I am a right-wing feminist, so reddit has banned me on a number of fronts.

ech · 2020-07-03T22:41:57+00:00

I agree totally. A left-liberalism based on principle and not tribalism would detest Islam. The problem is that the organizing principle of the left isn't empathy, fairness, or individual rights as they claim, but instead sticking it to the Red Team.

ech · 2020-07-02T22:47:03+00:00

Greg Johnson essentially says: "let's have a white country first, then we can debate feminism." Jared Taylor is pretty hospitable to feminism, too. I also used to be friends with Enoch before he got doxed. These guys are reasonable on women's issues if you engage with them patiently. There are definitely #WhiteSharia edgelords out there but if WNism ever took power (it won't), it would need to do so on the back of a much broader coalition. I don't think they would ever implement feminist policies, but they're not going to be exterminating white women for posting feminist arguments on the internet.

I personally do not identify with hardcore WNism, though. I am more of a Sailer type.

ech · 2020-07-02T22:40:45+00:00

The oft-used analogy is true: it's the difference between cutting off the fingernail and cutting off the hand. And one is done to an infant for more-or-less arbitrary reasons, while the other is done to a much older child for sadistic reasons.

ech · 2020-07-02T19:05:22+00:00

I think this is scientifically true. How else do you interact with the real world if not 100% through your own senses and ultimately through your own construct/model of your own senses?

I think demarcating physical pain from other phenomena registered by the brain is artificial and dualist. We know that certain human interactions reliably produce adrenaline, oxytocin, and whatnot. If you experience a predictable nervous-system response because someone kisses you vs. slapping you, are those responses so different? It seems reasonable to "blame" others for the predictable consequences of their behavior, although that doesn't mean divesting the sufferer of any agency or locus of control. In the scenario I described, I would absolutely blame the NYT. But this could be a very abstract difference of opinion we are litigating.

ech · 2020-07-02T18:57:01+00:00

If you were capriciously doxed and cancelled by the New York Times over something innocuous you did on the Internet 10 years ago, and your family consequently got evicted from housing and got assaulted by marauding rioters, I'd blame the NYT and the rioters for what could fairly be called suffering (even in excess of literal physical pain). But if you have some kind of ~zen problem with that approach, and you instead insist that most human experience is manufactured in the subject's brain, to each his own I guess.

ech · 2020-07-02T18:32:38+00:00

therefore blaming anyone else for one's suffering is irrational.

Well, I'm certain you can think of instances of suffering for which you'd blame others.

ech · 2020-07-02T17:58:07+00:00

JQ is one of those things where once you are sufficiently pilled, it's a lens through which you see every interaction, and it's ALWAYS the topic. But basically I agree with you and thanks for the welcome.

ech · 2020-07-02T17:46:01+00:00

Thanks very much! I'm enjoying it here so far. And in a weird way I don't mind JQ acrimony around the edges, because it shows the place really is uncensored.

ech · 2020-07-02T17:45:00+00:00

this is apt and obvious

ech · 2020-07-02T16:40:34+00:00

Basically I think women deserve to be seen as individuals.

ech · 2020-07-02T15:07:54+00:00

Well what counts as "feminist"? Do you have to buy into the whole "woke" stack? That's kindof part of the problem imo.

Definitely not. If you've read my other posts you know I am extremely antiwoke, lol. I suppose I meant: not antifeminist or totally off topic.

ech · 2020-07-02T14:52:36+00:00

Yeah if they are moderating good faith, substantive feminist content for partisan reasons that's disappointing

ech · 2020-07-02T14:41:48+00:00

I am not aggressive about censoring or banning, but I understand why someone would want to vigilantly moderate a feminist subreddit on a mostly alt right site. To prevent it from filling up with shitposts, basically. That's what I was saying in the other thread.

ech · 2020-07-02T13:33:28+00:00

I get impatient watching people articulate views in videos that would be much more efficiently set forth in text I could just read. But after watching a few seconds in, my framing of "feminism" is obviously different than his (see my OP).

