Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Left Failing Women

Yugoslav

Jugoslaven
A response to Krtek's question. Let us asses on how the modern-day Left with its Westernized, liberal values, claiming to be "progressive", while forcing acceptance of bourgeois elitism, has also affected women negatively. Many wrong assumptions and answers are made on this question. Feminism is rooted within leftism but that feminism is long gone for it now serves the very thing it fought against in the past. Marxist perspective offers the critique that due to the ruling elite promoting patriarchal norms but also discrediting men who are not fitting of the "masculine" image espoused by the elite, that both men and women should consider abolishing these destructive norms that divide them based on their biological sex.

A common critique of the Left and its failure to support female proletariat is in the basis of the growing number of liberals supporting sex work and pornography (both bourgeois degeneracies that degrade women) under the guise of "liberation" or "sex positivity". The liberals of this mainstream "Left" (don't laugh!) have labeled opposition to bourgeois practice of sex work as "right-wing talking point", associating the emancipation of women from sexual wage slavery as a "reactionary SWERF ideology". Whether this is an intended satire or a genuine reality, there are indeed those who call themselves "leftist" and yet support contrarian points such as defending sex work. People who claim sex work is inherently exploitative are not demonizing sex workers. The argument is if sex work is accepted then it encourages and normalizes men seeing women’s bodies as commodities which is not good.

Let's not forget the "radfems" and how instead of blaming capitalism, they blame the inherent nature of a man as "evil" and that it must be bygone with. That is also not the correct stance to take on. While Engels was a man who first proposed a Marxist take on feminism (though incorrectly stating that emancipation of women is when they leave their homes) in the 1884 book, Lenin as well as socialist states furthered the cause of gender equality. Per Article 122 of the 1936 constitution, "Women in the USSR are accorded equal rights with men in all spheres of economic, state, cultural, social, and political life.". The first woman to space was Valentina Vladimirova Tereshkova in 1963. Lyudmila Pavlichenko was a female sniper whose kill count of 309 made her the female version of "White Death" (Simo Hayha). Female workforce arose to nearly 900,000 from 423,000 between 1923 and 1930 and marriages were separated from the church. The fall of USSR damaged women's rights in post-Soviet countries where high rates of SA were reported. In 1995, 70% of Women were unemployed. Prostitution increased dramatically in the 1990s after the fall of communism.

It is clear that the Left failed both men and women.
 
A response to Krtek's question. Let us asses on how the modern-day Left with its Westernized, liberal values, claiming to be "progressive", while forcing acceptance of bourgeois elitism, has also affected women negatively. Many wrong assumptions and answers are made on this question. Feminism is rooted within leftism but that feminism is long gone for it now serves the very thing it fought against in the past. Marxist perspective offers the critique that due to the ruling elite promoting patriarchal norms but also discrediting men who are not fitting of the "masculine" image espoused by the elite, that both men and women should consider abolishing these destructive norms that divide them based on their biological sex.

A common critique of the Left and its failure to support female proletariat is in the basis of the growing number of liberals supporting sex work and pornography (both bourgeois degeneracies that degrade women) under the guise of "liberation" or "sex positivity". The liberals of this mainstream "Left" (don't laugh!) have labeled opposition to bourgeois practice of sex work as "right-wing talking point", associating the emancipation of women from sexual wage slavery as a "reactionary SWERF ideology". Whether this is an intended satire or a genuine reality, there are indeed those who call themselves "leftist" and yet support contrarian points such as defending sex work. People who claim sex work is inherently exploitative are not demonizing sex workers. The argument is if sex work is accepted then it encourages and normalizes men seeing women’s bodies as commodities which is not good.

