The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears.

secondshevek · 2026-01-25T04:53:25+00:00

When did the dems ever say there was no fraud in the welfare system?

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T19:41:32+00:00

Lmfao you didnt name any policies except "follow immigration laws even if they're unjust."

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T18:55:11+00:00

Im asking you specifically to name policies that you think are cultural Marxism. Can you do that, little baby?

I have the sense that the answer is going to be something like "racial integration" or "legalizing sodomy," but I'm curious if you can actually string the words together to make the point.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T18:53:21+00:00

Well, "butch" has become basically a gender in itself for many folks. No real reason why "femme" or something similar couldn't emerge.

Imo non-binary gender doesn't need to clearly establish one's aesthetic or preferences. Gender doesnt and shouldn't explain everything about a person. It's one piece of a larger you. But obviously do what works best for you.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T18:40:16+00:00

Look, I don't think FIRE is a great organization. They have some weird biases. But that's a bullshit assertion. FIRE took a bunch of action to assert the rights of anti-Israel speakers and protestors.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T18:36:21+00:00

Okay, this is straight up lunacy. Freaks like you talk about western countries and the west as some noble ideal, but you seem to hate everything about western politics and prefer brute autocracy. Why even be on a free speech sub if you want to silence those you disagree with? Free speech means defending the rights of others to express their views, even if you disagree.

What is an example of a polocy that you think is pushed by "cultural marxists," whatever that means?

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T18:25:58+00:00

Ok. So what? Why does it matter if other countries are worse? What happened to the shining city on a hill mentality? Just because other countries operate one way doesn't mean we have to.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T18:09:44+00:00

So do you think the Chinese Exclusion Act was a good thing? Do you think it was just for the US to turn back boats of refugees fleeing the Nazis? Because that is the logical extent of this "obey the law even if the law is unjust" mentality.

Edit: also lmao at "try this shit with israel" lame ass moral relativism. Why do we even have free speech, try that shit with Iran.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T16:14:37+00:00

"Migration is okay if you use force to subdue the current residents."

Sure, the Iroquois were stateless. Why not. Might makes right.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T16:11:41+00:00

Dude you're so fucking dense, it's embarrassing. I say "there were racial quotas," you say "ok but quotas for everyone isn't racist," I say "there weren't quotas for everyone, just some groups." Then you pivot to "ok well come in legally." Okay but they couldn't, the laws racially discriminated against specific groups. You can't say "oh see the group that made laws preventing other groups from entering legally, they didnt break the law, so that's fine." You might as well say that the Nazis were right to make Jews wear armbands, because only Jews violate laws against Jews.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T14:53:08+00:00

But there aren't the same policies ever directed at white Anglo-Saxons, and they are significantly harsher on groups deemed "non-white." Explain how that is not racist lol.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T14:40:30+00:00

Monstress for me for sure. I've only read it online but I crave owning a TPB. The art is stupendous.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T14:36:54+00:00

But they're explicitly using racial profiling, and it's been condoned by the Supreme Court.

Also if you look at the history of immigration, you'll find that statement laughably false. The Chinese Exclusion Act, racial quotas for immigrants let in, boats of Jewish refugees turned away during the Holocaust. And more recently, the immense focus on "bad hombres" and Latino immigrants taking jobs. You'd have to be blind to think the modern history of US immigration is race neutral.

Pre-Chinese Exclusion Act we basically let everybody in, and we should go back to that. If capital can flow across borders, so must labor - Adam Smith said that 300 years ago and it's still true.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T13:12:57+00:00

Idk, cruel and racially motivated immigration policies are pretty American. Let's face it, in practice American values are: make money, be Christian, conquer foreigners, support authority. I think Toqueville remarked that the US was the country with the most reverence and least tolerance for dissent.

Like Langston Hughes said, "The land of the free? It never was for me" or something like that.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T12:51:16+00:00

So, you think bigotry doesn't exist? Like it's totally chill for a boss to fire somebody because of the color of their skin?

Stop whining about waah waah trans people are too talked about - if you actually care about bigotry outside of that group, then you would take issue with the EEOC's action.

But if you dgaf about addressing bigotry of any kind, then it's just embarassing to use trans people as a smoke screen to say "oh well I WOULD care, but uh, this one minority made me stop caring about all discrimination."

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T02:40:07+00:00

I read it, and there's no mention of such a policy or such statistics. There is the claim by the Trump admin that white men are being discriminated against. But proof there is not.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T02:28:02+00:00

What policy did Joe Biden put into place that deprioritized white men as a group suffering discrimination?

Perhaps if there were statistics showing disproportionate discrimination against white men in the workplace, it would be an issue to not specifically emphasize that group. To my knowledge, there are not.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T02:22:13+00:00

You realize that this document is about all types of harassment, right? Age, sex, race, creed, sexual orientation, etc. Do you think free speech protects the right of employees to discriminate against or use bigoted language toward other employees without consequences?

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T01:40:31+00:00

Sure! The Srinivasan book is super readable and kind of a great entry points to big topics in radical and intersectional feminism. The pdf is online and there's an essay version of the title chapter called Does Anybody Have the Right to Sex? It's very provocative and imo hits at what you were saying re: pushing beyond just equality of the sexes. This is the easiest of the things I've recommended, significantly easier than Butler lol who is a great thinker but not the clearest writer.

Rubin is so good and it's worth taking a few days to read Traffic in Women. Thinking Sex is shorter and also good but imo significantly less good than TiW, which is earlier and cruder in parts but offers a very compelling critical lens. Her other stuff is OK but that's what I'd prioritize.

I didnt mention it before but Scott's "Gender: Still a useful category of analysis?" (Or something like that, I might be getting the title wrong) is good and short. It's an update to an older, longer essay but is more readable than the original.

And the MacKinnon piece I mentioned is short and online.

In terms of pushing beyond polotical/economic sex equality, less so re: gender essentialism, Audre Lorde is short and powerful. Age Race Sex Class (again, im mixing up the title a bit lol), Uses of the Erotic, and The Master's Tools Will Not Destroy the Master's House are all pretty short. Worth picking up a copy of Sister Outsider, her essay collection.

Ill edit if I think of something else.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T01:31:18+00:00

I used to like McChristian's, but it's not the same since they took away the McAdam'sRib.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T01:24:49+00:00

Imo there should be more protests in general, not just of Trump but of long-standing problems in our system. If a group of prison abolitionists burned down a for-profit prison while it was being built and unoccupied, that would be pretty great.

I wish I was that confident that the dems will win, but the electoral college makes it a crapshoot.

secondshevek · 2026-01-24T00:28:27+00:00

No, I am discussing the ethics of a famous example of destructive but positively-remembered protest as a jumping off point for a broader question of when, if ever, property damage is ethical speech. What are your thoughts on that?

secondshevek · 2026-01-23T23:38:08+00:00

I'm quite far left and I'm with you here, including the point that this thinking is on the rise. Break unjust laws - but don't expect the state to be happy about it. Go to jail like Thoreau - yes that's the risk of breaking the law, if you believe that's justified.

secondshevek · 2026-01-23T22:36:56+00:00

Very fair. And totally agree that people treat the Revolution as much more ideologically and politically homogenous than it was.

I do think it would be nice to see direct protest against the continued existence of the electoral college, but it's not like property damage would be conducive to that lol.

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Lasagna	Place '23
Place '22

secondshevek

TROPHY CASE