ech · 2020-07-02T13:22:19+00:00

"Unless they pose a threat to the public" is the elastic clause here. A homeowner who brandishes a gun against a violent mob will be deemed to pose a threat, but a hobo serial rapist won't.

ech · 2020-07-02T11:52:05+00:00

No, but it’s a useful meme.

ech · 2020-07-02T11:29:17+00:00

Lol that you could read my OP and think I don’t know these people. Hanging out at TRS with the neocons, lmao

ech · 2020-07-02T04:01:18+00:00

Nah they generally seem fond of me

ech · 2020-07-02T02:35:08+00:00

The idea is that the premise you're invalidating ("I'm a woman") is so core to his identity, and how he experiences the world, that you're invalidating his existence and humanity. TRA discourse isn't the first type of newspeak to resort to these exaggerations. It's the same reason disagreeing with BLM on anything is "violence."

ech · 2020-07-02T02:32:54+00:00

What is the difference between this and /s/GenderCritical?

ech · 2020-07-02T02:23:09+00:00

lol if only you knew

ech · 2020-07-02T02:21:13+00:00

Why not just gather in /r/JKRowling? Force reddit to ban the sub dedicated to one of the most commercially successful normie authors of all time.

ech · 2020-07-02T02:09:07+00:00

i'm also rich and white. xoxo.

ech · 2020-07-02T01:54:11+00:00

Welcome. I share some of the views you say you find tiresome, but relate to where you're coming from. One challenge with anti-censorship offshoot sites like this is that they sometimes end up dedicated, tediously, to the specific points of view that were banned, versus simply replicating the uncensored golden age of the prior website. Gab is an example of this. Anyways, I'm brand new to Saidit but hopeful that it can avoid being all alt right, all the time.

ech · 2020-07-02T01:49:22+00:00

Nice username. I assume you are a bigoted Nazi TERF?

ech · 2020-07-02T01:47:24+00:00

Welcome. What does it mean to retire from being a housewife? Does it mean you return to the workforce?

ech · 2020-07-02T01:03:00+00:00

When your prophet famously married and bedded a six-year-old, the concept of marital rape seems almost sacrilegious.

ech · 2020-07-02T00:34:02+00:00

no u

ech · 2020-07-02T00:02:13+00:00

I've never been evangelical and I'm not especially ignorant on these matters, although "bigoted" may be subjective. To be honest, it's the progressive establishment, and its zeal to scold and dox ordinary people who dissent from its trendy dogmas, that radicalized me. I don't hate trans people, or minorities. I hate the New York Times, Harvard, and Silicon Valley, though.

ech · 2020-07-01T23:17:05+00:00

Abortion is a substantive issue and I don't blame feminists for caring about it. The zeal to celebrate abortions up until the moment of birth is unwise, though.

ech · 2020-07-01T22:13:16+00:00

Do you mean from gendercritical, or trumpism?

ech · 2020-07-01T22:11:58+00:00

I'm genuinely curious -- what would you have me read, or "educate myself" on, other than the sources I told you I've spent years reading?

ech · 2020-07-01T20:56:50+00:00

I'm not keen on learning a new language.

lol I am looking at real estate in Eastern Europe, but grudgingly.

I do and I don't. That Ron Paul meme, "You could have prevented this" springs to mind.

Yeah but foresight isn't in normies' nature. The elites who should have husbanded them let them down.

ech · 2020-07-01T20:45:30+00:00

It is theoretically possible we know some of the same groups. I'm very blackpilled on the "will it be enough" question, but candidly and crassly, I am rich enough to survive even if it's not. I regret what is in store for normies, however.

ech · 2020-07-01T20:40:27+00:00

It's difficult to predict the future now but if I had to, I'd predict a slow slide into entropy and rot. Infrastructure gradually shittier. Societal trust gradually declining. Court system less reliable, families less functional, streets less clean. But no big explosive definitive boogaloo. This could be the worst case scenario, because at least if we dramatically imploded into a full-throttle war, there would be no pretense of enforcing the old rules and nobody could stick their heads in the sand anymore. This could be a long agonizing frog-boil situation instead.

ech · 2020-07-01T20:33:48+00:00

Gets more revenue from cable fees than from ads.

ech · 2020-07-01T20:15:35+00:00

Exactly -- "skin in the game" is a big part of the appeal, ditto that you get to prune which audiences are pandered-to.

