#Binary economics

[grayrazor]

I really don't like the recurring idea that if the Federation and Klingons go to war, the Klingons run roughshod over the Federation and can only be defeated by a deus ex machina.

It feels very conservative, very Red Dawn or Edward Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, that a liberal bureaucratic state is weak and womanly, and will be inevitably dominated by a strong manly warrior race.

If anything, it'd be more reflective of what we know now about WWII, the Cold War, and after, if Klingon aggression is mostly a bluff.

They know the Federation massively outclasses them in terms of population and industry, and are ruining their own economy dumping everything into the military in the hopes that the Federation doesn't realize it too.

"The Federation says they're all about peaceful coexistence, but what if they're lying? How would we survive?"

Section 31 was created to explain how how such a pacifist organization as the Federation could survive with hostile empires on all sides. I think it’d be better if it was really just because the UFP is such a diverse alliance, it inherently has more population and industry than the many single-race empires.

If on a full wartime footing, the Federation should probably win simultaneous wars against the Klingons, Romulans, and Cardassians even if just by burying them in starships and soldiers.

I give Discovery a lot of crap for this, but much as I love DS9 they were really bad about buying into the whole "hard men making hard decisions win wars" idea, both in terms of portraying the Federation as needing the occasional war crime to survive, and in terms of the Terran Empire being overrun by the barbarians after they became more progressive.

[bandofchimeras]

more unsolicited advice for poor girls & queer & trans kids: - do NOT MARRY THE UPPER CLASS GUY FOR STABILITY and confuse it for love. - do NOT have his children without a PRENUP & a childcare & custody agreement set up in advance. - you ARE marrying your in-laws. if they look down on you and see you as unworthy of their son, it WILL impact you and any children you have. - re kids: you are making an economic decision. raising children is a full-time job. ensure you are being adequately compensated. - if you can help it, NEVER mask your queerness for this kind of "getting stable" relationship - it will just stunt you late into your midlife and give you a lotta baggage to work through. -usually rich/upper class guys have emotional problems they will feel it is part of your agreement to tolerate & accommodate. be aware, pay attention to red flags or warnings from friends as you are entering an economically dependent position.

If it seems too good to be true, it probably is!

_______________________________________________ Stay safe, and remember if you find yourself being financially, emotionally, or physically abused, there is help out there! Domestic Violence Hotline for US: 800-799-7233 An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Stay smart, remember your worth, stay connected to a community of equals...and FINANCIAL INDEPENDENCE is key!

[miraculouslumination]

"Omg I can't stand when people try to use the intersectional feminist argument to include men. Like when they ask if a homeless man can be misogynistic to a rich woman. I'm just worried for the (poor helpless weak females) homeless women AROUND him!!"

So you just suck at intersectional feminism. Okay.

[cybersodas]

Hey! I love your Utena cards but the store isn’t giving me the option to preorder. Do I need to create an account with Storenvy?

Oh nono- the preorders aren’t open yet!! My shop doesn’t open until February 26th, so look out for that date to preorder! >wo

[jcmarchi]

Frostpunk 2 Preview - Breaking The Ice - Game Informer

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/frostpunk-2-preview-breaking-the-ice-game-informer/

Frostpunk 2 Preview - Breaking The Ice - Game Informer

The 2018 release of Frostpunk delivered a unique twist on the city-builder genre, putting you in control of a band of humans trying to survive the new ice age. Players assumed the role of The Captain as they built up their small colony of workers to a flourishing city in the post-apocalypse. Along the way, players needed to make hard decisions, like restricting food, enforcing strict authoritarian laws, putting children to work, or worse. Frostpunk 2 picks up the story 30 years later and, in the process, looks to improve nearly every aspect of the well-liked simulator.

Three decades have passed since the events of Frostpunk. The group has been roaming the frozen desert for years, but in the face of another whiteout, they return to the old machine, hoping to use its heat to survive. This is where my gameplay session begins. The old dreadnought is in pieces beneath the ice, so I have my work cut out for me in the weeks leading up to the whiteout. I must first break through the ice to reach an oil tank wagon, construct an extraction district to retrieve its oil, and then use it to ignite the furnace.

Frostpunk 2’s city operates off output – the resources you produce by districts, buildings, and workers – and demand – the food, shelter, goods, materials, and heat your people need. To satisfy the shelter and heat requirement, I build housing districts next to the furnace. Then, I frostbreak on an area with fertile soil and grow food on the patches. We’ll need a lot of food to survive the whiteout, so I build a food stockpile storehouse.

Unfortunately, 6 of my 1,350 people come down with an illness and are unable to work, hampering our ability to output food. Illnesses rise and fall based on factors like food supply, heat, and shelter availability. People can also get injured, which additionally prevents them from working. Still, at this juncture, it’s nothing to worry about, as I still have the vast majority of my population able to work. As the weeks roll on, it doesn’t look like I’ll be able to reach my goal, so Finan, a 42-year-old gardener in my group, speaks up, suggesting we work emergency shifts or tighten our belts by restricting rations to catch up to our forecast.

