[importantcatpics]

[asneakyfox]

the idea that restrooms, locker rooms, etc need to be single-sex spaces in order for women to be safe is patriarchy's way of signalling to men & boys that society doesn't expect them to behave themselves around women. it is directly antifeminist. it would be antifeminist even if trans people did not exist. a feminist society would demand that women should be safe in all spaces even when there are men there.

[asneakyfox]

btw this is maybe the single most key distinguishing feature of the terfy strains of radical feminism, the seed all the rest of it springs out of: they have absolutely no faith in the ability of feminism to actually destroy patriarchy. they do not think feminism can truly build a better world. they cannot really even imagine that possibility. they think patriarchy is an inevitable natural consequence of unchangeable biological facts, and therefore the goal of feminism can only be to mitigate the worst effects of patriarchy, not to get rid of it.

they can imagine a society where women get some designated safe spaces without men around. they cannot imagine a society where the presence of men is not inherently a danger to women.

[yugiohz]

[swagvo1d]

i love him

[so-much-for-subtlety]

[pangur-and-grim]

my house is scary at night

[storyweavingspider]

Interpreted this initially not as shelves, but as your cat having erected defensive fortifications

[tfap-tgirl]

reactionimage.jpg

[innerchildabortionclinic]

good morning everyone it's time to be tortured to insanity and then of course tortured for being insane

[jingerpi]

However, there still remain some Party members who, unable to shake off individualism, become arrogant and conceited and keep flaunting their merits. While criticizing others, they do not like being criticized; they avoid self criticism or practise it without sincerity and seriousness. They are afraid they might lose face and prestige. They pay no attention to the opinion of the masses, and make light of non-Party cadres. They do not realize that it is difficult not to commit any errors in one's work. We are not afraid of possible mistakes, but of failure to correct them resolutely. To redress them, we must listen to criticism by the masses and practise sincere self-criticism. Otherwise we shall lag behind and regress, which will lead to our being cast aside by the masses. This is the inevitable consequence of individualism.

Ho Chi Minh, On revolutionary morality

[communistkenobi]

I had a lot of/still have some vestigial arrogance about quantitative methods over qualitative ones, probably in a combination of scientific misogyny + STEMlord superiority. But doing regression analysis and quant-heavy data analysis makes me realise more and more that you can justify basically any claim with numbers, and that you can construct your research in such a way as to output the numbers you want. which does not mean that all data are made up or that quantitative knowledge is all false. I think stories about scientists straight up inventing numbers or fudging experiments on purpose prove that there is a real difference between fraudulent and non-fraudulent research. but those data must always be narrativised & are always already narrativised. The act of presenting numbers itself is doing some of that narration because you’re already arguing that these numbers are worth presenting

[communistkenobi]

People in the notes are rightfully pointing out common issues with data manipulation and pre-loaded conclusions in scientific research (i.e., the academic version of asking "so, how often do you beat your wife?" and so on), but I should have clarified that I'm not really talking about that. I'm talking about completely legitimate, above-board scientific research.

For example, I've had students ask me (in good faith) how it was possible for international medical bodies to report different counts of COVID-19 cases during the early years of the pandemic. And one of the answers is that you need to first define what you mean by a "COVID-19 case." Do you include self-reported incidences? Waste water data? Geo-fenced social media posts about people complaining about their coronavirus symptoms? Federal estimates? Hospital data? How do you compare countries/territories/substate entities with mandatory reporting mechanisms vs countries/territories/substate entities that rely only on voluntary self-reported cases? And what combination of these do you use? How you construct what you mean by "case" is going to impact the outcomes you report. These different counts of COVID-19 cases can all be true simultaneously, not because numbers are made up, but because they all come out of different methodologies that can be equally valid.

And this is true across all science, not just social science. Bill Clinton said it best lol: "it depends on what your definition of the word 'is' is." This feels obvious when you look at scientific research that uses "skull measurements" as their object of analysis - the concept itself is white supremacist, regardless of how "sound" the research is. But even something as apparently self-evident as a COVID-19 case still requires a definition, and how you define your variables is necessarily going to impact how the research goes and what conclusions are drawn.