I basically agree with Peter Thiel that if I have to choose between liberty and democracy, I choose liberty. But, joke's on us, because soon we're going to have neither. LOL.

ech · 2020-07-01T19:59:00+00:00

OP here. I, too, am skeptical of democracy, but edgelords who just pick on female suffrage specifically are usually lame misogynists. There's no principled basis in this day and age for granting universal suffrage to men and not women. You constantly see shitposters harp on the 19th Amendment and women's "nurturing instincts" or alleged incapacity for independent thought (males who say this are often, themselves, NPCs), but nobody mentions the antisocial, burn-it-down tendencies of unattached young males. Male voters got us the Immigration Act of 1965, and male voters are more likely to favor war than female voters. If you really want to limit suffrage, there are better schemes, such as:

Suffrage for families: A married man and woman with at least one child collectively get one vote.
Suffrage for taxpayers: Self explanatory.
Suffrage based on a test of cognitive ability and/or civic knowledge: self explanatory.
Suffrage based on national service: self explanatory.

All of these proposals seem less popular, in my experience, than just trashing women. Perhaps because the NEETs who populate these discussions don't have families, or pay very many taxes, or distinguish themselves in any way other than being male.

ech · 2020-07-01T19:45:24+00:00

What's funny is I didn't start out with a right-wing disposition. For example, if you are familiar with Jonathan Haidt's work (which examines psychological underpinnings of different political orientations), my scores on his exams suggest I should be a libertarian. But I'm very bullshit-intolerant, and there's a lot of totalitarian bullshit being imposed by the "progressive" camp. I have beliefs about race and IQ that are supported by evidence and shouldn't objectively have any moral content -- they're simply empirical assertions of fact that are true, or they're false -- but have been hyperpoliticized.

Current online discourse (especially Twitter, and especially bluecheck twitter) is toxic and has probably hurt democracy more than we can assess.

ech · 2020-07-01T18:59:02+00:00

Yeah, a lot of polling backs this up -- normie Americans are left on economics, unwoke on social issues. But this constituency has no formal voice.

ech · 2020-07-01T18:32:39+00:00

They are leftist on economics, but anti-SJW on cultural issues.

ech · 2020-07-01T18:17:13+00:00

Really glad to meet you.

Regarding mass immigration, I would be willing to let in some women if they couldn't chain-migrate their husbands and sons, and if they could be vetted to ensure they reject Islam.

ech · 2020-07-01T18:08:48+00:00

Could you please summarize the right-wing part of your right-wing feminism in 2-3 sentences, without references to personalities, social circles or media outlets you draw on?

It's hard to do this without reference to the above, but I'll try. I think civilization is hard to create and easy to destroy, and that seismic changes to the civilizational order should be approached with caution (vs. pursuing change for the sake of change). I think individuals should be judged on their merits as individuals, and that it's desirable to treat individuals fairly and equitably, but don't respect "justice" claims by groups. Moreover, there are obvious robust, and often innate, differences between human population groups which produce different life outcomes and at a massive scale, different societal outcomes. We should stop destroying our schools and emptying our coffers trying to ensure that kids of every color get the same SAT scores, because it's not going to happen. (And no, that doesn't justify abolishing the SAT). We should also recognize that mass immigration from the third world will make our societies more like the third world, which is bad. Traditional "family values" (discouraging extramarital sex, encouraging obedience to parents, encouraging loyalty to one's family and community) generated positive externalities so although those values can feel stifling to some, we should be cautious about tearing them down. I would rather live under quasi-fascism (Singapore) than quasi-communism (Venezuela), although ideally I prefer to live under classical liberalism, which is nowadays a conservative view. I truly hate our media and political elites for their hostility to ordinary people, especially ordinary white people.

ech · 2020-07-01T17:50:07+00:00

Don't expect black people to be pro-racism when it's destroyed and continues to destroy our communities, our minds, and our bodies every day.