I don’t want to restrict rations just yet, but I do authorize emergency shifts. However, the furnace is struggling, and I’m starting to run out of oil, resulting in 30 of my people dying from the cold. Morale and trust in my leadership falls. I start to work on extracting another oil tank, but it’s becoming increasingly obvious I won’t stockpile enough food in time, so I finally restrict rations. I’m also falling behind on construction materials, so I start working to extract building materials from under the ice, but I run into a problem: I don’t have enough workers.

This constant dance of prioritization and keeping several plates spinning is when Frostpunk and, by extension, Frostpunk 2 really shine. The feeling of sand slipping through your fingers, not knowing if you should loosen or tighten your grip, but you know you need to decide quickly or face losing it all. That’s what Frostpunk and its sequel deliver in spades.

Here’s how I know things are getting dire: Another citizen approaches me – a 62-year-old seamstress – and offers the senior citizens to sacrifice themselves so that the group’s youth can continue to live. I hope it doesn’t come to that, but thankfully, I have some more tricks up my sleeve. I construct additional Food Districts and storehouses and immediately order emergency shifts. It will come down the wire, and I feel the tension in my body rising. 

Then, the moment arrives: the decision point. The group is worried we won’t have enough food to survive the coming storm, so they present two options: We can let our seniors leave the group and walk out into the desert, reducing the number of mouths to feed without sacrificing our workforce or our city’s future, or we can slaughter a nearby seal colony. I don’t want to do either, so I keep going down the same path, just crossing my fingers I’m doing the right thing. That might as well be the mantra of Frostpunk 2: hope that you’re doing the right thing.

Disease is spreading, limiting the workforce, and the whiteout is approaching. With less than a week to go, we hit our food goal, but at what cost? Trust has dropped dramatically, and disease is running rampant following months of emergency shifts. That tense stretch was nothing more than the tutorial, but it appropriately captures the essence of Frostpunk 2. 

I’m then taken to the primary setting of Frostpunk 2, New London. The old Captain is dead, and the city is weak. Overpopulation has run rampant, food is low, and coal is running out. You step into the role of the Steward in charge of leading New London back to prosperity. Thankfully, this first year is warmer than expected (but this is Frostpunk, so it’s still an icy mess). I need to use that to get the city back on track.

As The Captain weakened, the city became more divided, bringing maintenance to a grinding halt. I have my work cut out for me. With a city population of more than 4,200 people, I work on addressing basic needs like food, shelter, and heat. In New London, three factions have emerged, each with their own agendas, desires, and projects. Among them is The Stalwarts, a group that resulted in a binary choice I made during the tutorial. The memberships of these groups will fluctuate, and you must balance your allegiances to them, playing the game of politics as you work to improve day-to-day life.

That’s right. It’s not just about building a city and allocating workers: Frostpunk 2 requires you to secure enough votes to not only stay in power but also pass laws that you propose using the game’s intricate system. For instance, at one moment, I’m low on money, so I propose an economics law where the citizens must volunteer their free time unless they purchase an exemption, which raises funds for the city, allowing me to fund more projects. It’s not the most popular option, but I secured enough support to push it through. If your projections look less confident ahead of the vote, you can try to negotiate with the various groups in New London to try and appease them to vote for your proposal.

City-builders can be extremely hit or miss for me, but when they hit, they hit hard. With so many systems stacked on top of each other, including what appears to be an incredible laws system, Frostpunk 2 not only has me circling July 25 on my calendar, but it has me eagerly re-downloading the original Frostpunk to satisfy the small taste my hands-on session provided me. Frostpunk 2 arrives on PC on July 25, then PS5 and Xbox Series X/S at a later date.

[jabondemanos]

OKAY SO MY UNCLE GAVE ME A BIBLE FOR WOMEN AND I JUST ASSUME HE WAS BEING HOMOPHOBIC BUT I OPENED AND READ SUM PARTS AND ITS ACTUALLY FEMINIST AND EVEN TOUCHES ON GENDER IDENTITY. I HAVENT READ EVERYTHING BUT I DID SEE AN ANGRU ONLINE REVIEW SAYING IT WAS PRO ABORTION AND PRO HOMOSEXUALITY. KINDA INTERESTING

[reasonsforhope]

"Shopping for clothes is already intimidating. There are so many options and styles to consider, as well as factors like sustainability and ethics.

But for people in fat, disabled, or queer and gender-nonconforming bodies, it’s even more arduous.

Nico Herzetty, Emma K. Clark, and Paul Herzetty wondered: What if there was a way people could shop — not necessarily by color or size — but by measurements, materials, and ethics?

So they set off to create their website: Phoria. 

