...is that really the takeaway from this? The trans aspect is negligible and not integral to what they're doing. Very odd that you've picked up on a whiff of antitrans rather than the prominent stink of misandry.
>>7239 He's right about that, but it seems like an odd takeaway considering 99% of the material is just anti-male. So seeing that and thinking 'TERF' implies a bit of a bias.
TERF stands for "Trans-Exclusionary Radical fisherperson". The Trans-Exclusionary bit is only a small part of the ideology, but it's the only part that gets wider attention.
>>7241 It does stand for that, and if you take it out you have 'radical fisherperson', with 'radical' being a relative modifier which isn't very useful without establishing exactly what a non-radical fisherperson is.
Is TERF ever used in a context where it's not meant to highlight the anti-trans rather than the 'radical' or 'fisherperson' parts? Because I've honestly never heard that. While it's only a small part of the ideology, it's the unifying aspect, otherwise 1/2 of the letters wouldn't be dedicated to it.
The term "radical fisherperson" has been around since the 60s and describes a distinct ideology. "TERF" is much more recent, partly because of a rift within radical fisherism and partly because of the increased visibility of trans people. Transphobia has become a weird rallying point for radical fisherpersons, because it's the only way they can get any sort of mainstream attention, much in the same way that PETA rely on outrageous headline-grabbing nonsense.
>>7247 Dunno m7. TERF was coined as a pejorative relatively recently and seems to be just be applied to anyone who doesn't follow trans-thought no matter whether they're actually radfem. Of the small group it does apply to; the core foundation is that gendered brains are a myth (which is popular despite the evidence) and following on from that the idea that someone can be born a woman in a man's body becomes absurd - there's nothing inherently misandrist about that.
From there on it just becomes a cultural cunt-off because trans-thought can stand no criticism given the sensitive subject matter and 'TERFs' are incensed by what they see as blokes invading their spaces, trying to silence them (including threats of violence) and transgender women that are stereotypes of women (bimbos and the like). The final point being particularly stinging as society doesn't tolerate transracial.
tl;dr you're being a bit of a twat and have now ruined a discussion.
>>7249 Not far off, FDS is women deciding that their partners need to match what they can offer... (and in some cass vastly exceed). I.e. they see relationships as transactional where, unless you "win", you lose. Their language is an exact mirror of chronic masturbator language.
>>7250 They've got their own website and everything. It seems to be a growing community premised on implicit mistrust and the transactional aspect you mentioned.
I hate to be a cunt, but you lads have very quickly bounced from "I don't really like my missus that much but she helps me pay for my nice house" to "these women are awful for looking for men who can offer them certain material benefits"
I'm not saying these FDS women aren't mental and terrible, but from my perspective it seems like post-twenties monogamy ultimately does boil down to weighing up your benefits rather than your actual desires. It seems a lot of people's default ideology is you must be with someone, be it for financially reasons or just because that's what everyone else does, but it sounds just as miserable as posting on reddit about the baseline salary a suitable man needs to have.
I have to assume only a select few of us are enthusiastic enough to have such a long debate about the nature of modern relationships in a thread about books.
>>7252 >but from my perspective it seems like post-twenties monogamy ultimately does boil down to weighing up your benefits rather than your actual desire
I agree with you there, a lot of people have worked out what they want by that age, and it's healthy to pursue that. My criticism is directed at the promotion of general hatred of men.
/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/comments/njn4dr/lol/
Is this kind of framing healthy? There seems to be a baseline of self loathing and anger. I know venting can be good, but is this good?
>>7254 It'll burn out eventually and get back on topic.
>It's a responsibility for you and your partner. Perhaps I should've been much more blunt: She's fucking up by not keeping you satisfied and I see it ending it in an affair if it keeps going down this road. You've tried addressing it and now I wonder why the hell you're putting up with it, there's a good few decades between now and the sweet release of death.
