. Firefox and Chome side-by-side and just surf a bit in the other one while $(SLOW_SITE) loads in the background and you’ll have defeated this rather poorly-thought-out and cack-handed attempt to punish you for defeating their attempts to game the metrics collected by the third-party advertising scripts embedded on their site.

Again with that “top 20%” figure, which seems popular in those circles. It must be difficult to maintain that kind of denial of reality. Even if you limit your friends to guys as embittered as yourself, you can hardly walk down a city street without seeing couples where the man is average-looking at best. At work, your homely male coworkers talk about their wives and girlfriends. You probably have male relatives in long-term relationships despite looking worse than you. But you must suppress that inner voice which says “looks like a lot of really ordinary guys have no trouble finding a partner. Maybe the problem you have isn’t that you’re not hot?”

Oh, and: these are guys who apparently have never talked to a lesbian. Do they all just live in the arse end of nowhere, where they never encounter anyone new?

Has Surplus been replaced by a script generator?

If MGTOW were actually going their own way, you’d think they would love lesbians for not trying to lure men into marriage or child support. So curious how they’re not pleased about it, huh.

@Surplus to Requirements,

Have you considered that the behavior you describe may in fact be the result of the behavior of your browser, and not a script written by website designers to deliberately make your life worse?

I mean, it’s not like it’s in Facebook’s best interests for you to feel annoyed every time you visit their site. On the other hand, a browser has a lot of resources to manage, especially when many tabs are open, and it is very much in the interests of browser programmers to keep the browser functioning as smoothly as possible, especially for users on lower-end hardware and on slower internet connections who like to open lots of tabs.

As someone who could reasonably be called a “kinky bisexual slut” I’m going to throw out there that I *have* dated men much more often than women (3 women versus 16 men¹, a number not likely to change any time soon due to currently being in a long term monogamous² relationship), but that’s more a function of availability than anything else.

Bi and Lesbian women I usually have to go out of my way to look for, and I’m not going to hold them to lower standards than I would for men. Straight and bi men are everywhere (collectively, I’m not trying to imply that bi men alone are common) …and usually quite open about their interest in women, even if they’re often subtle and don’t realize they’re doing it thanks to heteronormative socialization. I’m just not very inclined to seek 50/50 relationship parity just for the sake of it, even if my attraction is about 50/50. I also don’t value my relationships with either sex any more or less than the other.

¹If you include people I’ve had sex with without really dating them, make that 5 women, one of whom was trans, and 21 men, also one of whom was trans, plus an uncertain number of clients from when I was a sex worker, which I didn’t keep track of and mostly blur together, but all were men or at least male-presenting and I’d put them at something like 30-40. (If that sounds low, I was a sex worker for less than a year and had repeat clients.) If you *don’t* count people I’ve dated but never had sex with, make that 2 women and 14 men. So far I haven’t been with anyone who identified as nonbinary, unless they neglected to mention it.

²I’ve never been in a MFF threesome. I did once ask my current boyfriend if that were an option, but he’s not into that. I did do an MFM threesome once, though, with one of my earlier boyfriends and one of his other partners. I haven’t done FFF or an orgy either.

Personal anecdotes don’t mean much, of course, and bisexual people are all different, but you know, here’s one more data point against that kind of toxic attitude about bi women.

(One more side note for potential lurkers – if all of the above sounds like a “disease factory” waiting to happen, I have never had an STI. I check regularly, and have always been as safe as possible. “Slutty” doesn’t have to mean reckless.)

@Surplus to Requirements

What extensions are you using? Ideally I try to avoid the web since I can’t stand what fuckers like the MGTOW crowd and its sympathizers have to say in many places, but my activity can still fuel such predatory practices.

I adblock the web, I use Privacy Badger (I unfortunately have it disabled on a few websites that rely on Google’s APIs, but I don’t visit them often), I use Decentraleyes (to prevent tracking via CDNs) and I use the DuckDuckGo extension (still problematic because the search engine website uses AWS).

Ideally, using an extension like NoScript can help stop these predatory practices from influencing consumers, but since some websites simply stop giving users information without JS, it’s not ideal and is symptomatic of a neoliberal system that really needs to be dealt with.

@Moggie:

Even if you limit your friends to guys as embittered as yourself, you can hardly walk down a city street without seeing couples where the man is average-looking at best. At work, your homely male coworkers talk about their wives and girlfriends.

Ah, but you see, it’s all a vast conspiracy. Those coworkers? They’re talking about wives and girlfriends who don’t exist. The attractive blonde walking arm in arm with a homely guy? Paid escort. All of it to hide the TROOOTH. All paid for by the deep pockets of George Soros, of course. </sarc>

@Naglfar:

They claim it’s based on the Pareto distribution, but a minute of Googling reveals that that is not what the Pareto distribution does (it actually models distribution of wealth, where the rich have a disproportionate share of all wealth).

They see women as possessions rather than people, so they expect them to be included in the Pareto distribution.

@Definitely not Steve:

Have you considered that the behavior you describe may in fact be the result of the behavior of your browser, and not a script written by website designers to deliberately make your life worse?

I didn’t make any changes to my browser configuration that could cause this (or any at all recently, for that matter).

@Oogly:

Everything alright?

Lesbians only exist because Chad said ‘no’ and didn’t give them attention

Chad ? Incel lingo on MGTOW forum ? Who would have believe that ?! Certainly not me…

@Ooglyboggles
Are you OK ?