The opposite of antiracism isn't pro-racism. It's more like, "not racist." Antiracism is just demented inverted racism that targets whites. I've cited several authors, outlets, and memes that exemplify this.

Must be good to be able to fall back on white supremacy when you don't have any male privilege.

Actually at the moment I am intersectionally targeted for being a white woman ("Karen"), so both incels and BLM Maoists hate me.

I wonder how supportive these white men would be of you if you decided not do exactly what they want you to do which is uphold white supremacy which they very well know ultimately benefits them (white men) the most in the end? Something tells me they'd dispose of you fast because white supremacy and male dominance go hand in hand.

Weird how male dominance is most brutal, almost without exception, in nonwhite countries.

I am not fond of the majority of alt right males. I've posted elsewhere that misogyny is common in these environments and I dislike it. But I guess if I had to choose, I'd rather live in a red Republican state with abortion bans than in crime-ridden 1970s NYC or the favelas of Brazil. Antiracists want to transform the country into some combo of those latter two.

I want to go back to this:

continues to destroy our communities, our minds, and our bodies every day

I know this is common antiracist language, but do you really believe your mind and body are daily being destroyed by racism? How? Don't you think it's toxic that one of our dominant cultural narratives paints black people as perpetual victims likely to be murdered by white supremacists every time they step outside? In reality, the # of unarmed black people shot every year by police is about 1/2 of the # of Americans killed being struck by lightning. It's not a common occurrence. A sick, shameless media environment promotes fear and hate for clicks and rents.

I have no doubt that spending time in right-wing e-venues is rightly frustrating to you and that you see things glibly said and upvoted about black people which aren't fair. You probably see irrational animus and dehumanization. I am never going to respect someone like Ta Nehesi Coates or the ideology he and others are hawking, but for whatever it is or isn't worth, I don't judge you based on your race and I don't think it's fair for others to do so, either.

ech · 2020-07-01T17:43:06+00:00

I think israel does run a lot of things in USA and other western countries, to say that gets you labeled antisemitic and an unperson

Criticizing Jews qua Jews gets you this, but criticizing Israel is downright fashionable. Powerful Jewish figures and institutions ranging from Jon Stewart to the New York Times hate Israel. It's fashionable for the same reason that criticizing cops and white people is fashionable.

If you think for yourself there is no downside to BDS.

I see a downside to it because I applaud what Israel is doing (enforcing its borders, protecting its heritage population, and keeping Islam marginalized), and wish the West could do the same. If there's an economic upside to tariffs, then let's apply them in an economically optimal fashion, not a fashion designed to scold Israel for not wanting to get swamped by Africans.

ech · 2020-07-01T17:31:00+00:00

I haven't "discredited" myself.

You have, you just don't realize it, which doesn't surprise me.

Palestinians are better than Jews

You also seem like a misogynist who hates any kind of ordered civilization, which also doesn't surprise me. I mean, otherwise, I don't see how you could have a single favorable word to say about Arab Muslims.

I'm curious though, who do you think KMac is shilling for? The jews?

ech · 2020-07-01T17:26:02+00:00

It purports to target Israel for human rights abuses, but ignores worse human rights abuses elsewhere. Some people say the real impetus is antisemitism, but I think it's anti-civilization. Israel is an unapologetic white-ish ethnostate willing to defend its demographics and borders. Keffiyeh third-worldist activist types don't actually care how many innocents are abused or enslaved -- if they did, they'd care about the plight of women in MENA or dissidents in China. They care about signaling against the West and white people.

