You must log in or register to comment.

mouse wrote

this is primmie TERF bullshit

−7

GaldraChevaliere wrote

This was posted by an enby person and the argument it makes is that gendered oppression is a product of society rather than innate and biological, which is literally the opposite of TERF ideology. Please for fuck's sake stop using trans people as tokens because you want your robot arm or whatever, plenty of us are critical of civilization and we didn't pop into existence 20 years ago or some shit. We've been around from antiquity and before.

8

mouse wrote

the argument it makes is that gendered oppression is a product of society rather than innate and biological

the article literally says that men want to control "womens wombs". did you read the article? its full of TERF dogwistling like that.

−1

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Yeah, I read the article, and I'm literally a trans woman telling you that reproductive labour is a fucking thing. No shit TERFs like to say it because they co-opt actual feminist concepts like, uh, I dunno? Patriarchy? The difference is that TERFs argue its biological inevitability as a weapon against eeeviiil 'male-socialized' trans women, while every sensible feminist argues that while the oppression exploits a fact of biology (that afabs give birth), it's socially rooted rather than trans-historic, the same as socialization is an ongoing process through life and not something you're born into like sex is somehow a moral category.

Men want to control how, when and with whom women give birth, because it's in patriarchy's interests to control that. That attitude extends to sterilizing native and black women, to bombing abortion clinics, to restricting access to contraceptives that would afford afabs more agency and safety in sex. It extends to controlling my body and bodies like it, prescribing sterilizing drugs when safer alternatives exist for HRT, gatekeeping during the process of transition itself, the entire view of transness as a medical condition to be cured, and the relegation of my folk to sexual labor and the demeaning of us as a caste for our inability to be used for reproductive labor. That's why literally every trans woman I know argues in favor of cis womens' reproductive rights because we face similar oppression and it comes from the same place, cis dudes like you.

7

mouse wrote

You know what else removes women's options for birth control, abortions, sterilization, and HRT?

Primitivism.

And please dont say "cis dudes like you", yeah, a lot of cis guys are sexist assholes, but being cis does not automatically make a brocialist.

−3

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Primitivism

You mean the pre-industrial societies where gender wasn't a ruthlessly enforced binary, or where folk knew herbs that caused abortions and used them so extensively they became a cultural staple before Rome overharvested them and they went extinct, or where folk already knew how to distill a primitive form of premarin, or relied on local plants where horses weren't available?

Cis dudes like you

It literally means you benefit from patriarchy, you fucking loser. Breeders big mad that they're not getting their ally brownie points.

7

mouse wrote (edited )

You should commit primitivist praxis by dying when you're 25

Edit: Are HRTs also necessary to survive under capitalism? Is whatever other technology, or medicine, or any sort of processed food? You only own a computer for "survival", are you fucking with me?

you cant reconcile primitivism with the fact that you enjoy and benefit from factors of modern society every day. Deep down you have to know that this is not the answer. Throw out all your condoms and use herbal abortions instead, see how that works out. Im not trying to be the "people who live under capitalism cant criticize capitalism" guy, I know im coming off that way, but seriously this is so dumb.

−7

GaldraChevaliere wrote

LOL my life expectancy literally is 30ish thanks to pollution, the risk of starvation under capitalism, and being a routinely victimized minority. Never mind that human longevity has stayed roughly the same throughout history, we only see longer maximum lifespans through interventions that do nothing to increase or maintain the quality of our elders' lives and people my age are still dying for lack of the medicines you keep holding up as unique to these times and modes of production. You should prove you're a good feminist by getting yourself killed ASAP so there's one less man to deal with.

HRT is literally necessary to my survival in a modern context, like why are you crowing about TERFs when you clearly don't know shit about trans people except as political pawns? It's not exactly a fucking secret that trans people who fail to pass die faster, almost always to violence from breeder filth like you, if they're not just forced deeper into the shadows to starve or kill themselves on their own.

The difference between you and me is that I'm willing to sacrifice my comfort, while using the tools available to me to sustain up to that point. You're not even describing shit that didn't exist pre-industrial revolution, sheepskin condoms have been around for ages. You're literally being that guy, which is fucking hilarious because you genuinely believe it.

9

mouse wrote

LOL my life expectancy literally is 30ish thanks to pollution, the risk of starvation under capitalism, and being a routinely victimized minority.

so the solution is to put yourself in further danger?

