Possum_Bride wrote (edited )

You really just don't get how bad the experiences of minorities with invisible disabilities can be. Idk.

society is very intolerant of people don't fit the expected mainstream social norms. but the fix to that is to change people's attitudes to be more accepting

"Trying better" helps no-one and just makes people feel guilty. There are strong structural reasons why people are not accepting of the different.

The state systematically isolates and represses us and this hits the neurodivergent and other minorities hardest. It's not just sexual repression although that's one of the more obvious ways these issues show up. The authoritarian family unit systematically transforms emotional and physical intimacy into a source of terror and pain.

Fucked if I know how to fix Discord servers. I have a few ideas about play and random contact I guess. Also still chewing over Bell Hooks' Sisterhood: Political Solidarity Between Women.


Possum_Bride OP wrote

I am not asexual.

I am firmly a sexual lesbian even if I have mental health challenges and other issues that complicate acting on those desires.

Also being asexual doesn't remove the need for physical and emotional intimacy. Plenty of asexual people enjoy cuddling or kink.

The problem is I have too many brain worms.


Possum_Bride wrote

Sure. But unless they moderate a very large server they're relatively unimportant compared to most other hierarchies.

There also are a bunch of free software geeks working on decentralized chat applications. These have had moderate if any success but who knows what the future will bring.


Possum_Bride wrote (edited )

I'm not a fan of the argument but the usual argument is along the lines that misandry is usually based around a general hatred for feminity even when it hurts men in specific or is some other form of oppression. I don't feel I can give the argument a fair representation but it does seem off to me. For example I feel misandry, hatred of masculinity, actually hurts many women a lot.

Feminism is just a loosely related family of social movements. "Equality for both" doesn't really represent how these movements work in practice. Many branches of feminism believe in gender artifactualism, gender as solely a figment of culture, or believe in gender essentialism. Many branches of feminism are quite patriarchal or racist or classist or whatever. Just how it is.

Anyhow I don't really feel I can give a fair defense or criticism of feminisms.

Also by equality for both do you mean equality of men and women or equality of masculinity and femininity?


Possum_Bride wrote

I have huge issues so I'm cautious about it but definitely I have sympathy for you.

I think you might like Julia Serano's Whipping Girl and Sexed Up and also like Bell Hooks stuff like Sisterhood: Political Solidarity Between Women.


Possum_Bride wrote

To be honest a lot of feminists are very patriarchal and use and reinforce gender entitlement. And people positioning themselves as victims absolves themselves of their own complicity in supporting patriarchy and other bigotries.

That said I made the point that misandry hurts many women as well as men: trans women, lesbians and other minorities. There is something to be said about how the powerful hate and cage masculinity. The powerful donate massive funds to patriarchal churches and institutions and force masculinity into a box so as to punish weaker men or to force weaker men to go to war and so on. But as I mentioned many women are hurt by misandry and harder and control of masculinity as well. Point being feminism which neglects misandry hurts women as well.

I don't really know. I think there are a lot of pseudo feminists out there who don't really take the time to work on themselves. Just how life works anyhow. Doesn't make patriarchy any less of a problem because many feminists are very flawed people. Just really annoying.


Possum_Bride wrote (edited )

You should read Whipping Girl and Sexed Up by Julia Serano. Also maybe Cameron Awkward Rich's Trans, Feminism: Or, Reading like a Depressed Transsexual.

So full disclosure I have issues I really haven't worked out yet and can't give an unbiased explanation.

If you divide sexism up into traditional sexism (the specific essentialist traits attributed to masculinity and feminity) and oppositional sexism (male and female are opposing traits) in many ways many men tend to be more affected by oppositional sexism. However, keep in mind oppositional sexism also affects trans women and lesbians.

Look growing up as a boy toxic masculinity was a survival strategy.

Misandry is a hatred of masculinity not hatred of men. Actually misandry is widely deployed against women marked by masculinity. These women are derided as angry, violent, predatory and many other vices commonly attributed to men here and now. In a like manner men are also attacked by misogyny. Many men are derided as emotional, overly concerned with aesthetics and so on. Sometimes people are attacked both with misandry and misogyny. Trans women tend to get the worse of this but you see similar situations with other minority groups to a lesser degree.

