What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Gender Studies I

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kepler said:
It was a good run, but this about wraps it up for men.
Click to expand...

It wrapped up for you a long time ago.

And I get the sense from this board that you think I hate all cis men. I'm not a misandrist, but these are some things I can't stand:

-Loving me when I'm in a dress and heels, but not when I'm dressed for a hot and sweaty workout. I chased a creep off because he wanted me to wear heels and I was in wedges.
-Thinking I should always be available for sex on demand. But when I want it, when I'm available, I either get semantics or ghosted.
-Thinking I'm just some box you can check, that box being "banged a trans girl."
-Then there are those who find out I'm trans, then run.

And you know, I don't have time or patience to sift through 260 profiles on dating apps to find out either who wants to have sex with me or who wants a long term relationship with me. And right now, it's just a whole lot easier to assume you're all creeps, and be done with it.
 
Sitting in a meeting about our new project management system and it shows an example of the design planning stage. My focus is drawn to the words "design for average height man 5'11" or 70% male height 5'8" or above", anger ensues. I work for a large corporation that mostly manufactures tools. So the example in this presentation was likely based on some tool design, and of course, women don't use tools, so we shouldn't worry about designing a product to be used by women.
 
As for JK Rowling: I am hurt that a part of my formative years turned out to be a vile and vicious transphobic asshole. Everything I read prior to the transphobia revelations indicated she was this nice lady who loved everyone and Harry Potter reflected it.

However, the four functions of behavior are Self-Stimulating (playing with your hair, rocking back and forth), Escape (getting out of an unpleasant task), Attention-seeking, and Access to Tangibles (edible food, toys, etc). I really believe part of her transphobia is an attempt to stay relevant, to stay in the limelight... Harry Potter was so long ago and for someone like Rowling, if the spotlight isn't on her, she must do something to get it back. And so she's been vomiting bile all over twitter. If my community can turn her into "Joanne from Accounting," to turn her into some schlub... then I think we win.
 
Right there with you on the disappointment; though I can't possibly begin to understand how much it hurts from your perspective. Especially since they were such important parts of your childhood. Such a shame that half a generation grew up with those books only to find out the author who created that amazing world of characters is really just a bigot.

I have hope she can learn and reform. But given the extreme nature of her views, that seems unlikely. :-\
 
MissThundercat said:
As for JK Rowling: I am hurt that a part of my formative years turned out to be a vile and vicious transphobic *******.
Click to expand...

She isn't vicious, she's just old. She's extremely hurtful but it's incompetence, not deliberate: she's a product of a bygone generation that simply cannot cope with trans people. Just as we aren't vicious just because we have our own generational blind spots. My god, the things people will say about us when we are her age (not too long for me).

Look at the Fundies and the Republicans: they are vicious. Rowling is just a clueless old TERF who missed the chapter where we accepted another set of people as equal human beings. She's not a villain, she's a Has Been.

MLK was a-scurred of Bayard Rustin. That didn't make him Satan, it made him a blind old black Christian.
 
Last edited:
It also helps to separate the work from the creator. I'm sure it's difficult, but it can be done...

Walt Disney wasn't a saint... Alan Moore is a damn pedophile.... Woody Allen has his issues...

The list goes on and on across many mediums of entertainment... You can still appreciate the art while wanting to apply a sack of door knobs to the creator...
 
Kepler said:
Hmm. This doesn't seem all that likely. I know he likes his little harem, but what makes him a pedophile? (I doubt because pedophile : 2000 :: communist : 1955 :: witch : 1650.)
Click to expand...

Isn't LOST GIRLS about his fantasies surrounding the three characters from their respective stories going into some pretty obvious sexual scenarios?
 
RaceBoarder said:
Isn't LOST GIRLS about his fantasies surrounding the three characters from their respective stories going into some pretty obvious sexual scenarios?
Click to expand...

If I write about witches that doesn't make me a witch.

Now add in that Moore loves to f-ck with people, and one of the best ways to f-ck with people is to go for the most sensitive spot -- the place where brains turn off and pitchforks come out.

