Is this thing on? by loveSloane in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

This must be the one place on the internet where people are complaining the trans culture war is too quiet. :)

I still have a million topics

How sure are you of your beliefs? by nausicaa in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Regarding the facts around what is going on rather what ought to be done I'm pretty confident social aspects of gender are not all a social construct.

All societies have forms social forms of gender. Masculinity and femininity. Men are masculine and attracted to feminine women and women are feminine and attracted to masculine men.

Biology makes men and women differently, that is likely to include behaviours to utilise the differences. But humans being as flexible as they are the exact forms are completed by culture.

There are a constant minority percentage of people across all societies who do not strictly fit that pattern. Which implies a natural trigger not a pure social construct.

Is it mental illness? It depends on your definition of mental illness. So in a sense defying social norms is mental illness. But people in this category are not necessarily disconnected from reality.

I have less evidence for, but guess at a component hybrid model of gender. That some parts are associated with a sex but the combinations do not create perfect averages or perfect mirrors. For example I think same sex attraction IS from an opposite sex behaviour, however the combination does not always result in the same behaviour.

GC: What is the sexual orientation of chasers/gynandromorphophiles? by cars in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I do think a good percentage of transwomen are attracted to transwomen.

But what is the Blanchardian explanation of GAMPs?

Don't Blanchardians claim it is "AGPs attracted to a transwoman because they are attracted to a man who is now a woman which confirms their desire to be a woman" or something.

I have issues then with the idea that "AGPs are attracted to transwomen is related to their AGP unless they aren't AGP then the attraction isn't AGP related."

Meaning the attraction can exist without "AGP." Meaning the attraction is a first order thing.

Seems very confused.

GC: What is the sexual orientation of chasers/gynandromorphophiles? by cars in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, but straight men, and even some straight women, often have "gay phases" at some points in life. That doesn't make them any less straight.

Why? What's wrong with saying they aren't entirely straight?

You're saying people should be able to identify as they wish?

GC: What is the sexual orientation of chasers/gynandromorphophiles? by cars in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think Blanchardianism, that's the Bailey auto sexuality stuff is flawed.

I think the "porn makes perverts" model is flawed. I don't think the science shows it. I don't think Blanchardianism supports it (it is about an innate desire). The attractions are real but I think they are something more innate. That's just how humans are. Mostly conforming but with a fuzzy consistent range of gender divergent people.

When you try to enforce the Blanchard models you end up with seriously odd ideas. Like pseudo bisexual autogynephilia by proxy, something like that. Where transwomen who are attracted to transwomen are interpreted as being attracted to a person who confirms their identity. I think at a basic level they just are attracted to transwomen, of different degrees.

There's a background idea here, that if it wasn't for the corruption of modern life, porn, the internet, decadence that men would be normal, straight conforming, good people. That they have been corrupted by culture.

Further still it's overlapping and adjacent to saying gay rights, the sexual revolution and feminism have corrupted the natural order of the sexes.

I should say I'm not justifying porn addiction, porn production or saying certain identities do not exist. I am pointing out errors in these models.

All: what is your opinion on tomboys? by FrogEnjoyer in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The popular perception seems to be that TQ doesn't want tomboys to exist, and that they should transition to FTM trans.

Wouldn't that be the GC perception of the QT perception of tomboys?

Sometimes QT can be too essentialist and sometimes it's confused.

But it I think QT are tolerant of the form and even the label, no?

The popular perception seems to be that GC doesn't really like the concept in general and is okay with either gender mixing gendered qualities.

My assumption would be in theory QC are against gendered labels. But I think a lot of gnc GC women would have an emotional attachment to the label. Which is fair enough. In a lot of the ways the label is only nominal. The phenomena is real. But I think it's real for essentialist reasons. But I am confused by the GC position on essentialism. Formal factional labels would be nice all round.

GC: Have you talked to the conservatives in your life about the harms of teaching GNC boys that "real men" meet certain behavioral standards? by citydweller1 in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

How would you classify them?

GC: Have you talked to the conservatives in your life about the harms of teaching GNC boys that "real men" meet certain behavioral standards? by citydweller1 in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That they don't identify as a feminist? A lot of it reads like toxic masculinity.

GC: Have you talked to the conservatives in your life about the harms of teaching GNC boys that "real men" meet certain behavioral standards? by citydweller1 in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're attracted to feminine women but also hate femininity?

This might be obvious but that doesn't sound very healthy.

Are you sure you don't just naturally like expressing masculinity?