These definitions are always embedded in political & social assumptions. And again, this does not mean that science is all made up or nonsense or whatever. There is a widespread fetishism of "objective knowledge" that is itself ideological - the idea that knowledge can be divorced from all historical and political contexts, that you can scrub bias from research and simply report the facts. Valuable, well-supported, well-constructed scientific research is always embedded in these contexts. Not just as a result of researcher assumptions, but of the material context it exists in - what research resources are available, how & what research gets funded, the academy's relationship to the state & non-government bodies that both provide data and use that research to inform policy, the historical relationships universities often have with settler-colonialism and imperialism that give them access to "foreign" research subjects, etc etc etc.

So my overall point (which I didn't communicate well) is that data can always say what you want to some extent, for good and for ill. And research results (at least in my experience) tend to surprise you in ways that require explanations, which themselves can be fully justified, but again, exist within many different contexts that influence how you interpret them - and not just the results themselves, but your own surprise at your results

[decompose1]

girls i know accusations of racism can occasionally be falsely leveraged against trans women in order to discredit them and this Is Bad but this does notttt actually mean that you can just ignore the racism in the community like it doesn't exist. because racism exists in all communities and lately it is Nightmarish to be a nonwhite doll. i have experienced really glaring racism in several transfem spaces and there's been this really kind of awful attitude or like idea enforced that i shouldn't talk about it because speaking up could socially murder another tgirl. and that's really bad. that's really really bad. like it's really bad that i'm hesitant to even post this because of the scrutiny we're under. and yes the fact that it is so dangerous to speak up is because of the massive amounts of surveillance & transmisogyny we're facing but that just CAN'T mean racism gets a pass, okay? BIPOC girls are not expendable and you can't keep throwing us under the bus.

but i know calls to action without any kind of instruction aren't very helpful so here are some tips that i think you can easily do yourself with your own circles:

1) Staring off simple: Look around. Are there any BIPOC girls in your friend group, or are all of you white? Why? Do you often joke about everyone in your friend group being white? Why is that funny?

What to do: Examine why there are no people of color in your group. Examine why people of color may not be comfortable enough to hang out with you & your friends. Correct these, where possible. Do some reading on anti-racism. Talk to more people.

2) Examine how you talk about people of color & racism. Are you downplaying racism in your community? Are you treating women of color as dramatic or unreasonable for bringing it up? Do you find yourself only defending white dolls, always defending them from claims of racism, but never defending BIPOC dolls? Why?

What to do: Think about why you care more about accusations of racism than protecting the women of color in your community. Make sure you're making your space safe for BIPOC girls. Speak openly and loudly about anti-racism. Hold your sisters accountable- they should be apologizing when they say or do something wrong.

3) This one might sound silly, but as we often meet each other over fandom and roleplay- how are nonwhite characters treated in your circle? Are they always aggressive, angry, or antagonistic? Do you find yourself putting nonwhite characters in more roles like cops, dictators, sex pests, etc?

Additionally: If your circle shares sexual content, is there a lot of art where there's a pale/blonde character on the bottom, and a darker character on top? Are you and your friends always drawing darker characters as more dominant, more sexually aggressive, or promiscuous, while the white/pale characters are more innocent, submissive, modest, or clueless?

What to do: Examine how the way your group approaches fandom & art with nonwhite characters in it may make people of color uncomfortable. Examine why your art may make people of color feel unsafe or awkward hanging out with you. It's not wrong to have the occasional character of color be more antagonistic or dominant, but it's a problem when this is a pattern. If it's happening All The Time, question why!

4) Be honest with yourself: Did this post make you feel defensive? Does it make you feel defensive when people say something you did was racist? Why?

If a person of color tells you your actions were racist, they trust you to improve. I don't tell people they're being racist if i think they're going to hurt me for bringing it up. I know many like me. Don't prove us wrong- take these criticisms into account and work on it. You aren't cursed to be some kind of terrible bigot forever because you messed up- panicking without action is useless. Just be sure you examine the behavior in question and work to prevent this kind of thing from happening again. Okay?

I believe all these things are easy enough to check with yourself & your friends. Please work on making yourself & your group safe for girls who aren't white.

[leviathan-supersystem]

people in the usa are so uninformed/misinformed/propagandized about socialist countries that even knowing like, basic facts about the electoral system of marxist leninist countries feels like being privy to some kind of forbidden knowledge.