Here, shoppers can set up a free profile, add their body measurements (and “typical fit challenges”) and peruse over 270 brands. Once these data points are entered, users can personalize their pages with “saved,” “recommended,” or “hidden” brands. 

Pages can be totally private, or shared with the community to connect over styles and brands.

Aside from fit, brands in the Phoria database (which claims to be “the largest database of plus-friendly brands”) can also be filtered as “gender-neutral,” “woman-run,” “small business,” or “natural fibers.” Users can also filter for price, preferred styles, and more.

Pictured: A screenshot of the "Fit Challenges" feature on a Phoria user's profile.

Some brands include popular names like Athleta, Levi’s, and Patagonia. Others are small businesses, like Beefcake Swimwear, or Hey Peach.

“For so many people, it feels too damn hard to find and keep clothing that fits in all the ways that really matter. So we’re doing something about it,” the Phoria website reads.

“Unlike most online shopping experiences, we center the needs of plus-size women, nonbinary, and trans people, and prioritize supporting clothing brands focused on sustainability, ethics, and inclusion.” ...

That team — made up of Clark, and Nico and Paul Herzetty — calls themselves “fat, disabled, and very, very queer.” 

“These are some of the main ways we identify, and they’re qualities that have directly impacted our ability to get dressed every day in a way that feels good,” the Phoria team introduces themselves on the website.

Pictured: A screenshot of Phoria's plus-size clothing brand database.

In addition to catering the user experience to women, non-binary, and trans people, Phoria is also a benefit corporation, or a B corp.

“We’ve legally required ourselves to consider the interests of all our stakeholders — customers, employees, the planet, and our shareholders,” the Phoria website explains.

“Our specific public benefit purpose is to reduce people’s dependence on buying mass-produced items made in unsustainable ways and to use human-centered business models to boldly challenge economic systems of inequity.” 

Right now, in the early stages of the company’s business, it doesn’t make any money.

“We’re focused on building something that genuinely solves plus-size people’s challenges around clothes shopping and supports smaller and more sustainable brands,” Phoria’s website states.

So, spreading the word seems to be of utmost importance...

Additionally, TikTok creators @couplagoofs (a queer couple named Morgan and Phoebe), recently shared a video in which they discovered Phoria. They met the website’s creators at a fat liberation event in their city and were introduced to the tool.

Quickly, commenters responded with gratitude and excitement.

“It is so disappointing to sort through pages of plus size clothes that aren’t even plus size,” a TikTok user commented. “This is gonna be such a good tool!” 

Some even shared emotional responses, speaking to the need at the heart of Phoria’s mission. 

“I’m… gonna cry,” another commenter wrote. “I’ve needed this my whole life.”"

-via Goodgoodgood, November 20, 2023

[ayeforscotland]

First five things you’d do as First Minister with a huge majority?

Massive housing reform - Rent Controls, increased taxation on 2nd properties, massive regulation brought against AirBnB landlords, and increase the number of social housing.

Universal Basic Income/Government Job Guarantee Program - Job guarantee program would create a true national living wage

Massive Digital Transformation overhaul for the Public Sector - Get everyone speaking the same language, focus on regional economic development

Adopt immigration policy that encourages more people to come to Scotland

Abolish Conversion Therapy, pass Gender Recognition Reform and officially recognise non-binary genders.

Answering this as if I was FM of 1st Indy Scottish Government.

[batboyblog]

Things Biden and the Democrats did, this week #9

March 9-15 2024

The IRS launched its direct file pilot program. Tax payers in 12 states, Florida, New Hampshire, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, Wyoming, Arizona, Massachusetts, California and New York, can now file their federal income taxes for free on-line directly with the IRS. The IRS plans on taking direct file nation wide for next year's tax season. Tax Day is April 15th so if you're in one of those states you have a month to check it out.

The Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights opened an investigation into the death of Nex Benedict. the OCR is investigating if Benedict's school district violated his civil rights by failing to protect him from bullying. President Biden expressed support for trans and non-binary youth in the aftermath of the ruling that Benedict's death was a suicide and encouraged people to seek help in crisis

Vice President Kamala Harris became the first sitting Vice-President (or President) to visit an abortion provider. Harris' historic visit was to a Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Paul Minnesota. This is the last stop on the Vice-President's Reproductive Rights Tour that has taken her across the country highlighting the need for reproductive health care.

President Biden announced 3.3 billion dollars worth of infrastructure projects across 40 states designed to reconnect communities divided by transportation infrastructure. Communities often split decades ago by highways build in the 1960s and 70s. These splits very often affect communities of color splitting them off from the wider cities and making daily life far more difficult. These reconnection projects will help remedy decades of economic racism.

The Biden-Harris administration is taking steps to eliminate junk fees for college students. These are hidden fees students pay to get loans or special fees banks charged to students with bank accounts. Also the administration plans to eliminate automatic billing for textbooks and ban schools from pocketing leftover money on student's meal plans.