You should prove you're a good feminist by getting yourself killed ASAP so there's one less man to deal with.

thats... thats not what feminism is

−4

GaldraChevaliere wrote

My solution is to be in a less polluted, patriarchal environment where I don't have to worry about being murdered by a client or some breeder on the street. It's sure as hell not allyship to tell a trap to die at 25, but that's also a difference between us. I don't pretend to care about you to look good.

5

foggymorn wrote

Take that cultish reactionary scaremongering back to reddit. Trans people don't exist for you to weaponise against green anarchists.

4

mouse wrote (edited )

dude, IM a green anarchist. But acting as if resorting to being hunter/gatherers (and utilizing animal slavery) is going to solve all of our problems is so regressionist

−3

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Mouse: I'm a green anarchist because I don't eat meat! Also Mouse: Agriculture that led to the domestication of livestock, genetic bottlenecking of crops and degradation of land is a good thing!

2

TheLegendaryBirdMonster wrote

by genetic bottle-necking of crops, are you talking about supermarkets only selling specefic species and banning others? I wouldnt say it's agriculture itself that caused that.

otherwise, what are you talking about? It's the first time I hear this argument.

3

ziq wrote

Probably because by mass producing crops for certain desirable (profitable) traits, the diverse gene pool of the wild plant is largely erased by cross-pollination and then further by the farmers destroying the wild plant populations (weeds) to stop them from a) crosspollinating the domesticated crops and b) competing with them for survival.

4

mouse wrote (edited )

get off your computer then primmie. at least i can enact praxis and live by the values i support, where as you cannot because you know they're never coming true.

neither you or I would survive a week in a saharan winter and you know it. stop kidding yourself.

edit: look its you https://coinsh.red/p/ancestors_lol.jpg

−3

GaldraChevaliere wrote

We should improve dismantle society somewhat. Yet you participate in society, how ironic. I am very intelligent!

I use a computer because you literally cannot survive in capitalism without one, especially if you do sex work.

SAHARAN WINTER

SAHARAN

WINTER

Are you high?

2

mouse wrote

jesus fuck man, I just meant "a desert winter", yeah sorry. Dont try to red herring the point.

−3

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Don't red herring that you're pulling shit out of your ass, right.

Funny thing is in the environments I'm used to, which are cold as a witch's tit and only mitigated by the coast being there, I'd do pretty well because I took the time to learn what is and isn't safe to eat, when it grows, and what to avoid. It's not often I get to get out of the city, but every time I do I'm practicing specifically to be able to subsist in those environs. Like, maybe leave the Sahara to the folk and beasts used to living there and learn about your own surroundings.

4

mouse wrote

Big brain knows which plants are safe to eat. Eat the natural vegetation then and not your ridiculously expensive walmart soup.

−3

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Try not polluting the shit out of it first or driving it to endangerment to make more room for farms.

5

foggymorn wrote (edited )

Are you a green anarchist though? You're anti-civ? Or just a vegan like likes animals?

1

mouse wrote

I dont know what you guys think its required in order to be "green", but im definitely not against agriculture. Im anti-civ in some aspects, but sacrificing all of our modern inventions (especially medicine) is not the way to go. I'm a radical vegan and anti-consumerist and monocultures are definitely bad.

However, for the time being, veganism, gardening, and DIYing any luxuries/clothing you can is a lot more green+anarchist than: thinking that after the inevitable climate collapse in 10-20 years, leaving disabled people or anyone who needs pharmaceuticals in the dust in favor of running around all day finding berries to eat.

This concept that agriculture somehow created sexism is fucking ridiculous. I'm positive women were raped frequently back in the good-old-days of neanderthals simply because of their smaller stature and the little rapey brains of cavemen.

I know this is "revisionism" but we have to find a better way to get rid of landlords and bosses than to all live homeless in the woods. If thats what you want to do, I'll respect it, but an entire global society regressing back 10k+ years isn't the solution to capitalism. Let's all ride bikes instead of cars and make sure we don't destroy the planet (again), but I cant buy into this anti-evolution eugenicist shit showing off how much sexier men were back before farming existed.

−1

GaldraChevaliere wrote

Sure, if we ignore the sheer inaccessibility of veganism to most of the working poor, or to already threatened cultures that still rely on nomadic pastoralism or foraging or fishing, but fuck them, right?

