i dont undersrand :<

this series of video essays (“the state is counter revolutionary”) makes a lot of good arguments against authoritarian leftism and states, towards why they are not a path to communism but a hurdle. i doubt someone who has already fallen into the trap of authoritarianism will watch these videos with an open mind but maybe you could watch them urself and integrate some of the arguments into your intervention.

tankies think that whatever states they simp for are better than the US, because they wont admit any of the flaws of these states in the first place. their entire narrative is that the flaws of these states are made up as anti-communist red scare propaganda. so they are very good at rationalising any arguments against them.

i do not know how to convince tankies, but its great that you are trying :)

i assumed it was people indicating that they are posting due to the one rule (post before you leave)

i’d aregue the larger part is the system that alienates people from nature, society and the production of goods.

being a femboy and being a straight white dude are not mutually exclusive 👍

woagh, the entire gang is there

dogs go to dog heaven, duh
of they got souls! /s

the text is from the start of ursula k. le guin’s sci-fi novel “the dispossessed” which mainly describes and anarchist society.

i dont know about the vojak.

yeah, straight and gay are such restrictive concepts, i have trouble imagining that anyone actually fits them for any other reason than social pressure.

especially with gender liberation and people looking however they want, gender based atraction is such a weird concept…

yoo same :33

its not abandond afaik. there was a new versiom update a few months ago, and i think the dev is still slowly working on it. i do wish there were more activity tho

other keyboards got suggestions too ;3

meanwhile im still waiting for suggestions on my keyboard, which has been in development for years

biology is full of social constructs. reality is complex and messy, but to wrap their heads around it, humans put it into simple categories.

the destinction into male and female (and sometimes intersex) was creared backwards. first came the social destinctions and social importans on sex, then people searched for the reasons, to explain the destinctions.

through this they currently arrived at the definition of sex as biological organisms producing smaller or larger gametes. as if this were actually a super sensual to classify all organisms that produce larger gametes and all organisms that produce smaller gametes in the same categories respecrively. but fair enough.

but then anything that causes an organism to produce smaller or larger gamets is considered sex determening. and all caused or just correlated to this is also considered part of the sex, including social factors. so production of larger gametes in humans is cause by xx chromosomes, so all humans with those chromosomes are female, even if they dont produce gametes, and everything caused by the xx chromosomes like homrones and phenotypes produced by those is considered female and even certain attributes pushed majority on people categorized as such are considered part of it. but none of that is a must. people with xx chromosomes dont necessairily produce larger gametes, they dont necessairily have the hormones, they dont necessairily develop the phenotypes, they arent necessairily shaped by the same way by the same social system. and yet we categorise them as the same sex and categorize their attributes as wrong. this shit is social

how does one differentiate between man and woman? owo

wrong :3

you dont need the word mates in that sentence ?w?

and it wouldnt work in like so many situations.

not saying you cant use it, but it doesnt seem like an adequat plural you

my gender isnt wrong, its the society i was born into that is fucked

how does that work?
“could y’all please help me” -> “could mates please help me”?

i think its mostly an issue with not being used to it. “you” is both singular and plural as well and we manage fine. “we” is plural but it does not distinguish between inclusive and exclusive “we”. arguably those cases are more rarely relevant, and honestly id prefer if all of them had solutions, but i think we can handle it once we are used to it, or solutions will develop.

btw not trying to be antagonistic here, just sharing my thoughts :3

i think there is alot to be said about the influence of patriarchy on masculine words becomming applied to everyone. men being seen as the norm and all that…

my prediction is for th’all and y’all or just thal and yal in the long run