The Department of Interior announced $120 million in investments to help boost Climate Resilience in Tribal Communities. The money will support 146 projects effecting over 100 tribes. This comes on top of $440 million already spent on tribal climate resilience by the administration so far

The Department of Energy announced $750 million dollars in investment in clean hydrogen power. This will go to 52 projects across 24 states. As part of the administration's climate goals the DoE plans to bring low to zero carbon hydrogen production to 10 million metric tons by 2030, and the cost of hydrogen to $1 per kilogram of hydrogen produced by 2031.

The Department of Energy has offered a 2.3 billion dollar loan to build a lithium processing plant in Nevada. Lithium is the key component in rechargeable batteries used it electric vehicles. Currently 95% of the world's lithium comes from just 4 countries, Australia, Chile, China and Argentina. Only about 1% of the US' lithium needs are met by domestic production. When completed the processing plant in Thacker Pass Nevada will produce enough lithium for 800,000 electric vehicle batteries a year.

The Department of Transportation is making available $1.2 billion in funds to reduce decrease pollution in transportation. Available in all 50 states, DC and Puerto Rico the funds will support projects by transportation authorities to lower their carbon emissions.

The Geothermal Energy Optimization Act was introduced in the US Senate. If passed the act will streamline the permitting process and help expand geothermal projects on public lands. This totally green energy currently accounts for just 0.4% of the US' engird usage but the Department of Energy estimates the potential geothermal energy supply is large enough to power the entire U.S. five times over.

The Justice for Breonna Taylor Act was introduced in the Senate banning No Knock Warrants nationwide

A bill was introduced in the House requiring the US Postal Service to cover the costs of any laid fees on bills the USPS failed to deliver on time

The Senate Confirmed 3 more Biden nominees to be life time federal Judges, Jasmine Yoon the first Asian-America federal judge in Virginia, Sunil Harjani in Illinois, and Melissa DuBose the first LGBTQ and first person of color to serve as a federal judge in Rhode Island. This brings the total number of Biden judges to 185

[ftmtftm]

a friend of mine once said "whenever male privilege is brought up about trans men it's always about two points: being paid more and having our ideas listened to, bc those are the easiest things they can create an elaborate what-if scenario around and they can't make an argument for anything else". failproof, glad to see it holds strong

Your friend was so incredibly right and it's really funny because those are also the two most surface level social aspects of Male Privilege as a concept and it makes sense why those specific two come up.

This isn't a fully formed thought, so bear with me for a moment but, it makes sense total sense that trans people who - as a class - are usually economically disadvantaged and left unlistened to, see a demographic (trans men) transition towards a social role that they have been taught from birth is economically safe and provides a platform and they just assume that the economic security and platform must be granted by virtue of identifying with that role.

That isn't the case though because oppressive systems don't give a shit about your personal identity, they care about the labels they place onto you and those labels often misalign with your actual character and identity.

It's people explicitly buying into and believing that the patriarchal ideal of manhood is actually attainable for marginalized men when it's not. It's a cotton ceiling. It's literally radfem "gender and sex is universal and economic status, race, sexuality, and any other marginalizations don't matter because we're talking about gender" type politics that completely fall apart even farther because we are explicitly talking about a marginalized gender minority when we talk about trans men.

Like - there's a lot of reasons why those arguments don't hold up but even just on a base level it misunderands Male Privilege as like... A boon, rather than the horrific workings of centuries of Colonialist, White Supremacist gender hierarchies in practice.

If Male Privilege is treated as though it was a trait inherently afforded to men inherently by virtue of their personal identity, without acknowledging the fact that Patriarchy is a gendered tool of subjugation empowered by White Supremacy - people don't have to confront the racialized, colonialist nature of the gender binary. They don't have to confront the reality that Black Feminists have been arguing in favor of for decades that the liberation of women, especially marginalized women, cannot come without the liberation of the men in their communities because gendered liberation is racial liberation is disability liberation is economic liberation etc. etc. etc.

If it can be asserted that trans men have systemic male privilege then uncomfortable realities about the nature of the system itself don't actually have to be confronted and that's convenient for a lot of people who aren't actually genuinely interested in liberation and are only working in their own self interest.

[hero-israel]

One of the reasons for the "Left" becoming more and more like a cheerleading squad for exactly the kind of things Leftists are supposed to hate is because so much of this new coalition of young people are coming from conservative backgrounds, but not doing any real work to deradicalize themselves.

They grow up with these Puritanical ideas of sin and justice, crime and punishment, and instead of unlearning any of this they just switch the targets of their disdain. It's switching teams for them, not learning that they don't have to play the game. Most of them are soft conservatives who just want free healthcare.