BDS against South Africa was misguided for the same reason. Nobody can pretend with a straight face that South Africa now is a better country than it was under apartheid. I don't like apartheid but in the grand scheme of things, it seems like it was the lesser of two evils.

ech · 2020-07-01T17:20:06+00:00

We’re fair game, it’s plain as day.

This is well put and exactly right. It's obvious, and they're unabashed about it.

ech · 2020-07-01T17:16:39+00:00

I'm leftwing on most issues like economics but I guess I'm right wing on things like social justice.

Are you a fan of Aimee Terese, Stupidpol, et al? I follow them and they're pretty good

ech · 2020-07-01T16:46:37+00:00

I do like gender and sex being separate categories, because it's useful to differentiate between sex (which is biological) and gender (which is a socially constructed role grafted atop biology). Sex differences are more or less constant, whereas gender roles change across time and space. That's why Spartan women were trained with spears and Victorian women were not.

One huge problem with trans ideology is that it essentializes gender as innate. What's a "woman"? Under the old regime, it was someone born with XX and a vagina who, by virtue of gender roles, is socialized to be submissive. Under gender essentialism, a "woman" is someone who feels or is submissive (or giggly, or clumsy, or whatever other traits the "egg"/AGP crew fetishizes).

ech · 2020-07-01T15:59:33+00:00

you need to educate yourself more on racism

Where have I heard that line before. I've read reams of this material, and it's the reason I hate antiracism. Coates, Kendi, 1619, Mikki Kendall, Saira Rao, postcolonialist theory, and of course WHITE FRAGILITY. I read early antiracist blogs (like Stuff White People Do) before antiracism achieved its current cultural prominence and have probably conversed at length with more intersectional activists than I can name. I have almost daily Twitter colloquies with people like Karen Attiah. This is the reason I know antiracism is hateful poison.

Take just one of its tenets above -- "intention doesn't matter." Do you honestly think that fosters good faith debate, reconciliation, or reform?

*Editing this post to add that even as a white woman (who is sympathetic to some alt right ideas), I find sites with a strong alt right presence to be alienating sometimes, and as a black woman I'm sure it's worse. I just got here so I'm not a spokesperson for the community, but speaking solely on behalf of myself, I hope you don't leave. Well, unless you actually agree with the authors I list above, and want me doxed/killed for believing IQ is real or opposing street crime. In that case, good riddance.

Also, the fact that you say this

Calling out racism is not anti-white. To say so is to support the claim that all white people are racist by default which is to be racist to white people

Makes me think that "antiracism" doesn't mean the same thing to you that it does to me and bluecheck twitter, which is a good thing. Canon "antiracism" is that all white people are innately, and immutably, racist.

ech · 2020-07-01T15:40:18+00:00

You do understand that "antiracist" ideology, at least in its current marauding form, is almost by definition anti-white though, right? Its main manifestation is a creepy, ritualized, almost religious condemnation and flagellation of white people for vague, collective, imagined, or inherited sins. It's like Medieval Christianity with its obsession with atonement, except unlike Christianity there is no hope of forgiveness. Forgiveness is disdained. Intention doesn't matter. All white people, and only white people, are racist, and racism is the worst sin (racists deserve to be punched or killed, and certainly don't deserve to defend themselves). Moreover, white privilege -- the analogue of original sin -- is immutable. It's not about what you do. It's about who you are. That's why they hate you.

I never wanted to be racist and go out of my way IRL to treat individuals fairly on their merits. I've hired and promoted "POC" who were bright and competent, even when my coworkers preferred to hire White Chad. That said, antiracism is fucking evil, and I wish the same suffering on antiracists that they wish on me.

ech · 2020-07-01T15:23:13+00:00

Is that why Jewish people have male children genitally mutilated at birth? Do you know what percentage of them die each year, much higher than FGM

LMAO. I don't support male circumcision but you've succeeded at discrediting yourself instantly, congrats.

