Wow that gender thread that started interesting yesterday became incredibly stupid

"monosexuality in general relies on layers upon layers of socially constructed systems for its existence to make any sense at all" what does this even mean

Pure theorycel brainrot

@scathach agree lol

@georgia @scathach disagree sorry
it was poop from a butt from the outset

@patchuun @georgia It at least started connected to reality before it went off into theorycel fairyland

@scathach @georgia started off transmisogynistic and not at all connected to reality 🤷‍♀️

@patchuun @georgia It did, and I engaged with it to argue against that in a way that I thought they'd find compelling before the kill-corporations person showed up with nonsense non sequiturs

@scathach a lot of the shit that i said was completely insane and theorycel brainrot tbh but this one if any was the most grounded and true to me .
social construct 1: gender as a social class
social construct 2: heteronormativity, the idea that people should only engage in sexual activity with someone of the opposite gender or be otherwise deviant . this one is historically not strictly existent! people were having "gay sex" without it meaning anything in this context for a very long time!
social construct 3: the opposing idea of a gay person , who only engages in sexual activity with someone of the same sex
all of these are constructs that according to the historical record at some point in time didn't exist . this is the thing that i have said that is most grounded in empirical observation
i'm sure there's more layers im forgetting at this moment too but whatever

@ikeWren @scathach very rare occasion where i'll stick up for anyone going on about theory brainrot but yeah that one made sense to me

@ikeWren @scathach in other words heterosexuality is a relatively recent concept in history.

i think this is sort of true although history itself is a messy ordeal that cant really be appealed to in any functional sense. monosexuality doesnt need endless social reinforcement. instead what we see is the implicit domination of thought (the necessity to rear children) become explicit over time. while 'gay sex' is broadly left alone in history, it was done so in most cases because it was seen as frivolity to begin with as opposed to childmaking. the activity of childmaking was distinct from prostitute play.

@ikeWren @scathach same sex unions were a lot more outlawed and regulated outside of as a form of pedarast mentorship in many of the ancient empires (greece and rome for instance). its really more the issue that they outlawed that you couldnt really live together in the same home in that way.