QT: What is a rooster? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Chickens can sometimes undergo natural sex changes. Normally, female chickens have just one functional ovary, on their left side. Although two sex organs are present during the embryonic stages of all birds, once a chicken's female hormones come into effect, it typically develops only the left ovary. The right gonad, which has yet to be defined as an ovary, testes, or both (called an ovotestis), typically remains dormant. Certain medical conditions can cause a chicken's left ovary to regress. In the absence of a functional left ovary, the dormant right sex organ may begin to grow; if the activated right gonad is an ovotestis or testes, it will begin secreting androgens. The hen does not completely change into a rooster, however. This transition is limited to making the bird phenotypically male.[5][6] The condition could also be caused by mycotoxins that can develop when animal feed is stored, and these have the same effect as synthetic hormones.[7] In about 10 percent of cases, if eggs fertilized with male chromosomes are cooled by a few degrees for three days after laying, the relative activity of the sex hormones will favour development of female characteristics. The sex chromosomes work by coding for enzymes that affect the bird's development in the egg and during its life. This cooling will produce a chicken with a fully functioning and reproductively fertile female body-type, even though the chicken is genetically male.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_change#Natural_sex_change

Should GC feminists stop associating with conservatives on topics in which they’re interests are aligned? by Heimdekledi in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Well I'm glad I can still entertain you.

Just because you personally see the world through lenses that are hyper-focused on masculinity and femininity doesn't mean everyone else does

Aren't we all hyper focused on gender here? Doesn't gender critical want to talk about masculinity and femininity?

From your posting history, I have the impression you don't have a clue what radical feminists, a lot of other women and many "GC" men think.

I've chatted with gc plenty times to know and respectfully report their opinions.

Should GC feminists stop associating with conservatives on topics in which they’re interests are aligned? by Heimdekledi in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Radial feminists often seek to reject femininity, I think they end up in masculinity, but then I think they are often drawn to masculinity. That's natural.

But the pattern appears of gc lesbians being attracted to expressing masculinity, not caring what men do as long as they stay away. GC gay males being attracted to masculine men, and not "pretending to be women." Straight GC are down for all of that, liberation for women and gender conformity for men.

The trans debate itself is gendered.

This creates a pattern in the sides.

Should GC feminists stop associating with conservatives on topics in which they’re interests are aligned? by Heimdekledi in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Gender Critical feminists overlap with some social conservative thinking. But they also diverge.

A problem is social conservatives are a larger percentage of the population and gender critical radical feminists. So popular gender critical feminism gets overwhelmed by social conservatives who aren't interested in radical feminism.

Gender critical feminism has a relationship with masculinity that defines it's audience.

Announcement: new mod by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's true. It would probably be deleted in qt spaces.

In regular spaces the invite is going to attract the far right. I don't think gc are the far right. I think there is a relationship with social conservatism though.

Announcement: new mod by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

yeah you probably need to advertise in qt spaces for qt users really

Both: Do you believe there are sexual components to masculinity and femininity? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Part 2

Would you go to a park wearing like a sundress even if you knew there would not be any women there to admire you in it?

Yes.

Most crossdressers are likely closeted.

Have you ever been dressed in women's clothing in public and not felt even partially aroused by the possibility? No judgment here, by the way. I'm just curious.

The possibility?

I should say part of this is the mystery to me. I can’t say for sure what is going on in other people’s minds. I can’t tell if I am tuning in on femininity the way some women do.

The women who say “I get drag queens, I like to dress like a drag queen. If I was a man I’d be a drag queen ” The ones who are attracted to surgery to exaggerate their sexual characteristics. Their sexuality seems to be connected to that. They seem like the extreme end of a spectrum.

Am I as a crossdresser acting on the same triggers? I think that possibly might be the case even if I don’t believe in that kind of surgery or that kind of extreme lifestyle.

Is regular femininity a moderate form of that?

Then most men are tuning in on a moderate form of masculinity.

Are you tuning in on masculinity the same way men do? I figure you probably are doing something like that.

But it is my position to think there is something separate from sex that people are tuning in on. Naturally related but a separate thing.

Really that’s what a lot of gender expression is about IMHO. Uh, beg to disagree. Most women and men are not aroused by wearing ordinary clothing regardless of their orientation.

Certainly not straight men. Certainly some women are closer to it.

I don’t think you’re getting how harsh men are policed on gender.

No, I get it. But it's possible to find spaces that are more open. Especially in this day and age, right? Trans women walk right down the street in most cities and towns and no one accosts them.

I think passing trans women have an easier time.

I’d say the category of “non passing” or “crossdressers” are rare in public. They are rare because of the social cost. Any expression is “outing” yourself. That immediately places you in a category that will often be socially exiled. That is my experience.