I've been through all the JQ shit and I actually met Kevin MacDonald IRL. I do not find JQ compelling, and would rather live in Israel or Manhattan than literally any Muslim country. If we disagree on that, then you should move to -- and enjoy -- a Muslim country of your choice.

BDS was wrong in the 1990s, and it's wrong now. That doesn't mean it should be illegal, though.

ech · 2020-07-01T14:56:37+00:00

We have had similar experiences.

ech · 2020-07-01T14:53:28+00:00

I guess this raises philosophical questions about the nature of good and what's "best." My instinct is that societies where women are likely to be tortured, murdered, or forcibly raped en masse are not good societies for women. Like, if you are dying from complications of infibulation, I would argue you are obviously worse off than you would be as an alienated immigrant elsewhere.

Importantly, I am not making an argument for immigration. Even if it's true that Pakistani society is objectively worse for all women than, say, Western European society, that doesn't mean it's in the interest of Western Europe to impose feminism through imperial adventures or invite hordes of refugees.

ech · 2020-07-01T14:49:28+00:00

Thanks, and it's nice to meet you. One tiny silver lining of the dystopian censorious world we are entering is that different marginalized speakers can sometimes find common ground. We all have a stake in free speech. Fifteen years ago, I never thought I'd find myself fighting side by side with far-right men. Now I am, and they're my friends.

ech · 2020-07-01T13:56:06+00:00

That is one of the nonpatriarchal tenets of Islam, after all...

ech · 2020-07-01T13:55:17+00:00

This is a ridiculous shtick but let’s see how long you keep it up. Hats off.

ech · 2020-07-01T13:49:16+00:00

In my experience the overlap is rare, but you do run into fellow travelers every once in awhile. The overlap ought to be more significant objectively, since the best societies for women are Western (arguably, "white") ones.

ech · 2020-07-01T13:48:19+00:00

Nice to meet you too :)

ech · 2020-07-01T13:48:06+00:00

But it's truly alarming that issues that should be at heart of modern feminism are actually defended by the wave of intersectionalists and marxists that have infected the cause

This is 100% true. I identify as a feminist in the ways discussed above, but I truly loathe what "feminism" has become.

ech · 2020-07-01T13:40:37+00:00

Cops and Trump have never harmed me, and are unlikely to harm me in the future. They've certainly never slobbered at the prospect of seeing me fired, humiliated, or killed in retaliation for my political speech. If I malign cops or Trump, I get a book deal and retweets. If I use the wrong tone or pronouns discussing Nikole Hannah Jones, I am a pariah Karen. You are the real authoritarian menace, sorry.

ech · 2020-07-01T13:11:32+00:00

I suspect a lot of people who self-identify as nonfeminist, or antifeminst, agree with my basic egalitarian premises above. The misogyny I'm talking about occurs along a spectrum. Most subtly (and probably most controversially for purposes of this discussion), I always noticed an undercurrent of animus among many of the MRA-type posters on mainstream websites like reddit. They seemed more interested in harming (or at least venting about) women than concretely improving things for men. But this was a mild, recurring source of exasperation -- not a big misogynist blackpill.

I also spent significant time on chans, mostly /b/, /pol/, and /r9k/ in the 2000s and early 2010s. If you're familiar with those sites, you know what they are like. I don't mind the irreverent, chaotic old internet -- I enjoyed it. I made edgy jokes too. So if it had just been a mix of rape jokes and porn and other random content it wouldn't have bothered me. But over time it became very clear that a lot of these guys viewed women as (i) meatholes only good for fucking and degrading, and/or (ii) uppity bitches who must be brought down and harmed. This was especially true on r9k where more serious discussions prevailed and you could see proto incel ideology emerging.

