[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Redway

Something a lot of people forget is that clothes/accessories (just to use that as example now) that are highly feminised as we know them now were originally intended for men. Make-up, wigs, high-heels and even the colour pink were originally intended for men. As far as contrary doctrine goes you get certain Nigerian churches (Deeper Life being a notorious example, not that the church as a whole is too bad) banning women from wearing trousers despite the fact that hardly anyone wore trousers up-until about 200 years ago (and even then they were only made for a specific purpose, i.e., horse-riding) and even places that have earlier history and experiences with trousers often reserved them for women (India being a prime example). They try and push post-colonial indoctrination that only applied to a very particular time in history in the grand scheme of things as not just "African culture" but the actual word of God and we all know that ain't it. Even the overseeing superintendent himself (pastor Kumuyi) low-key admits that and actually wants to abolish all that crap. I can understand the bit about not wearing jewellery in church and women covering their hair in the house of God but the rest is just copy-cat truckster garbage.

"Non-binary" per-se is utter nonsense, too.

Clothes mean next to nothing. Some fully grown men wander around in nightshirts, doesn't mean they're going to bed

[Redway]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Clothes mean next to nothing. Some fully grown men wander around in nightshirts, doesn't mean they're going to bed

It’s a pity the likes of Deeper Life spoil their image just by enabling the cycle of man-made indoctrination (‘don’t wear this; wear a skirt that’s so long it extends to the hell-fire we’re trying to avoid instead; ah, you mustn’t wear that one, o’). As a church itself (putting all the indoctrination aside) it’s perfectly fine, potentially one of the best, but women are really limited when it comes to clothes in churches like that. Guys/men get it too but on nowhere near the same level and it just reeks of oppression that doesn’t need to be there. Pity as the teaching itself is otherwise actually really good but considering there are people who’ll run to the toilet and call the police on a pastor during extended services for “keeping them hostage,” oppressing women in 2023 doesn’t look too good. People wouldn’t even mind staying long as much if they could dress in a way that didn’t make them look like an underpaid house-maid sleeping in long coco-sacs. The police are bound to make an arrest in that church one day but only for crimes against fashion.

I’m just using the church as an example anyway. But I’m sure you catch my drift.

[hijaxers]

Its all nonsense and they can shove their pronouns where the sun don't shine.

[Redway]

I wouldn’t say gender per-se (tangible gender) means nothing whatsoever (not that those innate differences aren’t over-exaggerated) but that’s neither here nor there with regard to what I’m getting at with the crux of this thread. One thing I’d say for that though is that when you start to see someone of the opposite sex (I mean, depending on which way you swing, really) as a fully-fleshed person with an actual personality than a sex object you start to view them on their own terms (which is how everyone is entitled to be on some level) and not just within the rigid box of men and women.

There are some things that only apply to women and certain things that only apply to men (or at least predominantly) just by mere virtue of gender and stuff like that does need to be acknowledged but the way young ‘wannabe-alpha’ lads often talk about women comes from the fact that they’re often not socialised to see young women as actual people. They want to be earning 100k+ a year in fraud-money and have a pretty lady who they can eventually marry, cheat on, tell to shut up whenever they feel like it and expect to do all their laundry and cooking for them. Having a bit (or a lot) of N.S.A. fun is absolutely fine but when I’ve had to listen to other guys banging on about their increasing body count when they’ve already got a main woman/young woman on the go and had to pretend to be interested doesn’t bear thinking about. But to them “girlfriend” might mean “main side-ting on da go until I’m actually ready to get married” so in one sense I can’t even judge them too much. But what I do know fo-sho is that slag-shaming while actually being an out-and-out stud-cheat with actual strings attached (not just a high B.C. that’s accumulated over time) is not the one. I know it’s always been there but guys under the age of 30 often talk about it like it’s totally normal for the guy to cheat. Not even an ounce of shame or embarrassment. They don’t value the true meaning of relationships anymore.

[parmnion]

Originally Posted by Redway

I wouldn’t say gender per-se (tangible gender) means nothing whatsoever (not that those innate differences aren’t over-exaggerated) but that’s neither here nor there with regard to what I’m getting at with the crux of this thread. One thing I’d say for that though is that when you start to see someone of the opposite sex (I mean, depending on which way you swing, really) as a fully-fleshed person with an actual personality than a sex object you start to view them on their own terms (which is how everyone is entitled to be on some level) and not just within the rigid box of men and women. There are some things that only apply to women and certain things that only apply to men (or at least predominantly) just by mere virtue of gender and stuff like that does need to be acknowledged but the way young ‘wannabe-alpha’ lads often talk about women comes from the fact that they’re often not socialised to see young women as actual people. They want to be earning 100k+ a year in fraud-money and have a pretty lady who they can eventually marry, cheat on, tell to shut up whenever they feel like it and expect to do all their laundry and cooking for them. Having a bit (or a lot) of N.S.A. fun is absolutely fine but when I’ve had to listen to other guys banging on about their increasing body count when they’ve already got a main woman/young woman on the go and had to pretend to be interested doesn’t bear thinking about. But to them “girlfriend” might mean “side-ting until I’m actually ready to get married” so in one sense I can’t even judge them too much.

I can see them as someone who believes they wish to be neither, not someone who is neither. That's what I would say to them.