Male and Gender Critical

[Letmespeak82]

Anyone else find being associated with some of the male Gender Critical activists a bit…well embarrassing? I’m not even going to deal with the dumpster fire that is Glinner (though it seems many on this board love him). But now we have James Esses who is hyper focused on what this woman is wearing. What difference does it make if she wears revealing clothes or not? Typical gross male attitude.

Or even if they aren't, it suggests that they like to play around with sexualised imagery which is intended to be provocative.

Im curious. Would you say the same if we were discussing a rape victim being judged on her clothes? Yes it’s a forever fight. I will still point out the misogyny where I see it.

Yes I would assume she is trying to be provocative. Doesn’t mean she’s not asexual and that men like James should think she’s automatically up for it.

Well that’s odd. Perhaps she only wears hyper sexual outfits when she’s publicising the fight for the rights for asexuals 🤷‍♀️

Who is the woman being talked about here?

I don't think James was saying she's up for it, he was saying what other people on this thread have said, that bondage gear carries a different message to not being into sex.

You'd think someone who was genuinely repulsed by sex wouldn't want to wear bondage gear.

Nomorenonbinary this woman https://twitter.com/theyasminbenoit/status/1676249136239108096

Thanks

James is not posting about bondage gear. He doesn’t even reference it. He references the revealing nature and contrasts it with her claims to be asexual. That’s clearly implying that revealing clothing == up for it.
The critiques of leather and bondage stuff at pride is a completely different angle.

If you are displaying your breasts or bottom in very overt ways - you will surely expect people to notice your bottom and your breasts. People will not avert their gaze if they see you on the street. What they make of that you cannot control.

They may think " what a beautiful body"; or they may think " If my bum looked like that I wouldn't be wearing such tiny shorts"; and if you have a beautiful peachy, pert behind then you can well expect men to notice that; likewise your breasts.

Are we really pretending that bottoms and breasts are not sexualised in our culture?

He says “scantily clad” not “wearing bdsm gear”.

clothes are just clothes. People wear them for a variety of reasons. I personally would have thought she was trying to be provocative rather than signalling her sexual interests.

To answer your question, do any of them claim to be feminists? No?

Seems like just another discussion to divide opinion.

It's an interesting subject and not one that lends itself to soundbitey nonsense and yes/no dichotomies.

Women should be able to wear what they like. But also, clothes are foisted onto women and certain clothes communicate certain things in every society. I had a look through her pictures and they are about 50% mouth pouty half-open, breasts pushed out, hand in hair, cleavage, bondage or very skimpy clothes.

No human naturally dresses/stands like that and if you wanted to get laid at a nightclub, that's pretty much all of what you would do. Non-verbal communication does exist. That doesn't mean anyone has the right to assume she wants sex. It does mean that she has some interesting internal issues going on.

I worry that something has gone on for her to express her asexuality like this.

Clothes are not 'just clothes' though. We wear different clothes for different occasions. For instance, you might wear smart business dress to meet a customer, but slob around in an old jumper when working from home.

Some of you on this thread are ever so close to self-awareness and the rest are showing what a deeply misogynistic and essentialist movement this is. Either way.. HIGHLY entertaining.

What James is saying is that she's not authentic but performing. I agree with him. It's you that doing the 'she's asking for it routine.'

Again that’s nothing to do with what I asked. Yes I KNOW people make assumptions. I’ve said that many times. And I never once said if we wear revealing clothes we can stop people looking.

what I asked is very simple and nothing to do with others assumptions:

is what a woman wears a sign of her sexual availability?

could you please answer that rather than a tangent about societal expectations.

See, I'm more sidetracked by "Asexual people deserve to be protected by the Equality Act. We deserve to be protected by the ban on conversion therapy."

WTF. She's just attention seeking. Her clothes is just part of that.

Yes and some people do a full makeup even when working from home or spending time alone. Clothes are just clothes. They’re not infallible insights into a persons sexual intentions. Or any other intention.

OP are you 'as GC as they come?'

Quite. I disagree with Esses on his comments about what women wear, and it is irrelevant to me that this woman wears what she wears whilst being asexual. I agree with him that asexuals don't need specific protection in law in the way that homosexual or bisexual people do.

He never actually says any of that. How is she not authentic? How would she be authentic as an asexual person. What clothes are authentically asexual?

he is very obviously using her clothes to say she’s not asexual. So either he believes she’s asexual and inauthentic meaning that if someone authentically wore those clothes they’re a sign of sexual availabaility or she’s authentically wearing them and lying about being asexual.

I find both misogynistic.

I absolutely agree on both counts.

Clothes are not meaningless rolls of cloth, they carry social meanings. Surely no reasonable person is going to dispute that? That's exactly why transwomen wear female-coded clothing - to signal that they identify as women.

could you please answer that rather than a tangent about societal expectations

<salutes>

oh how I love watching some internet randomer try to order posters about