And these Leftoid chud debate pervert streamers like Hasanabi are a big contributing factor to this, not the only factor, but a prominent one. He definitely puts this veneer of artificiality and commodification over the Left. American society is under a lot of stress right now, culturally and economically. Instead of the Left organically building coalitions it's mostly unorganized college kids reading Al Jazeera and Russian and Chinese propaganda and running as fast as they can away from privilege and having a toddler understanding of class consciousness. It's so pathetic and basic and it will not save us.

You cannot save a society that you don't think is worth saving. They're just practicing radical disengagement and some kind of edgy nihilism. They purport to hate America and the West and want to burn it all down but they know that will never happen which is why they're so comfortable with the cognitive dissonance. It's why they don't vote, and why organizing and demonstrating is like teeth pulling for them. Either black activists have to do all the leg work for them, or the protests have to be about tearing something down, not advocating for any positive change, right now that's Israel. Soon it will be something else.

Unironically, the pussy hat resist lib wine moms did way more with their women's marches than any of these wannabe philosopher college kids are doing with anything. Like I know for a fact a "Leftist" would read a post like that and be like "L + ratio libshit, imagine supporting the neoliberal fascist colonialist concept of due process?" like we're so beyond the pale at this point. When fascism takes over, I'm sure they'll think they're fighting back, but if the fascists learn to coopt enough phrases about climate and Palestine and healthcare, will they even notice the fascists taking over?

I've got a few friends who were raised hardcore fundie Christian, "gays will burn" creation and rapture types. They went to normal public colleges and wound up becoming very left-wing, all the left memes and slogans you can think of, fastidious in their distinctions between and protections of every conceivable marginalized group (which none of them are, on any axis). And.... you can't disagree with them about anything. Can't point out that a source is questionable or that a slogan is psychologically backfiring and producing skepticism or mockery instead of benefits. They will not hear of it, because they are still fundies. They did a binary flip from one team to another but never moderated their tactics or temperament.

[ixlander]

         What is the family? So deep runs the idea that the family is the exclusive place where people are safe, where people come from, where people are made, and where people belong, it doesn’t even feel like an idea anymore. Let us unpick it, then.          The family is the reason we are supposed to want to go to work, the reason we have to go to work, and the reason we can go to work. It is, at root, the name we use for the fact that care is privatized in our society. And because it feels synonymous with care, “family” is every civic-minded individual’s raison d’être par excellence: an ostensibly non-individualist creed and unselfish principle to which one voluntarily signs up without thinking about it. What alternative could there be? The economic assumption that behind every “breadwinner” there is a private someone (or someones) worth being exploited for, notably some kind of wife—that is, a person who is likely a breadwinner too—“freely” making sandwiches with the hard-won bread, or hiring someone else to do so, vacuuming up the crumbs, and refrigerating leftovers, such that more bread can be won tomorrow: this feels to many of us like a description of “human nature.”          Without the family, who or what would take responsibility for the lives of non-workers, including the ill, the young, and the elderly? This question is a bad one. We don’t hesitate to say that nonhuman animals are better off outside of zoos, even if alternative habitats for them are growing scarcer and scarcer and, moreover, they have become used to the abusive care of zoos. Similarly: transition out of the family will be tricky, yes, but the family is doing a bad job at care, and we all deserve better. The family is getting in the way of alternatives.          In part, the vertiginous question “what’s the alternative?” arises because it is not just the worker (and her work) that the family gives birth to every day, in theory. The family is also the legal assertion that a baby, a neonatal human, is the creation of the familial romantic dyad; and that this act of authorship in turn generates, for the authors, property rights in “their” progeny—parenthood—but also quasi-exclusive accountability for the child’s life. The near-total dependence of the young person on these guardians is portrayed not as the harsh lottery that it patently is, but rather as “natural,” not in need of social mitigation, and, furthermore, beautiful for all concerned. Children, it is proposed, benefit from having only one or two parents and, at best, a few other “secondary” caregivers. Parents, it is supposed, derive nothing so much as joy from the romance of this isolated intensity. Constant allusions to the hellworld of sheer exhaustion parents inhabit notwithstanding, their condition is sentimentalized to the nth degree: it is downright taboo to regret parenthood. All too seldom is parenthood identified as an absurdly unfair distribution of labor, and a despotic distribution of responsibility for and power over younger people. A distribution that could be changed.         Like a microcosm of the nation-state, the family incubates chauvinism and competition. Like a factory with a billion branches, it manufactures “individuals” with a cultural, ethnic, and binary gender identity; a class; and a racial consciousness. Like an infinitely renewable energy source, it performs free labor for the market. Like an “organic element of historical progress,” writes Anne McClintock in Imperial Leather, it worked for imperialism as an image of hierarchy-within-unity that grew “indispensable for legitimating exclusion and hierarchy” in general. For all these reasons, the family functions as capitalism’s base unit—in Mario Mieli’s phrase, “the cell of the social tissue.” It may be easier to imagine the end of capitalism, as I’ve riffed elsewhere, than the end of the family. But everyday utopian experiments do generate strands of an altogether different social tissue: micro-cultures which could be scaled up if the movement for a classless society took seriously the premise that households can be formed freely and run democratically; the principle that no one shall be deprived of food, shelter, or care because they don’t work.

