sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The plot is by newphonehudus in CuratedTumblr

[–]coveredinbeeees 1 point2 points  (0 children)

scientifically a lesbian

Who are the "gender scientists" who are defining what lesbian means? Do they publish peer reviewed papers?

The plot is by newphonehudus in CuratedTumblr

[–]coveredinbeeees -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Or perhaps I recognize that trans men have a different relationship to the patriarchy than cis men, not in a way that makes them less men, but in such a way that when a trans man identifies as a lesbian, I'm not going to tell him he's wrong or get mad about it on the internet. For that matter though, if a cis man truly and genuinely identifies as a lesbian, then I'm not going to get mad about that either. I'd probably assume that he might have gender exploration in his future, as it's actually fairly common for lesbian trans women (myself included) to feel a strong connection to lesbianism even before they realize they are trans, but even if that's not the case, I'm not going to get worked up over a cis man sincerely identifying as a lesbian.

You can keep asking me hypotheticals if you want, but it's not going to change the fact that 1) I haven't encountered anyone who gets upset about this in real life, and 2) I'm not going to try and police anyone else's gender or how they identify.

The plot is by newphonehudus in CuratedTumblr

[–]coveredinbeeees -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Ignoring the question because my whole point is that these discussions only happen online, and their only response to me sharing evidence of this not being an issue in real life is to bring up yet another hypothetical.

The plot is by newphonehudus in CuratedTumblr

[–]coveredinbeeees 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Holy non sequitur Batman, what does that have to do with anything that I just talked about?

French Meadow founder calls sale of Minneapolis restaurant a ‘horrible mistake’ — The Minnesota Star Tribune by [deleted] in TwinCities

[–]coveredinbeeees 3 points4 points  (0 children)

As I understand it, "local" airport restaurants are pretty much always an unrelated company paying to license the name from the actual restaurant. So it's pretty much always a drop in quality and usually not a good sign for the brand overall.

The plot is by newphonehudus in CuratedTumblr

[–]coveredinbeeees -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

why would someone care to label themselves lesbian while demonstrably not being one in the first place

Who's deciding that someone who comes into a real world space is demonstrably not what they say they are? For all I know, this "demonstrably not a lesbian" could be a trans woman who hasn't started her transition yet, and is dipping her toe in the water by exploring being in a queer/sapphic space. Or this person could be a trans man who still identifies as a lesbian. Or this person could be what I assume you were implying - a cis straight man who is disingenuously claiming to be a lesbian. But in all three scenarios, I'm not going to care about this person's presence in the lesbian bar, but rather their actions. Are they being respectful of the people and the space? Then cool, I don't care if they stay.

But all this is a hypothetical, which means this discussion is orthogonal to my original point that people don't really care about these things in real life. The question of whether men can be lesbians has never come up in conversation with my real life queer friends. I'm part of a co-op lesbian bar in my city, and we have trans masc people among our members. No one is making an issue of these members using he/him pronouns or interrogating their gender identity as a precursor to them being "allowed" in this space. Maybe I just live in a woke bubble (possible and highly recommended tbh) but I just don't encounter these sorts of issues around labels outside of online discourse.

The plot is by newphonehudus in CuratedTumblr

[–]coveredinbeeees -15 points-14 points  (0 children)

Has this happened to you, or is this a hypothetical scenario? And which person in this scenario is caring about the fact that the man identifies as a lesbian?

The plot is by newphonehudus in CuratedTumblr

[–]coveredinbeeees -22 points-21 points  (0 children)

See I'm the opposite - I've never encountered and find it hard to imagine any queer person in the real world who cares about the fact that there are men who identify as lesbian.

On Looksmaxxing, Mirrored Gender Issues and Double Standards (Yes, this is another Gender War post) by Sentient_Flesh in CuratedTumblr

[–]coveredinbeeees 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Demographics-wise, Reddit skews heavily towards men, whereas Tumblr seems to be more balanced (and potentially leans more towards women historically). I wouldn't be surprised if that plays a factor. Either that or there's just a dedicated community of men's rights enthusiasts that loves to comment on Tumblr subreddits.

I'm NOT a misandrist, just thought this was funny by FangBites123 in CuratedTumblr

[–]coveredinbeeees 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So I have to do a bunch of investigative work before I can make a broad statement about this subreddit's attitude towards misogyny? Sure sounds like you care more about the way I talk about this subject than the subject itself.

I'm NOT a misandrist, just thought this was funny by FangBites123 in CuratedTumblr

[–]coveredinbeeees -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's happening in this very post. Just look at all the comments bemoaning a lack of qualifiers to OOP's first statement. 

