[–] no- 73 points

Nevermind this Freudian orthodoxy about women being defined by castration

For the millionth time, a woman isn’t a castrated man. The female reproductive system is its own complex set of organs, it can’t be reduced to the lack of a penis.

Only a man would think a woman is defined by castration. Its obvious we women aren't fully human to them because we lack a penis.

Absolutely. And the fact that most men are willing to play along (on the rare occasion that they pretend to give a fuck) because of their castration phobia makes them just as offensive as the TiMs themselves. They consider their penises to be the source of their power both literally and symbolically, and most young men spend their lives letting their dicks or troubled relationship with their masculinity completely control them.

If he thinks ‘woman’ is simply ‘man - penis’, it indicates that a man sees women as inherently deficient in the most important characteristics of strength, power, and capability that he could possibly imagine.

Lesbians are not defined by their relationship to men, they are defined by their relationship to women. Get over it 😝

If anyone here is one Twitter, please respond with the simple question: "Why are you talking to a minor about dicks?"

i know it's really recent, but i'm having trouble finding the tweet.

Oh nooooooo, Nick can’t get an actual female girlfriend no matter how many tantrums he throws, I see.😂

And what’s with the weird emphasis on radical feminism? It’s like he’s secretly obsessed.

Cuz we’ve got his fuckin number, that’s why. He can’t dazzle us with his pseudo-philosophical bullshit and he knows that we know he’s a big fraud.

It’s so embarrassing when men try to sound smart.

I can usually tell when Contra is angry, and this is one of those times. When he tweets about current events it's usually more structured but this time he's just throwing out random sentences. I guess the radfem and gender critical uprising on Twitter, along with the Lesbian Strength events are making him unhinged.

[–] furyosa MERF 17 points

"Discordant with radical feminist thinking about sex"??? You can fuck right off, sir.

A little while ago he was complaining about feminism disappearing from the center of discourse and that he'd like to singlehandedly bring it back. The audacity and hubris of it all. I cringe to think I used to be a patreon early into his appropriation of womanhood 🤢

women defined by castration

What? Women aren't castrated males. We're a completely separate sex, you numpty. Everything about us is different, from our heads to our toes, and our reproductive system isn't defined by a lack of a dick -- it has its own set of organs which produce hormones essential to the functioning of our body.

EdUcAtE yOuRsElF.

Just throwing in obscure academic terms doesn’t magically make your point more valid?

The left love to write so much gibberish literally even the author doesn’t know what they’re saying - @Judith Butler

I never heard any radical feminist deny women's sexual urges to like genitalia of their partner. And what is 'diffuse sensuality'? It sounds like he just wants to say women don't like to have sex as much as men do.

He might be referring to Andrea Dworkin, but filters her critique through his trans-fetishistic mind. She was critical of the focus on male genitalia and penetration as the main --or only-- form of sex. But "diffuse sensuality over genitality" sounds like an academic man who doesn't know where the clitoris is. 😂

[–] disco_metal 2 points Edited

I suppose it could be based on the “political lesbian” of the second wave—women tried to downplay the sexual component of being a lesbian, instead claiming that it just meant “loving women” in a general sense, or identifying with women. There were some “political lesbians” who actually had male partners—this might be the basis of that interpretation.

Load more (3 comments)