Sophie Lewis, Abolish the Family

[opencommunion]

"My analysis challenges a number of ideas, some mentioned above, common in many Western feminist writings:

Gender categories are universal and timeless and have been present in every society at all times. This idea is often expressed in a biblical tone, as if to suggest that 'in the beginning there was gender.'

Gender is a fundamental organizing principle in all societies and is therefore always salient. In any given society, gender is everywhere.

There is an essential, universal category 'woman' that is characterized by the social uniformity of its members.

The subordination of women is a universal.

The category 'woman' is precultural, fixed in historical time and cultural space in antithesis to another fixed category—'man.'

... Merely by analyzing a particular society with gender constructs, scholars create gender categories. To put this another way: by writing about any society through a gendered perspective, scholars necessarily write gender into that society. Gender, like beauty, is often in the eye of the beholder. The idea that in dealing with gender constructs one necessarily contributes to their creation is apparent in Judith Lorber's claim that 'the prime paradox of gender is that in order to dismantle the institution, you must first make it very visible.' In actuality, the process of making gender visible is also a process of creating gender. Thus, scholarship is implicated in the process of gender-formation."

Oyèrónkẹ́ Oyěwùmí, The Invention of Women: Making an African Sense of Western Gender Discourses (1997) ~

"Feminist anthropologists of racialized peoples in the Americas tend not to think about the concept of gender when they use the term as a classificatory instrument, they take its meaning for granted. This, I claim, is an example of a colonial methodology. Though the claim that gender, the concept, applies universally is not explicitly stated, it is implied. In both group and conference conversations I have heard the claim that 'gender is everywhere,' meaning, technically, that sexual difference is socialized everywhere. The claim, implied or explicit, is that all societies organize dimorphic sexuality, reproductive sexuality, in terms of dichotomous roles that are hierarchically arranged and normatively enforced. That is, gender is the normative social conceptualization of sex, the biological fact of the matter. ... The critique of the binary has not been accompanied by an unveiling of the relation between colonization, race, and gender, nor by an analysis of gender as a colonial introduction of control of the humanity of the colonized, nor by an understanding that gender obscures rather than uncovers the organization of life among the colonized. The critique has favored thinking of more sexes and genders than two, yet it has not abandoned the universality of gender arrangements. ... Understanding the group with gender on one’s mind, one would see gender everywhere, imposing an order of relations uncritically as if coloniality had been completely successful both in erasing other meanings and people had totally assimilated, or as if they had always had the socio-political-economic structure that constitutes and is constituted by what Butler calls the gender norm inscribed in the organization of their relations. Thus, the claim 'There is gender everywhere' is false ... since for a colonized, non-Western people to have their socio-political-economic relations regulated by gender would mean that the conceptual and structural framework of their society fits the conceptual and structural framework of colonial or neocolonial and imperialist societies. ... Why does anyone want to insist on finding gender among all the peoples of our planet? What is good about the concept that we would want to keep it at the center of our 'liberation'?" María Lugones, "Gender and Universality in Colonial Methodology," in Decolonial Feminism in Abya Yala: Caribbean, Meso, and South American Contributions and Challenges (2022)

[butchscientist]

From Queers in Palestine (here is their website, queersinpalestine is their instagram):

"Since October 7th, we have been witnessing an accelerated genocide unfolding in the Gaza Strip and in all parts of Palestine, blatantly and publicly declared on numerous occasions by Israeli governmental and military figures. The brutality and lethal magnitude of the atrocities committed by the Israeli state and its supporters produce increasingly harrowing conditions for those who remain alive in Palestine, every day, everywhere. This brutality has been sustained through the continued economic, military, diplomatic, and political support of world leaders historically and presently. We note, document, and narrate the hundreds of catastrophic massacres for the past 75 years at the hands of the annihilatory wrath of the Zionist regime; from Deir Yassin to the Tantura Massacre (1948) upon which Israel’s foundation is based, to the Kafr Qassem Massacre (1956) to Sabra and Shatila (1982), and this is just to name a few. There is no possibility of any liberatory political and social movement to achieve life and dignity if it is aligned with the genocidal death machine of Israel. Israel is founded on blood and is sustained through blood.

During these times, and in line with its long-standing exploitation of liberal identity politics, Israel has been weaponizing queer bodies to counter any support for Palestine and any critique of its settler-colonial project. Israelis (politicians, organizations, and “civilians”) have been mobilizing colonial dichotomies such as “civilized” and “barbaric,” “human” and “animal,” and other dehumanizing binaries as a discourse that legitimizes the attacks on Palestinians. Within this settler-colonial rhetoric, Israel seeks to garner and mobilize support from Western governments and liberal societies by portraying itself as a nation that respects freedom, diversity, and human rights, that is fighting a “monstrous” and oppressive society, illuminated clearly through the declaration of the Prime Minister of Israel “There is a struggle between the children of light and children of darkness, between humanity and law of the jungle.”