Let's not forget the "radfems" and how instead of blaming capitalism, they blame the inherent nature of a man as "evil" and that it must be bygone with. That is also not the correct stance to take on. While Engels was a man who first proposed a Marxist take on feminism (though incorrectly stating that emancipation of women is when they leave their homes) in the 1884 book, Lenin as well as socialist states furthered the cause of gender equality. Per Article 122 of the 1936 constitution, "Women in the USSR are accorded equal rights with men in all spheres of economic, state, cultural, social, and political life.". The first woman to space was Valentina Vladimirova Tereshkova in 1963. Lyudmila Pavlichenko was a female sniper whose kill count of 309 made her the female version of "White Death" (Simo Hayha). Female workforce arose to nearly 900,000 from 423,000 between 1923 and 1930 and marriages were separated from the church. The fall of USSR damaged women's rights in post-Soviet countries where high rates of SA were reported. In 1995, 70% of Women were unemployed. Prostitution increased dramatically in the 1990s after the fall of communism.

It is clear that the Left failed both men and women.
You've failed men and women, in addition to which you have let yourself down
 
Yugoslav Why did Marx equate the family with prostitution in the Communist Manifesto? Why did you neither mention the family nor capitalism?
 
We have definitely left any kind of television behind and are now into some kind of fan produced You Tube video with stock photographs and a computer generated voiceover now.
 
Porn is bourgeois degeneracy. It commodifies women.
So when you see a drawing of two furries of indeterminate sex yifing is that commodifying women?

When you see a photo of a man hitting his own balls with a riding crop that is commodifying women?

When you see a 3d model of a dragon copulating with a VW camper van is that commodifying women?


You sir do not even know the meaning of porn.
 
Last edited:
So when you see a drawing of two furries of indeterminate sex yifing is that commodifying women?

When you see a photo of a man hitting his own balls with a riding crop that is commodifying women?

When you see a 3d model of a dragon copulating with a VW camper van is that commodifying women?


You sir do known even know the meaning of porn.
1. That also counts as fetishizing and commodity because it again can generate profit through stuff like Patreon since Patreon is notorious for allowing NSFW content to be visible via the paywall.
2. What part did you not understand? Porn in general targets and commodifies women since women are often the subject of this.
3. While NSFW sites can also be free, it still does not provide any benefit to the class struggle, hence we do not need pornography in socialism or communism.
 
Why is so much pornography free at the point of use on the web?
Liberalism allowed it. However, that is one of the things that capitalism has made as a form of its own self-destruction for it simply shows that this is what capitalists want to do and distract workers with this. Surely, You do not want an Ian Kochinski (Vaush) type guy on the Internet claiming to be a "leftist" but then is discovered to have a stash of insidious NSFW fetish worse than the average human mating. Oh yeah, Vaush is a Democrat liberal claiming to be a "leftist", would not recommend him for leftist learning at all.
 
Liberalism allowed it. However, that is one of the things that capitalism has made as a form of its own self-destruction for it simply shows that this is what capitalists want to do and distract workers with this. Surely, You do not want an Ian Kochinski (Vaush) type guy on the Internet claiming to be a "leftist" but then is discovered to have a stash of insidious NSFW fetish worse than the average human mating. Oh yeah, Vaush is a Democrat liberal claiming to be a "leftist", would not recommend him for leftist learning at all.
That is one of the most stupid answers to a question that I have seen this week.
 
1. That also counts as fetishizing and commodity because it again can generate profit through stuff like Patreon since Patreon is notorious for allowing NSFW content to be visible via the paywall.
2. What part did you not understand? Porn in general targets and commodifies women since women are often the subject of this.
3. While NSFW sites can also be free, it still does not provide any benefit to the class struggle, hence we do not need pornography in socialism or communism.
1. All things can be a commodity.
2. Porn in general is not porn in specific.
3. Chocolate does not provided benefit to the class struggle.
 
1. All things can be a commodity.
2. Porn in general is not porn in specific.
3. Chocolate does not provided benefit to the class struggle.
1. Yes. The aim is to prevent such commercialization and use these commodities for a common good.
2. Porn in general is NSFW. Whether it is human mating or just plain brainrot of something else that I don't wanna bring up.
3. Chocolate is merely a sweet. But what does provide benefit is bread and water for example.
 