Trans people are most aware of misgendering and "gender entitlement" as a weapon of attack but the weapon is commonly used elsewhere. Racial minorities are often feminized or masculinized.

What many feminists reject is patriarchy is rule by the fathers not rule by men. If you're not a powerful man misandry absolutely can be used to hurt you. I tend to see patriarchy as in large part a type of false consciousness used to get easy votes and scam men. It's no different than the kind of racism where they say "look behind you is a babyeater" and then they steal your wallet.

Also radical feminists tend to see gender as solely an artifact of culture "gender artifactualism" instead of as a social construct.

Edit: Also like feminists are just normal flawed people. Just because you're a feminist doesn't mean you can't be a bad person or whatever.

Edit2: Also it's not that complicated. Feminists have just heard the word misandry from the wrong sort of people too much and have an aversion to the word even if it's the right word. Feminists usually prefer to call it misogyny which sometimes is justified and sometimes is not. Anyhow if a feminist reinforces masculine stereotypes you can maybe be slightly more convincing if you call it out as misogyny instead. Just how things are.


Possum_Bride OP wrote

So I tried het fantasies before I transitioned and was still closeted and in denial which is why things are weird and confusing for me. So it's kind of a hybrid of trauma from gender dysphoria projecting myself into the guy and with projecting myself into the woman having hetero intercourse.

After starting transition. I just felt being a lesbian was small potatoes compared to being trans. Anyhow I always thought of myself as some kind of bi mostly leaning towards attraction to women.

You are right to bring up the whole OCD aspect. So I have a friend with pure O OCD who thinks I have similar issues. It's complicated because I have ADHD and Adderall helped a lot.

But anyhow I read a few books on OCD and the basic idea is don't worry about intrusive thoughts they're ego dystonic and you're not actually going to do them. So the basic strategy with OCD is to identify intrusive thoughts and reattribute them to OCD or whatever. So how I took it is usually I might end up tagging intrusive thoughts of violence with stigma, depression and ruminating. The other thing is exposure and response therapy which is slightly more complicated with more mental compulsions but you can still desensitise yourself to obsessive fears. Anyhow I have been working on my internalized stigmas in a bunch of ways but it's still pretty tough going. I have been making progress though.

Your story reminds me of a few trans women in a discord server I'm in.

Anyhow yeah I'm thinking of like the mental trauma of forcing yourself to whack to het porn basically. It's weird because lesbian porn/fantasies is somewhat accepted for guys but it's just weird.


Possum_Bride OP wrote

I mean you can still wander around like Snufkin if you want? I guess what I'm talking about doesn't apply as much to you.

I was thinking about this. If you make it all abstract then it's really a problem with information asymmetry and risk aversion in a gift economy.

Right-wing types are often very afraid. So they don't take the social risks that might lead to escaping their filter bubbles or benefit their lives in other ways.

The information asymmetry thing is almost a reverse of the usual issues under a market economy. You can't give gifts to someone you don't know anything about. I don't know anything about the subject but some things are signaling and screening. The trouble is under capitalism we are beaten until we try to try to signal wealth with knockoff goods and other foibles. Also like signaling poverty, mental health problems and other issues can be dangerous. Also you want to avoid frauds.

I'm sure there's stuff on this sort of problem but I don't really know the details.


Possum_Bride wrote

Dude you have cPTSD. You totally had an abusive father and an awful childhood.

Also you're disabled.

Life's shit for disabled people in a lot of ways.

Work on your problems. A lot of therapists and psychiatrists are pretty shit but they can be a little helpful. Also read a bunch of self-help books. A large amount of them are shit but I recommend The Anxiety and Phobia Workbook and Complex PTSD From Surviving to Thriving : A Guide and Map for Recovering From Childhood Trauma. Mindfulness in Plain English is great for meditation as well.

Don't diminish your problems. Don't inflate your problems. Just take small steps every day to improve your situation.

You say you're autistic? See if you have sensory issues. Try a pair of noise-canceling headphones. Try blackout blinds.

Also maybe see if you're ADHD it can contribute to intrusive thoughts. Basic summary is get on ADHD meds, exercise and use fidget toys. Also use a timer for time blindness.


Possum_Bride wrote (edited )

Crapitalism or market failure basically.