While these blatantly racist genocidal declarations take the stage, activists in Palestine and internationally are being silenced, harassed, detained, criminalized, workers fired from their jobs, and students suspended from universities. International feminist and queer activists, in solidarity with Palestine, are facing attacks and harassment by Zionists under the premise that those who support Palestine will be “raped” and “beheaded” by Palestinians for merely being women and queers. Yet more often than not, rape and death are what Zionists wish upon queers and women who stand in solidarity with Palestine. Zionist fantasies of brutalized bodies do not surprise us, for we have experienced the reality of their manifestation on our skin and spirit. Yet they never seize to accelerate in their explicit vehemence. It becomes evermore absurd when such framings are constructed against Palestinian society, in light of countless testimonies, reports, and documentations of sexual violence Palestinians have been facing throughout Israel’s 75 years of military occupation. From the thousands of Palestinian prisoners, men and women, who are subject to sexual torture and rape since Israel’s inception to this very day, to daily and escalating settler violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, to Israeli “civilians” filming themselves torturing kidnapped Palestinians as a TikTok trend, and the most recent harrowing footage published on social media platforms by Israeli soldiers which document the lengths of torture and sexual abuse soldiers and settlers inflict on our bodies regardless of their sexual orientation and gender – all forms of violence, including sexual violence are systematically and structurally part of Zionist domination over Palestinian life. And yet Israeli society continues to weaponize queerness for the purposes of justifying war and colonial repression, as if their bombs, apartheid walls, guns, knives, and bulldozers are selective of who they harm based on sexuality and gender.

We refuse the instrumentalization of our queerness, our bodies, and the violence we face as queer people to demonize and dehumanize our communities, especially in service of imperial and genocidal acts. We refuse that Palestinian sexuality and Palestinian attitudes towards diverse sexualities become parameters for assigning humanity to any colonized society. We deserve life because we are human, with the multitude of our imperfections, and not because of our proximity to colonial modes of liberal humanity. We refuse colonial and imperialist tactics that seek to alienate us from our society and alienate our society from us, on the basis of our queerness. We are fighting interconnected systems of oppression, including patriarchy and capitalism, and our dreams of autonomy, community, and liberation are inherently tied to our desire for self-determination. No queer liberation can be achieved with settler-colonization, and no queer solidarity can be fostered if it stands blind to the racialized, capitalist, fascist, and imperial structures that dominate us.

We call on queer and feminist activists and groups around the world to stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people in their resistance to displacement, land theft, and ethnic cleansing and their struggle for the liberation of their lands and futures from Zionist settler-colonialism. This call cannot be answered only by sharing statements and signing letters but by an active engagement with decolonial and liberatory struggles in Palestine and around the globe. Our unequivocal demands are as follows:

Reject Israeli funding, refuse collaborations with all Israeli institutions, and join the BDS movement.

Strike: Silently or publicly, refuse that your exploited labor be used for the silencing of Palestine activism or the funding, support, and endorsement of military settler colonization and genocide.

Do what anti-colonial queers have done for decades, reclaim the narrative, and set the terms of the conversation, this time about Palestine. What is happening in Palestine is Genocide. Israel is a Settler-Colony. Palestinians are a Militarily Occupied and Colonized Society. Under international law, Israel Does Not have the right to “defend” itself against the population it occupies, while Palestinians Have the right to Resist their occupation. Demanding Ceasefire is the first step in holding Israel accountable for its crimes against humanity. We must also demand to break the siege on Gaza and the dismantlement of the Zionist settler-colony.

Contact your local representatives to pressure them into defunding the genocide, ending their military, diplomatic, and political support with Israel. Speak up against the ongoing and complicit criminalization of solidarity with Palestine and the colonial and Islamophobic projection of European Antisemitism on Palestinian and racialized voices, as we are witnessing particularly in France, the UK, the US, and Germany.

Shut down main streets. Organize a sit-in in your local central station. Interrupt the flow of commerce. Complacency is a choice.

We, queer Palestinians, are an integral part of our society, and we are informing you: from the heavily militarized alleys of Jerusalem to Huwara’s scorched lands, to Jaffa’s surveilled streets and cutting across Gaza’s besieging walls, from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free."