>I wonder why the hell you're putting up with it
Well, there's plenty of reasons, lad. It's the fact that splitting the bills with her means I've got just shy of a grand to spunk on whatever I want every month. It's the combined fifteen grand we've got in savings, that I'd have to build back up by myself if I left. It's the fact she does the dishes and cleans out the bathroom. It's the fact she's always up for a pint whenever I ask, unlike any of my male mates, and usually provides better conversation to boot.
In a lot of ways, a steady relationship is just like having a best mate who you sometimes shag. While I'm unsatisfied with the frequency of our current shagging, it's still more than if I was single, desperately scrolling through the cesspit of over-30s Tinder and POF every night. If it comes to an "affair" so be it; as long as it's in the open nobody is harmed, and ultimately she doesn't really have a right to be upset about me shagging someone else if she doesn't care enough to do it herself.
Honestly mate you just sound a bit naive to me, if you had been in more relationships and experienced their ups and downs you'd have a bit more of a grounded perspective on all this. As I've grown older I have realised that the maxim of "you only live once" is a double edged sword, it is both a warning to carefully consider making rash decisions that will negatively affect your life, as well as a justification for throwing caution to the wind. There are no do-overs in life, your mistakes stay with you, and you start to appreciate that a lot more as you mature. As I mentioned in my initial post, I would have had a totally different outlook on this when I was 25 instead of 32, but the fact of the matter is you do have to re-assess your priorities as you get older.
Then again as otherlad said, you are the kind of person who thinks Jordan Peterson is worth listening to, so this will probably fall on deaf ears.
>the rest of this thread
That went in a bizarre direction. FDS types and chronic masturbators are two sides of the same coin, and both broadly symptomatic of the same weird moralising Jordan Peterson type ideological wank. People who don't realise you can improve your lot in life dramatically by just being a bit more pragmatic and accepting you're certainly not perfect, and nor are other people.
>>7257 >and both broadly symptomatic of the same weird moralising Jordan Peterson type ideological wank. People who don't realise you can improve your lot in life dramatically by just being a bit more pragmatic and accepting you're certainly not perfect, and nor are other people.
But that's exactly what Peterson has always talked about. If there's any fault to his ideology it's that his work is overly pessimistic and too rooted in creating the next generation of cogs in a machine waiting tables for pennies.
>I agree with you there, a lot of people have worked out what they want by that age, and it's healthy to pursue that.
When I said it seems like it's all about weighting your potential benefits over your actual desires, I did not mean that I thought this was a good thing.
I've also noticed that people who are in relationships at my age, or people still in their twenties having quarter life crises, have a much, much dimmer view of the 30something dating scene than anyone who is actually participating in it. I just think the idea of being stuck in a relationship mostly due to practicality or finances is my idea of hell, but I suppose I'm lucky enough to not need a partner to split the bills with, so I'll just shut up and go and have a lonely wank.
>I've also noticed that people who are in relationships at my age, or people still in their twenties having quarter life crises, have a much, much dimmer view of the 30something dating scene than anyone who is actually participating in it.
I mean, I'd expect anyone who has ever had doubts about their relationship has dipped their toes into the apps and whatnot, to "window shop" as they say, and presumably didn't like what they saw. And like it or not, the apps basically are dating now. Expecting to find anyone out there in real life, beyond workplace acquaintances, is a skill most people in their 30s today have already entirely forgotten. Besides that though there's no such thing as "the dating scene", there's just the women around you and your own subjective judgement if you can really be arsed going through all the hassle again for birds who have, quite frankly, already got a few more miles on the clock than you'd really like.
>I just think the idea of being stuck in a relationship mostly due to practicality or finances is my idea of hell, but I suppose I'm lucky enough to not need a partner to split the bills with
The trouble is it doesn't really matter how independently wealthy you are, you're always going to be better off cohabiting with a partner than in any other kind of living arrangement. If you've never had it, you obviously don't miss it, but once you [i]have[i/] had it, you'll really begrudge forking over that extra three to four hundred quid every month. Even if you're financially secure enough to take the hit without really feeling it, it's still money going down the drain.