Surprisingly enough, pre-modern cultures actually looked after their disabled thanks to clan and tribal obligations, the fact that having legs don't work doesn't suddenly make all the knowledge or other skills you've accumulated disappear, and basic decency. It's also almost like we don't suddenly lose all that knowledge we've accumulated about medicine or being decent to eachother in a giant book burning or some shit, wow! Almost like the majority of medicines are already synthesized from plant sources, or that we can point out pretty fucking universally that massive agricultural projects and city sprawls are immensely destructive to everything around them, but maybe keeping a county hospital is a good idea.

Agriculture is absolutely traceable to hierarchy and patriarchy, we can literally see how populations explode and how those cultures go from relatively egalitarian and sustainable to patriarchal empires that collapse as soon as their resources run out or a bigger agricultural society shows up. No shit it didn't invent rape, but feudal kingdoms and empires originated rape culture, which made rape from a crime of one against one to a crime of an overclass against an underclass. Looking at remains of norse and pre-scandinavian folk by the way, we actually have a really fucking hard time telling the boys from the girls. So much so that some fuckboy anthropologist mutilated the skeletons of shieldmaidens to make them look more 'masculine' rather than admit that women bore arms.

LOL, the funny thing is you won't respect it, because your technofetishism necessarily means cutting down the fucking woods to fuel the fires of industry. That's kind of the sick joke, bruv. You can't opt out of civilisation any more than you can out of capitalism. It'll find you wherever you go.

4

mouse wrote

Sure, if we ignore the sheer inaccessibility of veganism to most of the working poor

A pound of beef costs $3.70. A pound of beans cost $0.23. I am working class. I am also vegan. It's pretty fucking easy.

Almost like the majority of medicines are already synthesized from plant sources

I take antidepressants that I need to function daily. Essential oils are no replacement for medicine.

Agriculture is absolutely traceable to hierarchy and patriarchy

This is actually true, but only under capitalism. If the crop owner uses his crops to take advantage of others by making them pay or building him the biggest house, yes. What makes you so sure that this wouldn't just happen again if we returned to primitivism?

the funny thing is you won't respect it, because your technofetishism necessarily means cutting down the fucking woods to fuel the fires of industry

You keep implying that im some sort of transhumanist, which im definitely not.

1

GaldraChevaliere wrote

I'm literally an obligate vegetarian, getting dinner made with shit from wal-mart to have enough soup for three people for two days ran us twenty-five bucks. Meat is absolutely cheaper by the pound and fills you for longer, mostly thanks to the huge fucking scale of production livestocking runs at, especially compared to any vegetables that aren't maize or grain. You can do a lot with a pound of beans, but you can't make a rounded diet out of them. I know because I have to.

You can derive aspirin, one of the most common medicines in the world, from willow-bark. The majority of medicines are synthesized from a botanical source, and like I already said, there's a world of difference between maintaining a sprawling city and a regional hospital. Generally speaking us filthy savage primmies aren't advocating for destroying every single lab that manufactures insulin or antipsychotics, we're arguing for the dissolution of a structure that makes health problems even more prevalent than they already were.

You're aware that agriculture predates capital, right? Rome for all its imperialist bullshit wasn't a capitalist society, and early medieval/late migration England sure as hell wasn't. The crop owner already does this, it's called feudalism, and is only feasible in stationary societies where he can use violence to control the only source of food. That's why kings had royal forests only they could hunt in, where their soldiers would murder you for poaching to feed your family. You're asking the same question literally every cappy asks leftists, "b-but what if it comes back!". The answer is we don't let it.

I'm implying that your goals are shallow and meet ultimately the same ends, the preservation of your comfort over doing what actually needs to be done. Given a choice between averting collapse and maintaining civilization's ravenous growth and upkeep, you'll choose the latter.

5

mouse wrote

I just provided you with the fact that meat costs 16x more by pound and you have the nerve to say "meat is absolutely cheaper by the pound"... wtf. veganism is inarguable lol, stop trying. but look at you! a vegetarian, how cute. dairy is worse for the enviornment and causes even more animal torture than meat, but thats okay because one day your completely unrealistic goals are gonna happen, right?

You're aware that agriculture predates capital, right?

so you dont think we could keep capitalism out of it without feudalism?

the preservation of your comfort

i want comfort for everyone, so in a way, yes.