[leviathan-supersystem]

most of my ride-or-die mutuals probably already know about al of this, but for any of the non-tankies who follow me who might not be aware:

in most marxist-leninist countries, the way the elections work is that the citizens elect representatives to the local council/assembly, who in turn elect from amongst themselves a delegate to go to the council/assembly at the next level up, all the way up to the national assembly, which in turn elects from itself a president/chairman. depending on the country and time period these selections by the assembly might also be put to a confirmation vote by the public, to either confirm or veto the assembly's selection, but this is largely a formality.

let's use cuba as an example, since it's a small country and consequently it's system of nested assemblies has a lot less layers and is much easier to keep track of. community meetings are held where between two and eight candidates are put forward for a single seat to the local municipal assembly. the municipal assemblies, in turn, elects from themselves a representative to go to the national assembly. prospective representatives to the national assembly are also put forward by various trade unions and other mass organizations which represent students, the elderly, non-working mothers, etc, these proposed candidates are also voted on by the municipal assembly. the national assembly then in turn elects from itself the 31 member council of state, which in turn elects the president. these representatives elected by the municipal and national council are then put to a confirmation vote by the whole citizenry, but again, this is largely a formality. there also used to be provincial assembly that was above the municipal assembly and below the national assembly, but this was removed in order to streamline the system and give a more direct path from the democratic input at the municipal election level to the national assembly.

now, i'm sure there are any number of critiques you could make, or ways this system might be improved- but anti-communists by and large aren't interested in critiquing the cuban electoral system (or any other marxist-leninist electoral system) as it actually exists. they completely ignore the multi-candidate municipal elections, ignore the electoral process by which the municipal assemblies select the delegates to the national assembly, and instead laser focus on the mere formality confirmation vote on the representatives the municipal assemblies elected, to paint a narrative that in communist countries you can only choose one candidate. you know the drill, "in communist countries, 'elections' have become a sham, a farce! you have no choice, but to vote 'YES' for your evil dictator overlord- under communism, so-called 'elections' are merely a method of control and humiliation, meant to enforce total submission to a system you have no say in!" here's just one example of that kind of rhetoric: [link]

the very existence of multi-candidate municipal elections utterly debunks this of course, people in communist countries choose between candidates in elections all the time. even if you completely reject the "bottom-up" method of leninist democracy, and you think that the elections by the municipal assembly of representative to the national assembly have no meaningful democratic content, (if this is you, just out of curiosity, what's your opinion on the electoral college? or the supreme court?) it's pretty hard to deny that the competitive races in the municipal/local level put at least some democratic input into the system.

now, i can already hear what some of the anti-communists who lurk my blog because they hate-follow me are thinking. "multi-candidate municipal elections? in cuba????? where the fuck are you getting this dogshit. let me guess, you read it on the website of some tankie political party, and like the gullible moron you are, you immediately believed it. pathetic. find any source, *any* source at all that isn't overtly communist that corroborates this claim."

this is a genuinely good point! i did originally learn about this from overtly communist sources, and if those were the only sources claiming this, it really would cast some pretty serious doubt on the veracity of these claims. so, can i find anti-communist sources that corroborate this?

yes.

from the congressional research service:

Although National Assembly members were directly elected for the first time in February 1993, only a single slate of candidates was offered. Direct elections for the National Assembly were again held in January 1998 and January 2003, but voters again were not offered a choice of candidates. In contrast, at the local level elections for municipal elections are competitive, with from two to eight candidates. To be elected, the candidate must receive more than half of the votes cast. As a result, runoff elections between the two top candidates are common. In 2007, the process of nominating candidates for the local municipal assemblies took place in September 2007. Municipal elections were held October 21, 2007 (with runoffs on October 28), and over 15,000 local officials were chosen. The new municipal assemblies then met on December 2, 2007 to nominate candidates for provincial assemblies and for the National Assembly of People’s Power.