That said I think this dynamic changes again by the time you're in your mid-40s to 50s. By that point you've really got little to gain from being in a relationship, you've likely already got assets like a house to rely on, the kids have already grown up and fucked off, and so on. A divorce might cost you dearly, but it's not a leap of faith like cutting the cords on a relationship in your early 30s.
I suppose it's just that like it or not, nature imposes a relatively strict timetable on our lives. If you want to start a family, 30-35 is the sort of age where you have to shit or get off the toilet.
>Even if you're financially secure enough to take the hit without really feeling it, it's still money going down the drain.
A few hundred quid a month seems a reasonable price to pay to not sleep next to some one I'm growing to despise (or vice versa), honestly. I've lived with people, I've bought property with an ex, but I certainly am glad we didn't stay together just to split the council tax. Again though, it's very easy for me to say this when I already outright own a house and make good money. I do honestly think I'd feel the same no matter how my finances were. The only thing I think could drive me to feeling like I needed to 'lock in' to a less than ideal partnership is the drive for starting a family, as you say, but I also don't have that.
I'm quite sure that watching both sets of grandparents stay together until death in complete misery is influencing my viewpoints. I do get your points, they make perfect sense, I just can't understand them on a personal level.
Perhaps check back in 15 years and see if I'm desperately lonely, or if indeed I've shacked up with whoever comes along for the sake of it - I hope not, I don't think so, but who's really to say.
I'd say that for most people, there's a big difference between been stuck in an actively negative relationship, and merely passively accepting a mediocre one. If it was the former I'd waste no time extricating myself, but the latter would make a much tougher decision.
In effect I don't see how a relationship that gradually turns platonic is any different to just having a housemate. In fact if I was in that situation I bet I could trick myself back into finding them sexy again by pretending we were housemates with a saucy secret fuck-buddy dynamic.
Get some MDMA down her and she'll be all over you like a rash.
Also, stop panicking about the age thing. Your mid-thirties are weird because of the increasingly loud biological clocks of women your age, but once you hit your forties you get into the glorious era of horny perimenopausal divorcees. I've said it before, but it bears repeating - Guardian Soulmates is full of professional middle-aged women with busy lives who just want an intelligent conversation and a good hard shag. Also you get to stare down their teenage kids with a look that says "I'm shagging your ma and there's nothing you can do about it", which is great fun.
I'm sure most of this stuff is being written by 17 year-olds who're bitter about their one experience with men but it gets spread around by people who click like or share without thinking but it's just egregiously stupid and dangerous rhetoric.
>>7264 I was sort of with her for the first few paragraphs. I would be interested to know what civil and social(?) rights she feels that women are comparatively lacking though.
>Men are training their soldiers. Are we training ours?
Weird how they want to frame things this way, when according to the teachings of their own ideology, men have successfully overpowered and subjugated women for the last 4000 years. I wouldn't fancy my chances in a war with that kind of track record honestly.
If they're not careful we might just vote to go full Handmaiden's Tale at the next Global Patriarchal Alliance Summit (No Girls Allowed).
>>7262 >In fact if I was in that situation I bet I could trick myself back into finding them sexy again by pretending we were housemates with a saucy secret fuck-buddy dynamic.
Don't be ridiculous, that's... that's actually not a bad idea.
>>7270 Yeah, I liked it. Really liked it in fact, the more I think about it the more I like it. There are some passages that are an absolite slog and I think it could have been trimmed down by about 100 pages but it's probably one of the best books I've ever read or will read.
>>7224 > Seppos are just weird when it comes to dating, like it being fine to see other people at the same time until you become 'exclusive'.
I've never gone out with a yank to compare, but I've found that concept to be fairly widespread everywhere I've been around western Europe and South America. I think it's also fairly common in the UK but we're either old or just a bit sad. Or both.
It could have been about a hundred pages or so shorter but it was an enjoyable easy read. My main issue is that the next sequel was announced in 2006 and it doesn't look like it'll be out any time soon.
