betheydocrime @ betheydocrime @lemmy.world

Posts

16

Comments

223

Joined

2 yr. ago

I used to think this way, but now I'm not sure if it holds up. Although there's definitely a basis for this when looking at American, cisgender, heterosexual relationships, those are not the only kinds of relationships that exist. If women were only passive when it comes to forming relationships, then every lesbian would be single, and there is also no room in that theory for nonbinary people

For me, personally, it's the divisible-by-three check. You know, the little shortcut you can do where you add up the individual digits of a number and if the resulting sum is divisible by three, then so is the original number.

That, to me, is black magic fuckery. Much like everything else in this thread I have no idea how it works, but unlike everything else in this thread it's actually a handy trick that I use semifrequently

I believe the term is "beach off"

Also there's no way that Mattel would be upset that the Ken Bro-House was outselling Barbi Dream house. They're making money, they'd have leaned into it, not tried to shut it down.

Regarding this, I think the point the movie was trying to make was that Mattel could choose to eliminate the Barbie line of toys and use those resources to create a product for boys that would sell better, but they choose not to. Even though the board (both in the movie and in reality) is dominated by men and they are motivated by profit, they still want to make little girls happy. Of course, they want to make their profit along the way, but that's commentary on capitalism

The patriarchy is what enabled and encouraged you to have an interest and education in computer science in the first place :) if you had been born in a woman's body in the same time period, you would have been discouraged from that path passively through cultural messaging and actively by your peers and mentors--all decisions made by men. To this day, men outnumber women in STEM fields by roughly a 5-to-2 ratio, and that number is only where it is as a result of deliberate outreach to women of all ages.

I'm not trying to detract from your work ethic or the quality of the output you produced or how hard you had to work to get to where you are-- I'm just saying that if you were a woman, it would have been that much harder, and that is how you benefited from the patriarchy without actively participating from it.

Much like white privilege, one of the things that makes patriarchy and matriarchy so insidious is that you do not have to directly engage in it in order to benefit from it if you look like you belong to the gender in charge

I don't know if it's defininitive, but I do think it offers good insight into what a person notices when they watch things. There's a whole lot to notice and think about in the movie

It's not one-sided, though. It argues that both matriarchy and patriarchy are not inclusive ways of operating a society. The movie did not shy away from showing Ken's dissatisfaction living under a matriarchy, just like it did not shy away from showing Gloria and Sasha's dissatisfaction with living under a patriarchy

The difference between "charged" and "indicted" is who finds probable cause that you committed a crime. If it was a prosecutor, you are charged. If it's a jury, you're indicted.

Accused, legally speaking, is a noun meaning a person who has been arrested for or charged with a crime

That's why I used the word "most" :) I don't want to invalidate anyone's personal lived experience.

And I'm not saying that people have the full picture the second they're born, just that once someone has that egg-cracking moment and looks back at the rest of their life suddenly, in hindsight, lots of mannerisms and desires and personality quirks make a lot more sense. That's how I felt when I realized I was nonbinary-- I always felt the way I always felt, but I only recently decided to attribute the label of "nonbinary" to those feelings

It's rare that I see someone type a comment that mentions everything I want to say. You rock!

Well, I'm glad you made this comment, poorly phrased as it is. I went back and double-checked the scientific definitions of the words I used, and I included a word as a synonym where it actually is not a synonym. I've gone back and fixed my comment to avoid spreading misinformation.

Now to answer your accusation and your question, in that order:

First, the accusation that this is "my position" and a "claim"-- that is not the case. This is the established consensus of the scientific and medical communities, and I am just repeating what they said. If you have a problem with that, go to your local hospital and argue with a doctor or something.

Now, for your question-- I didn't say anything resembling that at all. I corrected their terminology from "biological sexuality" to just "sex" because that's literally what biologists call it--sex. Then I made the points that sex is based on lots of traits, not just the one, and that there is a lot of variance in what we call "male" and "female". That doesn't deny the existence of sex, all it does is say that biology mostly operates in spectrums, not binary systems.

Imotali got it right, that is exactly how it works :) most people who are transgender know that they are transgender before they know the meaning of the word "transgender". It also looks like you're confusing two terms that sound a lot alike but mean two different things.

What you're calling "biological sexuality" is really just called "sex" or "sexual identity". It's concerned primarily with categorizing a person's physiology into one of two groups based on the average of several traits, with lots of variance possible between individual members of those groups. This is what TERFs incorrectly call being a "biological man or woman". Note that it has nothing to do with presentation, performance, speech, and other non-physiological traits--those all relate to gender, not sex.

"Sexual identity" refers to the intersection of sex, gender identity, gender roles, and sexual orientation.

if other people were forced to treat my every feeling with rubber gloves, I wouldn’t feel respected

It's a good thing that this isn't what's happening, then :) if people were treating trans people's every feeling with rubber gloves, then we wouldn't be four times as likely as a cisgender person to be the victim of a violent crime

We don't want the rubber glove treatment. All we want is to have the same right to bodily autonomy as straight white American men do-- free to go where we feel comfortable AND comfortable in our own skin wherever we go, with no one trying to legislate away our mastership over our own bodies.

Politics is "the activities associated with the governance of a country or other area, especially the debate or conflict among individuals or parties having or hoping to achieve power."

This definitely strikes me as a conflict among individuals having or hoping to achieve power.

How do I delete someone else's comment

Hard G and soft G are both acceptable pronunciations, the only way to be wrong in the situation is to insist that your preferred way to pronounce it is the only correct way to pronounce it

Oh, except silent G. Silent G is wrong.

You aren't the judge of when someone is or isn't a woman, though. The only person whose opinion matters in that case is the woman herself.

Yes, I do. This is a space where trans rights and trans people are respected. That means that their existence is accepted as fact, not debated in the comment section.

There are numerous places and resources available for that person to educate themself, if they had chosen to do so before commenting. Instead, they chose to comment from a place of ignorance. We have no obligation to offer them that education here.

So, no contestants who have had their wisdom teeth removed? No one allowed who has had a C-section? No cancer patients who have had biopsies done?