If it was 1750 he'd be writing about transubstantiation. 1900 and it would be evolution. Now it's pedophilia. There is always something so terrifying to a culture that it forbids even satire, and a guy like Moore (or me) will exploit that for notoriety (and also to expose that human rationality has a think skin below which is the murderous, blind mob). Our kink isn't the content of the piece, it's to show you all that we are vicious animals and we have to be careful of ourselves.

I don't think he wants to bang 8-year olds.
 
Last edited:
Thanks DX.

Also... Candace Owens, JK Rowling, and all Republicans are mortified to learn there is at least one gender neutral bathroom in their house. Sometimes two or more, depending on how wealthy they are.
 
So, Dr. Mrs. and I were having a discussion today and we want others' input. Warning: the tacit assumption here is that men and women do not differ in terms of their likelihood to be vain, short-sighted, self-absorbed, or creepy. They merely express it differently either due to social opportunities or other differences. If you think women are better then men for god's sake stop reading now.

OK, so: rich guy gets divorced -- the Tradition is he goes out and buys himself a cultured, lovely lass 25+ years younger than the first wife. All well and good. But the rich ex-wife does not typically do this unless she's Demi Moore. So the question is: what does she do?

We're not all that interested in what women (or men) actually do. We want to find the stereotype of what women do that is the equivalent of the guy playing Brillantmont whack-a-mole.

We came up with three hypothetical answers, but are not sure if any of them carry more social "credibility":

1. Mergers & Acquisitions. Hunter/killer for an even larger fortune than the one you have amassed for yourself, ideally with a dude so close to death's door you won't have to endure his ooky presence long before all this can be yours.

2. Push your kid. Buy your idiot son a Senate seat. Make the shining produce of your vagina the talk of the town.

3. Become a finance saint. Create a hospital or a research fund or whatever and buy yourself a halo. Become a philanthropist who sh-ts rainbows and social justice.

Now, note that the guy could do all of this too, so the first question is are women even more likely to be thought of as doing any of these things than men? Our guesses are: 1. Yes, 2. Kind of, and 3. No. But even if we're right and option 1 is most likely it doesn't have that same titillating certainty that Take Your Next Wife on a Play Date does.

Any takers? Are we missing the obvious?
 
Last edited:
Stereotype in my mind is the same as men. Find some young stud and shag him until she grows bored.

What they actually do, my guess is none of the above.
1. More likely than the others
2. They would make sure the kid got through a great college if under 20. Otherwise not a thing.
3. Don’t see that.

Now, interestingly, my wife thinks it’s most likely 3. Otherwise it depends on who the breadwinner is. If the wife is just a knobwetter, then she’ll be more likely to do things the dipshit husband never “gave his permission to spend” money on. If they’re equal, definitely #3 but just quietly do good.


Anyways, it’s interesting we different so much in our answers. Not really sure what to make of that.
 
dxmnkd316 said:
Stereotype in my mind is the same as men. Find some young stud and shag him until she grows bored.

What they actually do, my guess is none of the above.
1. More likely than the others
2. They would make sure the kid got through a great college if under 20. Otherwise not a thing.
3. Don’t see that.

Now, interestingly, my wife thinks it’s most likely 3. Otherwise it depends on who the breadwinner is. If the wife is just a knobwetter, then she’ll be more likely to do things the dip**** husband never “gave his permission to spend” money on. If they’re equal, definitely #3 but just quietly do good.


Anyways, it’s interesting we different so much in our answers. Not really sure what to make of that.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming a woman who is exactly analogous to Midlife Crisis Man: very successful in her own right and suddenly available.

I also wonder whether it would be different if the circumstance of availability changes:

a. widowed
b. amicably divorced
c. acrimoniously divorced

MCM seems more likely to jump to the F-ck Bunnies as the situation becomes more tawdry (with Giuliani you extend it to "d. acrimoniously divorced own cousin"). Is MCW?

Again I'm looking for the stereotype, not what they actually do which presumably cannot be known since the first thing money -- real money, not money as portrayed on media -- buys you is privacy.
 
One thing I hate about talking about a breast augmentation with cis women: inevitably, I get someone who says "well, I have large breasts and I'm unhappy, so you don't get to be happy either." It's never felt like "my body, my choice" applies to trans women.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top