Online pornography is basically a monopoly under MindGeek. These kinds of monopolies are inevitable because porn is currently a natural monopoly: there are high startup costs and barriers to entry.

It might seem like anyone can take their cellphone and post a video of them masturbating on the internet. And you can, kind of. But due to the stigma around pornography very few people are willing to risk their reputation that way. Furthermore, credit card processors heavily discriminate against all forms of sex work. Credit card processors have heavy-handed restrictions on the partners they do let through. The ACLU is currently suing MasterCard for these kinds of issues https://www.aclu.org/news/lgbtq-rights/how-mastercards-new-policy-violates-sex-workers-rights

As well, there is a large amount of information asymmetry due to the stigma. Nobody tells their buddy in a bar that the trans porn they saw last Wednesday had too many or too little slurs.

IIRC there are also problem due to online pornography being a digital good and not really a product. I forgot all the details about that.

Anyhow there are a bunch of problems which mean people don't get the porn they want in the first place.

But anyhow why are you watching pornography you don't like anyway?


Possum_Bride OP wrote

Physical labor or intellectual labor is often not the problem with NEETs. Many NEETs are very driven and intelligent if often depressed and fatigued.

I struggle a lot with communication and cooperation and I think these are underexplored issues and opportunities with anarchy.

Because I have ADHD I deal with issues like Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria. In today's world I am very afraid of tasks like job interviews and performance reviews. As well, I struggle with organizing my thoughts into clear and coherent writing. In anarchy I would struggle with anxiety over negotiating important disputes. Because of the fear of rejection I may put off important disputes. And in the progress of disputes I may not communicate my needs clearly and coherently.

I am much better than I was a few years ago but many people have the same sort of problems and do not cope very well.

In addition, due to sensory issues I find difficulty with crowds. Today I find job fairs very distressing. I find noise-canceling headphones and breaks can help with networking but I still have issues. Under anarchy I think I would have difficulty with collective meetings as a whole. Because I would struggle to get my voice out during meetings I think many of my needs would be less met than they could.

These issues are distinct from more general handicaps such as trauma, depression or social anxiety.

For several reasons I deeply struggle with emotional intimacy. This often leads to a robotic or artificial character to how I talk. Often I really am not being honest or authentic with others. Because of deep and painful issues I find it very hard to talk about issues in general and to accept gifts or give gifts. I required an inordinate amount of courage to apply for various services and welfare.

Again I am much better than I am many years ago but I know many people face similar issues.

Many visions of anarchy put an emphasis on communication and play. But communication and play require an emotional freedom and intimacy which can be extremely painful to some people. Because of my issues with social contact and play I deal with a great many issues under capitalism. I don't think this is a problem with anarchy exactly. But I do want to read about how anarchists solve issues with communication and play when communication and play are not available or are violently painful.

I'm sure some anarchists have probably written about these sorts of issues.


Possum_Bride OP wrote

Yeah I want to spend my limited spoons on talking with my friends not resolving property disputes.

I don't think gift economies really work that way exactly. And I'm sure it's possible to have a friend be a helpful intermediary in gift giving for you.


Possum_Bride OP wrote

It's more I have trouble envisioning this specific kind of situation than I think it would be difficult for anarchy to handle.

I think it's likely anarchy would handle this situation better than archy but I have trouble thinking through how it might turn out. I do wonder if criticizing anarchy through this edge case can lead to a stronger vision for anarchy.


Possum_Bride OP wrote

This is fair. I didn't want to confuse groups. I get really upset myself when people confuse NEETs or other overly online types with incels or other groups. I was not sure of the best phrasing. At one point I was thinking of phrasing it as "people with avoidant personality disorder."


Possum_Bride OP wrote

I feel bad reading language like "enable." This kind of language has been used to promote "tough love." I didn't need "tough love" I needed estrogen and Adderall.

NEETs can continue as hermits, but they'll need to take more responsibility for themselves

I guess hermitage is an extreme case of the issue?

I think "emotional labor" is the wrong phrase but it's something like that. "Social labor" sounds kind of right. Not sure I can put my finger on the precise issue.


Possum_Bride OP wrote

Trust can be really difficult for 4chan self-isolating types.

Trust is part of it but not really what I mean though exactly. I can't put my finger on it but I just don't think how anarchy can work is underexplored with a certain type of avoidant person.