[ciswomenofficial]

I swear so many people online these days identify as gender abolitionist who I don’t think are talking at all about abolishing gender as a social reality. They just want to abolish the language of gender, to muddy the water by contorting the definitions of words altogether beyond meaning or practicality. This is of course an impossible project. Abolishing gendered language is impossible without abolishing the social and economic realities of gender through dictatorship of the proletariat and then smashing its trappings decisively through cultural revolution. They will not take that first step. They make the same mistake as the second wave feminists who placed too much value on individual lifestyle choices. They think choosing their pronoun of choice and engaging in “genderfuckery” and choosing identity labels that contradict each other is some kind of radical act of revolution. This is a mistake. People engaging in behaviors and taking identity labels outside of the binary is fine and harmless, but it is not an act of revolution. Revolution is conducted with guns, not accessories. It is achieved through collective action, not the consumption habits or strong personality of an individual. And revolution needs scientific terminology with consistent definitions: bourgeoisie and proletariat—defined in relation of private property and means of production—being a clear example. Gender can no more be seen as binary than class: as there are peasants and petty-bourgeoisie, a scientific, materialist conception of gender is able to talk about non-binary existences and different strata of men and women. But there needs to be clear cut scientific terms for their to be a unified theory of gender, and for their to be a revolutionary theory of gender. With no revolutionary theory there will be no revolutionary at all. Revolution not guided by theory, borne from the spontaneous eruption of the masses has never come, and there is no scientific evidence for such a theory that posits revolution can come just by spontaneous genderfuckery within the masses not guided by a scientific theory, where the revolutionary scientists just follow the masses around and take note of who among the would-be revolutionaries has the most wild and confusing gender identity. We know what theory of revolution is evidenced through real data and that theory is dialectical and historical materialism. If we are not guided by these, there will be no end to patriarchy no end to transphobia. Do not be naive enough to think that postmodern nonsense and individual consumption and identity will free you.

[communistkenobi]

Sorry if this is a dumb question can you talk a little bit more about what you mean when you say someone’s politics are reactionary? And what the opposite of reactionary would look like in politics or media or what have you? I get that it’s a bad thing but not totally why and also what something better looks like

Not a stupid question at all - I use the term reactionary broadly to refer to right-wing responses to/analyses of current political circumstances. They are reacting to social, economic, and/or political progress and fighting for those things to be dismantled or destroyed in order to return “back” to an idealised past where those social and political advances were not available to people. This is the reason why the right wing has an eternal obsession with “tradition.” I don’t know the exact scope of the term’s lineage within Marxist thought specifically, but part of reactionary politics is, well, reaction - there is no political imagination offered beyond what already exists or has existed, reactionaries can only react to current conditions, and so right wing political projects demand a backwards historical trajectory, either to an earlier stage of capitalism or even feudalism, where these institutions better enforced (in their view, not necessarily in reality) gendered divisions of labour and gendered roles in society, cisheterosexual norms and practices, racial segregation, imperial and colonial domination, aristocratic class structures, and so on. These are founded on moral claims about what society “ought” to be like, and those moral claims are often bound to religious authorities like the Christian church, intellectual and political projects like white supremacy, colonial states like the US or France or Canada or the UK or etc, and so on. The goal is to protect these existing institutions and reinvigorate them with more political and social power - to make them great again, one might say! 

Often to justify these political goals, claims are made about harm being done to a nation or people (this is what animates “the great replacement” conspiracy about white people being bred out of society), to traditional family values, to IQ, but these are not empirical claims being made - the harm is metaphysical, the progress they oppose destabilises idealistic categories like gender or race, it’s not actually physically harming real human beings in the world. Reactionaries can hold the belief that the white race needs to be protected from non-whites, for example, despite the fact that “race” is not something that can be discovered or proven in the material or natural world, it is a fiction that organises society hierarchically but is not premised on anything real. Reactionaries equate the destabilisation of these categories with harm (eg trans people destroy the gender binary, gender equality destroys the need for men, racial equality harms whites), and so their opposition is founded on maintaining these categories, not reducing harm. The harm is part of their goal! It’s why when you point out that, for examples, trans healthcare greatly improves the lives of trans people in order to rebut reactionary claims that most trans people regret transition, they don’t care - their goal is not to reduce harm, it is to maintain existing gendered institutions and norms. They are using the language of harm for rhetorical purposes, but they are not making empirical claims about harm because they don’t give a shit about reducing harm to trans people.

It is opposite to revolutionary politics, a political imaginary looking to produce new institutions, new forms of social and economic relationships, new political horizons not previously developed in human history, or to build upon past projects that have come before. These projects are premised on analyses of current political and social conditions in order to identify the harms they cause. Things like decolonisation, socialism, transfeminism, and so on can act as (potentially) revolutionary political projects that seek to abolish old social/political relationships and hierarchies, be they gender, capitalism, settler colonialism, etc, for the purpose of creating a more just and equitable society. Demands to abolish old social and political forms are founded on empirical claims of harm - settler colonialism produces harm, the gender binary produces harm, capitalism produces harm, etc., and we can measure and assess the extent of these harms. This is part of the reason people claim Marxism is scientific, because its political conclusions and proposed solutions are based on an analysis of “material conditions” ie the real world & its various structures