I posted on another forum I can't name because it's private, but it contains a lot of men in my professional sphere. I work in a mostly male industry. At work, everyone is polite and I have no real complaints. I have been promoted fairly based on what I believe are my merits, and if men think I'm a shrill harpy or a ballcutting shrew, they don't say so. But online, my professional peers would rate pics of women they knew (including, once, me), conjure grotesque and absurd "cock carousel" fantasies about how we must secretly have conducted ourselves before marriage, and opine that our legal rights should be taken away. Again, this occurred on a spectrum with edgy jokes on one end, and genuine mentally ill rage on the other. At least one man from the forum was arrested IRL for a sex crime.

When I got into what eventually became the alt right, the view that women were generally NPCs who ought to be treated as second class citizens became the prevailing one. There were benevolent versions of this (women don't belong outside the home, keep them pregnant, feminists are evil for burdening them with the option of economic independence; we should protect them by treating them as what they are, children) and malicious versions (like a blog which I won't link, but is discussed here.) The latter blogger -- the sadistic pedophile -- was an influential and ubiquitous presence in several NRx sites. He had smart and interesting things to say on topics including cryptocurrency, but his view of women is deeply demented and if I personally believe he has violently raped young girls. Less grave, but still blackpilling, were my interactions with dozens of men who parroted Roissy posts uncritically, as if this was some shining secret knowledge that explained the world instead of a sleazy, reductive polemic against women.

In the meantime, IRL, incidents like Rotherham and Cologne were getting swept under the rug.

I don't want to portray myself as traumatized by the Internet. I'm not -- in fact, I like the Internet. But I credit it for opening my eyes to misogyny as a real force that shapes cognitions and behavior. This, in turn, made me more interested in feminism, and I've come around to the view that 1980s-90s feminists made some valid points, especially about pornography. I used to view it as a coincidence that the young men I met online who hated and objectified women had also spent years immersed in online porn. After all, I'd been exposed to the same porn on the same sites and it didn't affect me. Sitting here today, I don't think the "coincidence" is so easily dismissed.

*fixed link

ech · 2020-07-01T12:56:10+00:00

Thanks

ech · 2020-07-01T11:58:07+00:00

Is there one that’s literally just an uncensored reddit without additional pretentions?

ech · 2020-07-01T11:57:36+00:00

You’re right that these are distinct in many cases. Not sure they’re distinct here.

ech · 2020-07-01T11:56:23+00:00

I wouldn’t say I’m not “comfortable with debate,” but shoehorning every interaction into a high school debate paradigm is what people do who lack sufficient indicia IRL that they are smart, thus need to perform smart on the internet.

ech · 2020-07-01T11:39:34+00:00

If you try telling the average woke westerner about the Saharan slave trade they literally don’t believe you.

ech · 2020-07-01T02:41:30+00:00

Is racist porn also allowed on reddit? Or is misogyny the only social justice bias that's fair game, and exempt from censorship, if you mix it with grotesque porn?

ech · 2020-07-01T02:37:19+00:00

Is this a "debate website"? I thought it was an uncensored reddit alternative. "Debate website" sounds tedious, midwitted, and gay.

ech · 2020-07-01T02:10:10+00:00

it's the realisation that my nationalist views will always be silenced by the handful of "people" who own and manage the media ... seriously, what the fuck can even be done?

Probably nothing tbh. I am considering moving to a cabin with some guns, but don't think that's imminently necessary. The encroaching accelerating censorship is definitely a hard, cold blackpill that's difficult to escape.

ech · 2020-07-01T02:03:33+00:00

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/plastic-chemical-linked-to-changes-in-baby-boys-genitals/

Lower prenatal androgen exposure has detectable effects on baby boys -- notably for purposes of this study, it shrinks their taints (the balls move closer to the anus). Among Scandinavian boys (and I'd bet throughout the Western world), taints are shrinking. Some scientists surmise that exposure to estrogen-mimicking derivatives from plastics has caused this effect.

ech · 2020-07-01T01:59:44+00:00

They die at a lower rate than other men too.