1. Yes. The aim is to prevent such commercialization and use these commodities for a common good.
2. Porn in general is NSFW. Whether it is human mating or just plain brainrot of something else that I don't wanna bring up.
3. Chocolate is merely a sweet. But what does provide benefit is bread and water for example.
1. Then this could also be done with porn
2. What does your personal distaste have to do with the wider movement?
3. So you would treat humanity as a mere robot fulled by substance and denied the full experiences of this world?

Your future is grim
 
Porn is bourgeois degeneracy?

Then we must cum together to create the workers porn.

Our "means of production" will be used for the people by the people
It's already been done, hasn't it? Someone I know shared something about... going to Google, carefully, brb

Fuck For Forest, which is supposed to be ethical porn, iirc. I didn't click the link, so can't confirm.
 
It's already been done, hasn't it? Someone I know shared something about... going to Google, carefully, brb

Fuck For Forest, which is supposed to be ethical porn, iirc. I didn't click the link, so can't confirm.
I remember that.

Taking a look now it certainly seems like they donate to a bunch of good causes.
They certainly seem like a bunch of folks who enjoy it and want to use it for good.
Not my cup of tea but fair play to them.
 
A response to Krtek's question. Let us asses on how the modern-day Left with its Westernized, liberal values, claiming to be "progressive", while forcing acceptance of bourgeois elitism, has also affected women negatively. Many wrong assumptions and answers are made on this question. Feminism is rooted within leftism but that feminism is long gone for it now serves the very thing it fought against in the past. Marxist perspective offers the critique that due to the ruling elite promoting patriarchal norms but also discrediting men who are not fitting of the "masculine" image espoused by the elite, that both men and women should consider abolishing these destructive norms that divide them based on their biological sex.

A common critique of the Left and its failure to support female proletariat is in the basis of the growing number of liberals supporting sex work and pornography (both bourgeois degeneracies that degrade women) under the guise of "liberation" or "sex positivity". The liberals of this mainstream "Left" (don't laugh!) have labeled opposition to bourgeois practice of sex work as "right-wing talking point", associating the emancipation of women from sexual wage slavery as a "reactionary SWERF ideology". Whether this is an intended satire or a genuine reality, there are indeed those who call themselves "leftist" and yet support contrarian points such as defending sex work. People who claim sex work is inherently exploitative are not demonizing sex workers. The argument is if sex work is accepted then it encourages and normalizes men seeing women’s bodies as commodities which is not good.

Let's not forget the "radfems" and how instead of blaming capitalism, they blame the inherent nature of a man as "evil" and that it must be bygone with. That is also not the correct stance to take on. While Engels was a man who first proposed a Marxist take on feminism (though incorrectly stating that emancipation of women is when they leave their homes) in the 1884 book, Lenin as well as socialist states furthered the cause of gender equality. Per Article 122 of the 1936 constitution, "Women in the USSR are accorded equal rights with men in all spheres of economic, state, cultural, social, and political life.". The first woman to space was Valentina Vladimirova Tereshkova in 1963. Lyudmila Pavlichenko was a female sniper whose kill count of 309 made her the female version of "White Death" (Simo Hayha). Female workforce arose to nearly 900,000 from 423,000 between 1923 and 1930 and marriages were separated from the church. The fall of USSR damaged women's rights in post-Soviet countries where high rates of SA were reported. In 1995, 70% of Women were unemployed. Prostitution increased dramatically in the 1990s after the fall of communism.

It is clear that the Left failed both men and women.
looks like the wanker's remorse is strong this morning, eh Phil ...
 
1. Yes. The aim is to prevent such commercialization and use these commodities for a common good.
2. Porn in general is NSFW. Whether it is human mating or just plain brainrot of something else that I don't wanna bring up.
3. Chocolate is merely a sweet. But what does provide benefit is bread and water for example.
yep the wanker;s remorse is strong today isn;t it Phil ...
 
Back
Top Bottom