I picked this up because I assumed the film of the same name with Willem Dafoe was adapted from it, which turned out to be completely incorrect.
It's a novella about Futh, an awkward and forgettable man who spends a week walking in Germany after his marriage breaks down, and the woman who runs the first hotel he stays at. Most of it is spent reflecting on the past, often revisiting the same memories and revealing more each time they're brought up.
There were quite a few occasions where I wasn't keen on the writing style; I felt it was rather poor at setting up some of the scenes but it was fine once it got there. You could tell that the wording was very carefully chosen, but the use of symbolism was overdone for me.
Does anyone have a recommendations for books that are just a fun read? Over the past few years, I've been trying to get stuck into all the books that are supposed to be so amazing, but I find they usually just bore the arse off me. I'm not really enjoying reading anymore because of it - I've basically been trying too hard, and found I'm not bright enough to get anything out of it.
Whats your best guilty pleasure/trash novel for lads who are just looking for a good time reading?
>>7335 The problem I suspect you're hitting is one of length. Novels tend to have chapters that feel like a total waste of time because of length and the authors forcing in allegories about whatever deep idea they're on their soapbox about.
Short story collections might be more up your alley.
>>7335 The Last Dog on Earth, by Adrian J Walker, is quite possibly the most fun I've ever had with a book. But then, I don't really read many books because I don't particularly enjoy them either, and that's fine.
Like books you might read on holiday? Bond novels, Tom Clancys books and Bill Brysons travel books maybe? Easy to read and fun if you like that sort of thing.
>>7335 For a very brief moment, someone had edited the Wikipedia page for Zowie Bowie's Moon to claim that it was based on a trashy sci-fi novel from the 50s called Rogue Moon by Algis Budrys. It's one of my favourite little novels, largely just for the aesthetics that it conjures or giant computers the size of factories, and cool cars driving along the California coast. The story is absolute sci-fi wackadoo mumbo-jumbo that tries too hard to invoke spirituality, sort of like a lesser Dick, but it's written perfectly for a casual read.
>>7335 I really enjoy the books that Games Workshop puts out. Might be worth a look even if you aren't into the models/games.
It's the closest stuff to modern 'pulp' that I know - as much as I enjoy high brow wank, sometimes it's nice to read a straight forward fantasy/sci fi story with clear goodies and baddies, aliens getting blasted in the face with lasers, spaceships exploding etc.
That said, some of their books are genuinely really good. Let me know if you want a few recommendations to where to start.
Machine of Death is a collection of 34 short stories based on the premise from an old Dinosaur Comics strip; there's a machine test which will tell you how you're going to die, but these have a habit of being ambiguous, e.g. the machine reading could say 'old age' and that could mean you get killed by an old person driving a car.
I came very close to giving up on this book because there is an awful lot of guff in the first 200 pages or so. I guess that is to be expected based on the demographics that will have been reading Dinosaur Comics ~15 years ago but, holy-freakin-eff, there is a lot of immature American brilliance to have to wade through. That said, I'm glad I persevered because the quality does pick up markedly before reading the halfway point.
Fuck Thomas Mann and fuck Germany. There's no humanity in this book, it's just a young insular man pattering about in a mountain health retreat getting browbeaten by an Giuseppe, a failed clergyman, some hoe and his doctor. Yes, you can certainly tell that the author stopped and came back to it at which point he shoved his mental diarrhea onto the pages and found a narcoleptic editor to approve it.
I make a point not to leave books unfinished so after 752 pages I assure you I will not be following Mann's advice to 'read it again' to get it.
I was struggling to read his Doctor Faustus and your post I feel has justified me in my decision to desist from continuing it.
I've started reading Ottessa Moshfegh's 'My Year of Rest and Relaxation' and I really like the voice, and would recommend that if you're looking for good fiction.
I am also reading the Francis Bacon Biog that came out this year and it is likewise really interesting.