This is an important point that doesn't get emphasized enough, and isn't obvious/intuitive even to most trans-skeptical people. Although I don't have current stats on it, I'd speculate that in the United States, trans women are also higher SES than most other populations, which is another indicia of "privilege."

ech · 2020-07-01T01:54:04+00:00

Excellent to meet you. I think we are snowflakes to some extent, but there are more of us out there, and one thing that attracts me to the pinkpill/blackpill feminist subreddits is the hope of meeting more women who don't bootlick or grovel to woke elite consensus.

ech · 2020-07-01T01:21:50+00:00

Thanks!

ech · 2020-07-01T01:21:30+00:00

As practiced IRL, mainstream Judaism is clearly less misogynistic and threatening than mainstream Islam. I wouldn't want to live in a theocracy governed by any of the Abrahamic holy texts, but the Muslims are the only ones actually trying to make that happen at scale.

ech · 2020-07-01T00:11:13+00:00

Relieved that this is the top comment. One factor that reliably sucks the fun out of anti-censorship e-venues is this pretentious focus on upscale, substantive debate. (Quilette Circle has this problem, for example). The old, pre-censorship internet was fun because it had an organic mix of effortposting, shitposting, cute animals, trolling, and everything else people naturally gravitate towards. The internet, especially the uncensored internet, shouldn't feel like work, unless you want it to.

ech · 2020-07-01T00:00:44+00:00

As I said in another comment, I'm brand new to saidit as of about five minutes ago so I can't speak to the substance of these comments. I'm just weighing in on principle from prior experience, and disagreeing with the idea that if you're vastly outnumbered, the people who outnumber you surely aren't NPCs...think about what you're saying.

ech · 2020-06-30T23:29:31+00:00

Or they oppose feminism because they favor #WhiteSharia (or normal sharia) or pathologically hate women. These men aren't the majority of men, but they can be the majority in certain e-forums.

I don't begrudge these men the ability to have their own spaces. I would defend /r/incels or /r/islam against censorship, but I wouldn't expect fair, equal moderation if I posted there. From the dawn of reddit (and the broader internet before it), mods could curate their own private discussions. The issue is when you try to interfere with other peoples' discussions, or when you unfairly moderate a forum that purports to be neutral and open.

ech · 2020-06-30T23:18:02+00:00

That’s a good point. Majority opinions in a particular milieu are never thoughtless or wrong. If “muh pussy pedestal” or “muh white privilege” is the prevailing opinion it must be right.

ech · 2020-06-30T23:17:21+00:00

If you don’t know what I’m talking about, you’re too obtuse (willfully or by no fault of your own) for me to want to engage.

ech · 2020-06-30T22:50:14+00:00

The goal would be to avoid becoming an echo chamber that is dominated by opposing "views" (really dumbshit misogynist NPC scripts), to such an extent that the intended users of the subreddit, who are outnumbered, can't get a word in edgewise.

ech · 2020-06-30T22:27:43+00:00

IME you do find men who can be convinced, and some of them have become my best friends. But I'm sympathetic to harsh moderation of feminist e-spaces, because it's a numbers game -- you get flooded by tons of men, most asserting the same tedious deflections. Maybe you convince 1 out of 20 -- you're still deluged by 19 shitposts that detract from the theme of your discussion. I'm brand new to this site and one of the biggest free speech zealots you'll meet, but it seems sensible to allow mods of niche subreddits to moderate in favor of their niche themes.

Also, the men I've been able to convince over the years, or with whom I've been able to find common ground, generally distinguish themselves as uncommonly bright and thoughtful from the start, even if they strongly disagree with me. They're not posting 110-IQ manosphere copypasta (which is most of what feminists need to moderate).

ech · 2020-06-30T22:22:13+00:00

Without a doubt, "intersectionality" -- it's oppressively imposed in virtually all feminist spaces, and it's cultish, alienating, and fundamentally hostile to any constructive discussion. Women should be able to assert their own interests clearly and simply, without bowing and scraping to other random fringe groups. It is patently absurd, for example, that police shootings of males are considered by mainstream feminists to be a mandatory feminist issue.