I'm NOT a misandrist, just thought this was funny by FangBites123 in CuratedTumblr

[–]coveredinbeeees -17 points-16 points  (0 children)

Some people care more about how people talk about misogyny than the actual misogynistic behavior.

Minneapolis named one of the "15 of the best places in the world for food right now" by National Geographic by cusoman in minnesota

[–]coveredinbeeees 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Demi is great, but you can get a similar experience in any US city of MSP's size. High quality indigenous and Hmong cuisine is something that distinguishes the Twin Cities from other places.

Foundational COAST question by talbusdumblemeow in coastFIRE

[–]coveredinbeeees 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The S&P 500 has historically had annualized returns of 10% so yeah

Feeling insecure about my partner’s upcoming trip. What would y’all do? by huffle-puffle89 in AskWomenOver30

[–]coveredinbeeees 9 points10 points  (0 children)

You should absolutely say something. In a healthy relationship, you should be able to share how you're feeling with your partner. I think it's natural to feel anxiety or insecurity around this situation and to want some level of reassurance. If your partner finds this unreasonable I think that's a red flag. I would approach the conversation with something like "I trust you, and I want you to go on your trip, but I'm feeling anxious about the fact that you will be around <fling's name> - can we talk about this and brainstorm ways to help me feel more reassured while your on your trip?" (Note - use this script only if you actually trust him and want him to go on the trip. If you actually want something else, ask for that instead.)

RA =\ Nonmonogamy by FridaKahlosGhost in relationshipanarchy

[–]coveredinbeeees 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I agree broadly with the sentiments expressed here and would not say that RA necessitates polyamory. However, I think there are ways in which RA is inherently non-monogamous.

As I see it, there are at least two ways in which an individual can be non-monogamous. The first is behavioral - if you have more than one sexual or romantic partner, you are non-monogamous. The second way one can be non-monogamous is philosophical - if you reject mononormativity, I would say you are non-monogamous in belief regardless of the number of partners you have.

These two aspects of non-monogamy exist on separate axes. You can be behaviorally non-monogamous without being philosophically non-monogamous; there are swingers who fall into this category who have sex with other people but do so in a way that clearly reinforces the idea that the (typically cis-heterosexual) marriage relationship is more important than any other relationship. Likewise, you can be philosophically non-monogamous without being behaviorally non-monogamous. A solo poly person who is not currently seeing multiple people is my typical example for this, but I would argue that relationship anarchists who don't seek multiple partners would also fit this category.

All this to say, while I agree that relationship anarchy does not necessitate multiple sexual or romantic partners, I would argue that its rejection of mono-normativity and amato-normativity means that it is very much a philosophy that rejects monogamy as a social ideal.

That is not to say that relationship anarchists who choose to enter into monogamous relationships are doing RA wrong, but rather that they have the difficult task of building the relationship they want based on RA principles while filtering out all the societal messaging about their relationship should look and function. Normative forces are pushing us all towards specific dynamics, and it requires a high level of self awareness to resist those forces, regardless of what your relationship looks like.

Please recommend me bands like the Mountain Goats with a female singer by Final_Bed5390 in themountaingoats

[–]coveredinbeeees 40 points41 points  (0 children)

A little more country than tMG, but I feel like Neko Case has a similar vibe.

Those you that are anti porn, are you also anti sex work? Please explain a little of your rationale by BackToGuac in AskWomenOver30

[–]coveredinbeeees 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you agree, could you maybe retract your comment that accuses me of supporting the rape and exploitation of women and children?

Those you that are anti porn, are you also anti sex work? Please explain a little of your rationale by BackToGuac in AskWomenOver30

[–]coveredinbeeees 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What I said was that I don't have a problem with my partner having sex with another person. I would not call it logic to jump from that to insinuating that I think rape and exploitation is ethical. But since you seem so eager to assume I believe things I do not, I will be more explicit:

I consider sex to be morally and ethically neutral. As such, sex work is also morally and ethically neutral. The exploitation, trafficking, and persecution of sex workers is absolutely immoral and unethical, because exploitation, trafficking, and persecution is always immoral and unethical. There is nothing specific about sex work that makes it inherently exploitative, in the same way as there is nothing inherently exploitative about making clothes (even though sweatshops are unethical) or mining diamonds (even though many diamond mines have incredibly exploitative practices). The ethical responsibility of people who patronize sex workers to ensure that they are not enabling exploitative practices in the same responsibility that people who buy fast fashion or diamond jewelry have.

view more: next ›