[link]

given that this is an anti-communist source, they are of course playing up the confirmation vote in the usual ways (ouagh! aough! only one candidate! no choice!) but given that this document is intended to be viewed by congress, and isn't really intended for the general public, it has to at least passingly address actual reality at least a little and can't spend it's whole time rolling in propaganda slop.

or check this out, from fox fucking news:

Municipal assemblies also nominate candidates for half the representatives on provincial assemblies. The provincial assemblies then nominate candidates for half the representatives for the National Assembly, which elects Cuba's ruling Council of State, which in turn elects the president. The other half of the candidates for the municipal and provincial assemblies are selected by a government electoral commission, assuring continued Communist Party control. Once all of the candidates are nominated, voters choose among them in general elections. Every municipality is divided into block-level voting districts. The two-month process of electing municipal assembly representatives begins when residents gather in an empty lot or at a school to nominate neighbors as candidates. Each district picks at least two candidates — more populous ones have more. The top winners of show-of-hands votes at the meetings became the official candidates put before voters in Sunday's election. In all, there are 27,000 candidates to fill 12,589 seats on municipal assemblies for 2½-year terms.

and this is in an article about overt anti-communists successfully getting nominated as candidates for the municipal assembly! (they lost their election though lol bye bozos) [link]

they're trying to spin it, of course- the part about the "government electoral commission" is misleading and inaccurate (as previously stated, the other half of candidates are put forward by mass organizations such as trade unions, which are then voted on by the municipal assembly. the electoral commission simply approves the selections made by the municipal assembly.) fox news, engaging in anti-communist disinfo? unheard of!

but even here enough of the truth is shining through the lies to put to bed the idea that there's no element of choice in the cuban electoral system.

and what's crazy is that all of this info is just out there for anyone who cares to look. but a lot of people are simply too incurious to bother, they were told that the Enemy Country is a totalitarian regime without any democracy and it just never occurs to them to check into it. the US ruling class barely even needs to try to hide the truth, because most people in the US are too lazy and apathetic to look for it.

[beardedmrbean]

[undefeatedoftheeast-deactivated]

[prokopetz]

Bisexual impostor may sound like a meme (or possibly a band name), but I swear some days I really do catch myself thinking "what if I'm straight and don't know it and I really did just suck all that cock for clout?"

[prokopetz]

@tambuli replied:

Clout with whom????????? 😭😭😂😂

You need to understand that when I was a kid, "bisexual men are really just straight dudes pretending to be queer for clout" was genuinely a mainstream opinion in gay and lesbian spaces. A formative experience doesn't need to make any damn sense to leave a mark!

[yasmin1000000]

Idk anything about her but im a Patricia Taxxon soldier for life

[yasmin1000000]

Im at the "beating him unprovoked" stage

[dre759]

The things some ultras say about the former USSR and China today is crazy. Like dawg you’re saying that shit for free???

At least find a way to get some Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation money. Or maybe some money from the U.S. Congress—they’re paying millions for people to spread negative news about the BRI. You’re already saying their talking points. May as well get paid by them.

[dre759]

The above post was made when I was really fed up. Normally I’m not that openly annoyed on here but like. Come on. Some people need to get it together in terms of when they run their mouths about revolutionary socialist projects.

So to encourage some studying to not fall into ultra leftism please read The Long Transition Towards Socialism And The End Of Capitalism (digital copies are free for download!).

It goes through the history of revolutions and does an excellent job of being balanced in regards to topics like: the Soviet NEP, the Sino-Soviet split, the various Maoist factions in the 70s, Reform and Opening up, etc.

As the author says in his introduction:

Much discussion related to the development of socialism has focused on the struggle between different political lines within communist parties operating first in the Soviet Union and later in China instead of the actual material conditions which these lines represent. My judgment of these struggles does not rest on some sacred socialist values but on being rational. When things go wrong, it is not necessarily because of mistakes or treason of subjective forces, nor because of communists betraying the “true” values of socialism. The history I want to review is not a history of morals. For a materialist approach, the questions of betrayal or rectitude have only minor relevance.

The struggle for socialism is a collective project, created by the effort and support of millions over the past two hundred years. A specific economic and political constellation in the world system can make it impossible to move in the direction of socialism at any given point in history. A detour might be necessary. This does not mean that there are always excuses when things go wrong. Mistakes and treason do happen. However, we should be careful to not retreat to idealism and hand down a quick verdict, but rather conduct a dialectical historical materialist analysis of the facts so we might learn from history.

For a further deep dive into the BRI, China’s economic relationship with Africa, and modern anti-China propaganda please read Why The World Needs China.