Im Not Doing Ok

this feels particularly relevant given recent events regarding a cis man talking down to transmascs about their relationship to male privilege

I wish anyone else were ready for the "Fat women are violently degendered and therefore are subject to a heightened intersection of misogyny and fat-phobia that is socially comparable (and compounds with) other intersectional oppressions (such as misogynoir and transmisogyny)" discussion.

Guys I’m going to make a hot take

The whole “I wish I could be with a woman, but instead I’m stuck with my stupid, gross husband/boyfriend” sentiment I see repeated in bi circles is just the “progressive” queer version of the boomer “I hate my wife” jokes

if he’s stupid and gross you should leave him and if he isn’t you’re just being cruel for internet points and he should leave you

gee i wonder if there’s some institutional pressure that women face that leads them to engage in heterosexuality compulsarily. Like maybe there’s some sort of societal structure at play that’s compelling women to act in accordance with heterosexual social standards. I wonder if there’s a material reason that a woman might maintain a romantic or sexual arrangement with a man she does not like that doesn’t hinge on her being an irrational bitch. Probably not though. Women are stupid cunts who only act out of ignorance and cruelty.

Where in this post is anyone saying women are irrational or ignorant or that comphet isnt real? If anything I think the trend of “i hate my stupid gross husband/boyfriend” jokes in bi spaces would exacerbate comphet feelings, because it promotes the idea of hating your male partner as a normal part of het relationships, and not as a problem that the woman does not need to put up with.

I know object permanance is hard for you, but there’s words above the ones you just read and oftentimes they’re related to eachother in some way.

Alright. Instead of being so condescending, consider that my understanding of those words was not the same as yours. I understood the reblog above yours as “If you do not like being with your partner you should not be with them, if you do like being with them then its mean to belittle them online”. That is the only mention of cruelty - someone insulting their partner who they do actually like when that partner hasnt done anything wrong. I do not see that or the original post as saying that there is no reason a woman could ever feel stuck in a relationship with a man other than being “irrational”. It sounds like you think the issue in the original post was with a woman thinking “i wish i could be with a woman instead of a man”, instead of with the woman calling her partner stupid and gross.

I was mean to you because it’s really not worth my time to honestly try and give you people an understanding of any analytical framework outside of libertarian individualism. You’re the center of your own world and the greatest injustice of society is that someone might not care about your hurt feelings. But I missed therapy today, so if you really want my opinion, then here; This post and the phenomenon it describes is the direct material result of reactionary queer tribalism and empire-building expressed in two ways; first and foremost is the bisexual community’s vested interest in claiming ownership over women at any stage of compulsory heterosexuality. E.g. women who are only attracted to fictional or hyper idealized icons of manhood are frequently painted as ‘bisexual’ when their iconoclastic attraction is the result of patriarchal pressure and wouldn’t be present in it’s absence. This attitude coincides with the societal preference for patriarchy-compatible expressions of queerness like bisexuality; women are socially and materially encouraged to maintain attraction to men, even if that attraction is only held for universally appealing iconoclastic images of manhood. The bisexual community engages in social imperialism by claiming ownership over anything but the most strictly defined gender-sex dynamics and arguing that any discussion of material factors of attraction, especially woman->man attraction, is bigotry against themselves. This reactionary shut-down of any structural feminist or lesbian critique that throws into question the voluntary nature of attraction is the second major expression of reactionary queer tribalism. These two positionalities *are* the actual issue; while this post offers a critique of this problem that hinges on ‘women who complain about men’ as vacuously cruel. We have a word for analysis that relies on women being shitty for no reason; misogyny.

See part of my critique is that these myopic terminally-online positionalities lead to overall reactionary worldviews. That’s why i think this sort of reactionary kvetching should be shut down; it breeds resentment and tribalism and all the shit that takes a dude from “angry about women being mean online” to “materially invested in the oppression of women.” It’s also emblematic of the very thing it originally claims to oppose; picking on easy targets for internet clout.

Yeah I think I see your point there - like, sure “complaining about your partner for Internet approval” is a thing that can happen, but if someone sees a woman complaining about her male partner and the assumption is “she’s probably just saying it for attention”, thats a problem that plays right into existing misogynistic bias and doesnt help anyone, and shuts down discussion

Guys I’m going to make a hot take

The whole “I wish I could be with a woman, but instead I’m stuck with my stupid, gross husband/boyfriend” sentiment I see repeated in bi circles is just the “progressive” queer version of the boomer “I hate my wife” jokes

if he’s stupid and gross you should leave him and if he isn’t you’re just being cruel for internet points and he should leave you

gee i wonder if there’s some institutional pressure that women face that leads them to engage in heterosexuality compulsarily. Like maybe there’s some sort of societal structure at play that’s compelling women to act in accordance with heterosexual social standards. I wonder if there’s a material reason that a woman might maintain a romantic or sexual arrangement with a man she does not like that doesn’t hinge on her being an irrational bitch. Probably not though. Women are stupid cunts who only act out of ignorance and cruelty.

Where in this post is anyone saying women are irrational or ignorant or that comphet isnt real? If anything I think the trend of “i hate my stupid gross husband/boyfriend” jokes in bi spaces would exacerbate comphet feelings, because it promotes the idea of hating your male partner as a normal part of het relationships, and not as a problem that the woman does not need to put up with.

I know object permanance is hard for you, but there’s words above the ones you just read and oftentimes they’re related to eachother in some way.

Alright. Instead of being so condescending, consider that my understanding of those words was not the same as yours. I understood the reblog above yours as “If you do not like being with your partner you should not be with them, if you do like being with them then its mean to belittle them online”. That is the only mention of cruelty - someone insulting their partner who they do actually like when that partner hasnt done anything wrong. I do not see that or the original post as saying that there is no reason a woman could ever feel stuck in a relationship with a man other than being “irrational”. It sounds like you think the issue in the original post was with a woman thinking “i wish i could be with a woman instead of a man”, instead of with the woman calling her partner stupid and gross.

I was mean to you because it’s really not worth my time to honestly try and give you people an understanding of any analytical framework outside of libertarian individualism. You’re the center of your own world and the greatest injustice of society is that someone might not care about your hurt feelings. But I missed therapy today, so if you really want my opinion, then here; This post and the phenomenon it describes is the direct material result of reactionary queer tribalism and empire-building expressed in two ways; first and foremost is the bisexual community’s vested interest in claiming ownership over women at any stage of compulsory heterosexuality. E.g. women who are only attracted to fictional or hyper idealized icons of manhood are frequently painted as ‘bisexual’ when their iconoclastic attraction is the result of patriarchal pressure and wouldn’t be present in it’s absence. This attitude coincides with the societal preference for patriarchy-compatible expressions of queerness like bisexuality; women are socially and materially encouraged to maintain attraction to men, even if that attraction is only held for universally appealing iconoclastic images of manhood. The bisexual community engages in social imperialism by claiming ownership over anything but the most strictly defined gender-sex dynamics and arguing that any discussion of material factors of attraction, especially woman->man attraction, is bigotry against themselves. This reactionary shut-down of any structural feminist or lesbian critique that throws into question the voluntary nature of attraction is the second major expression of reactionary queer tribalism. These two positionalities *are* the actual issue; while this post offers a critique of this problem that hinges on 'women who complain about men’ as vacuously cruel. We have a word for analysis that relies on women being shitty for no reason; misogyny.