#ok this was the last post forreal promise now lol

[communistkenobi]

I’ve noticed a common rhetorical shift people do on here where if you don’t accept the argument that “patriarchy hurts everyone” you must be arguing that gender imposes immutable natural characteristics that you’re born with and can’t change (eg “men are inherently violent”). like there’s no structural position left, you can’t talk about gendered oppression in terms of social position, it’s either egalitarianism or bioessentialism. straight people are deeply harmed by heteronormativity - being in relationships they don’t like, having children they don’t want, accepting sexual roles they don’t find fulfilling or are actively harmful, ie the normalisation of non-consent and non-enjoyment for women in straight relationships, etc., but saying “heteronormativity hurts everyone” as an analytical framework is not very helpful for talking about heterosexuality as a privileged, normalised, and entrenched social position in society. and you don’t have to accept that people are “born straight” or that being heterosexual inherently makes you a pro-nuclear family sex-negative prude to make this argument. like what are we even doing here man