Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Women are non males now apparently..... ffs

109 replies

CampervanKween · 24/09/2023 17:57

What is this shit? Absolutely sick of it. Non males? Really???

Women are non males now apparently..... ffs
OP posts:
NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision · 25/09/2023 17:44

It's nice that you think you're on "TRSOH". It's better for your sleep if you think that.

Helleofabore · 25/09/2023 17:56

"The whole thread is based on a false premise."

Again, do you have a reading problem?

This whole thread is based on some organisation advertising something using fucking offensive language. There are several other ways that this ad could have been worded. They chose to use offensive language.

Again, you are here on a thread where women are pointing out that this is a misogynistic wording and attempting to shame women for rejecting it. That is your motivation on this thread, is it not? Pointing out that women should be ashamed for rejecting that terminology?

bringbacktheladiesloos · 25/09/2023 18:05

To me personally, that's the most insulting definition of a woman so far.

Helleofabore · 25/09/2023 18:14

Oh sorry dadjoke There is another option, you are purely motivated by shaming women for rejecting males under the definition of women or female. Or should I use similarly dehumanising language and say ‘people who have had or who have penises’ as women or female people?

or swap out ejaculators / prostate havers…

Either way, your intention is as it has always been to shame women into accepting people YOU believe have some right to call themselves women or female as being called women or female.

What part of a male human telling women who is a woman and who is not is not misogynistic?

Apologies for the typo in your name, I am on the way out the door to work.

maltravers · 25/09/2023 18:32

I’m renaming DadJoke as nonMumJoke, in the name of inclusivity. Then people who are uncles, cousins, aunties, sons and total strangers etc can all come under his umbrella and not feel excluded by his existence and hurtful name choice. Why would he/him/her/they object?

MrInbetween · 25/09/2023 19:38

@maltravers i think we also need to think carefully about the definition of joke because currently I don’t see anyone laughing.

maltravers · 25/09/2023 19:43

Change is hard NonMumJoke, but once you have embraced the need for inclusion by you of the uncles/aunts/sons/strangers/Guinea pigs and the need to make way for them and let them come first (after the Mums of course) the world will be a better place. As defined by we Mums anyway.

RebelliousCow · 25/09/2023 19:55

DadJoke · 25/09/2023 17:12

Women are not simply non-males. We agree on that. The whole thread is based on a false premise.

If they had wanted just women, they would have said women and you still wouldn't have been happy, because that would have included trans women.

Non-binary people exist. This fact doesn't make me a misogynist; it says more about your desire for permformative victimhood.

People who adopt a non binary identity remain visibly male or female. Adopting an identity is like playing a role; putting on a costume. It doesn't change the reality of who and what you are. Queer Theory is all about performativity and about playing roles.

Whyisegg · 28/09/2023 03:11

The fundamental principle of sexism is that male is the default human and women are lesser males, or lesser humans. Human males are indoctrinated from a very young age with this belief whereas human females are led to believe they are equal but only achieve goodness through caring for others, especially men and children. Hence the carelessness that men display towards women and the baffling loyalty women display towards men.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page