0

GaldraChevaliere wrote

LMAO, of course the vegan's pretentious about his petit-bourgie way of life. I'm vegetarian because meat makes me violently ill, you idiot. And it's still cheaper in bulk than getting vegetables, as proven by going out the other fucking night to make dinner at home. In terms of how much you can bring back, how much energy it gives you, and how much food you can make with it, getting industrialized meat is way fucking cheaper than vegetables, and I'd probably be eating a whole lot fucking better if it wasn't. Dairy's necessary to my diet because there's little in the way of cheap sources of Vitamin D and calcium, so I bear with it instead of pretending that there's somehow ethical consumption under economies of scale. My vegetarianism is necessary, yours is a fashion statement. The potential loss of that easy source of Vitamin D and calcium when something's actually fucking done about the factory farms is a sacrifice I'm more than willing to live with, especially considering how much less impact something like small scale subsistence farming or pastoralism has on the environment around it in comparison. Until then, I work with what my broke ass can afford to maintain my health.

1

existential1 wrote

Not trying to jump into this argument or really trying to participate past the comment I'm about to make, but in no way shape or form is meat cheaper than vegetables/grains in small or bulk fashion. I think for you make that argument, you'd really need to break down your definition in this context of "cost". Personal cost vs societal, what externalities does your definition include/exclude, etc.

I think it's really ignorant to argue that meat is cheaper in any way "in-general". It isn't. It doesn't take a lot of logic to understand why either. It isn't sensational to say that either.

To me, you'd have to throw in some caveats that you absolutely haven't in this thread to explain how it is possible that in your specific case meat can be cheaper than bulk vegetables (and to me, the context of your use of the word vegetables in this thread seems to be anything that isn't meat, which includes grains/legumes).

I'm vegan as are other folks in here, but I do think it is possible for individuals to have valid ethical reasons to abstain from a vegan diet in modern society. I think I've yet to read your reasoning in a way that have moved me to believe you have a well-thought-out explanation of your choices (not that you need to, cuz I'm not your parent/loved one and you don't know/care about me at all).

For your unfounded opinion of vegan sources of calcium, please read: https://www.vrg.org/blog/2010/09/21/faqs-about-vitamin-d/

For your more founded opinion of vegan sources of vitamin D: https://www.vrg.org/blog/2010/09/21/faqs-about-vitamin-d/

Just my 2 cents...

5

TheLegendaryBirdMonster wrote (edited )

dumpster dives, food banks and other free distribution of food are often not vegan and are the cheapest you can get. Maybe one could argue meat on sales is cheaper than veggies at supermarkets too, but I haven't looked into it.

If you're working class and/or poor student, I agree with you: If you've got enough money to shop, choose and cook your food, bulk vegan from scratch will be cheaper.

but going vegan itself also costs time and energy: be it reading/education and cooking/changing habits, all are things poor people can not always afford to do. And meat is also a source of pleasure they can not emotionally afford to leave.

be careful, the things you take for granted aren't for everybody; especially on raddle.

5

existential1 wrote

I agree with everything you said, but I would add that past the second paragraph, you added things that are outside of the very specific context I tried to stick to...which was monetary cost of things at the store and nutritional options.

I happened to use food banks for a time (2 of them in same city), before I was vegan, and that's actually mostly vegan except the bread sometimes can have milk and the meat options were very limited and often canned. I'd say maybe 90% of what was given was vegan in my very limited experience. I would imagine dumpster dives of produce is horrible unless it's bagged, but even then, probably not great.

And I would also add that when I was on food stamps, I used to spend my $200/month in maybe 20-25 days on just myself (which is why I used to visit food banks). Presently, I spend maybe $125/mo on groceries since becoming vegan and buying mostly bulk foods. So honestly if I was vegan when I was in worse monetary shape, it would have changed my life for the better at the time. Hindsight always 20/20...so salt grains and all that.

And as for the emotional thing with meat, I get it. I was there. From this side of my experience I can solidly vouch that some % of meat cravings greater than 0 is attachment to what you know, and gut bacteria craving the things you've always fed them. Not all too different than falling back on political positions/ideas that you've always had because that's the information you feed your brain and it wants to stay consistent. The human system is a really complex but sometimes very simple system. I would say my meat cravings since being vegan are analogous to my State cravings (need/want to engage with the State) since learning more anarchist theory/practice...very seldom if ever present.

None of that is to diminish individual's own experiences, just expressing my own and what I've come to interpret through them.

5