Even small things will be judged by regular liberal people. Tolerance does not mean people don’t act on the difference.

Does that mean I’d be tempted to become the transwoman in order to get by? I would be a “hon.” I am dysphoric about some things but I still don’t see myself as a woman. I feel like that would not be me. You could say I feel my gender identity is male with that female gender expression, and even role.

Sure, but who cares if they judge? I know people judge me. As long as they're not assaulting me, they can think what they want.

It matters in relationships, friends, workplace politics, services.

I am well aware of what people say.

People on the street don't know if you're gay or straight, transgender or simply a crossdresser. If a trans woman can be herself in public, why can't you? Do you think maybe you're held back by fear of social disapproval?

Of course. I’ve lost friends from people simply knowing.

I find the world is full of people who say they are understanding and liberal then come out with very illiberal attitudes on something like this.

I don’t really want to have to get into debates on it with everyone. To have to justify my existence with every other person. Ha as much as I find the topic interesting.

Like, here’s an issue, merely discussing feminism in some ways can lead you down paths that can be too revealing. Justifying equality in regular political conversations on feminism.

A lot of the role of males in those liberal circles can be either brocialist saviour, white knight or dubious agreeable feminist ally. It takes male masculinity and female preference for masculinity for granted.

If I argue towards saying “Women want masculinity” there is an implied taunt of “Well what are you doing? it’s not like you want to wear a dress and play hard to get.”

I have had women grab me at times. Pinch my bum, hand down my trousers. Right, and it's a normal thing for a woman to grab a guy's ass or grab his junk. In a consensual context, of course. It's not some weird thing. You may think women do it less often, but they still do it.

They were non consensual things.

I agree they do it but less often. I think that would be my understanding of the world. And by desire not circumstance. As in women are less sexually aggressive.

Though growing up I did lack the PIV obsession that seemed to be the norm and expected from me as a boy. I wasn’t obsessed with sticking it in. Is that relevant? I still don’t know. All part of the unusual sexual behaviour.

Most guys are obsessed with sticking it in any available orifice, it seems. But you do enjoy PIV? It's not like you won't use your penis during sex?

It was a revelation to understand the pleasure of it. It took the right woman. I was really innocently saying the wrong things to people. People would be thinking “This person needs to fuck, I don’t think he even understands what he’s missing.” Like I said there is so much assumption in what a male sexuality is like or can be. No one is going to come along and say “Yeah well you’re a crossdresser attracted to domish women, it’s a type.”

I’m not passive, and it took a while for me to realise I needed an active or very aggressive partner for me to enjoy sex. But the active sex role is so commonly placed on the male. Perhaps naturally.

I do take an active role but with a woman who prefers being passive that will quickly become the set roles and a turn off for me.

I believe very few women are so passive that all they want to do is lie there. But even if they do, they're still enjoying stuff like intimacy, caressing, kissing, touching, and the physical sensations of sex.

I think it’s fairly common.

By being with you he is experiencing something statistically unusual.

Sure, but do you think he's not a normal man in a sexual sense? I've asked him about this myself, actually, since I used to be so worried he would be judged negatively because of me. He says the way he sees it is that I'm a woman and he's a man and anyone who has a problem with that is just ignorant. I believe him. He's never shown any hesitance about us. I was always the one worried about what people would think.

From here I can’t say if he’s “normal.” Perhaps men who are indifferent or attracted to very masculine women are outside the normal range of preferences.

Of course that is not in any way a judgement.

I think sexuality can be strongly physically based or have a strong indirect sexual element, erotic stories, roles, narratives, right they way through to fetishes. I’ve never related to the very anatomic based sexualities. Even if I can understand it being important.

Both: Do you believe there are sexual components to masculinity and femininity? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Part 1

Ha, 4 months late, but I'm finally responding.

Hey. yes it’s been some time and that’s fine. I wrote this earlier before Christmas then went back to review it.

Back to two parts. Written up in google docs.

If one sex is aggressive towards the other sex, and that sex is presumed to enjoy being subordinate to them, that's inferiority. I don't see any way around that.

I wouldn’t see sexual aggression is a completely illigimate category. It covers being sexually pro active, provacative and initiating within a relationship.

I think it does also cover grey areas, mild bdsm and fantasy.

I also think it correlates with other masculine tropes.

What do I make of this? Trauma from patriarchy, porn, physical abuse, sexual abuse, and childhood or adolescent exposure to inappropriate media.

But you see people can enjoy bdsm without having experienced any of that?

Do you think all mild bdsm people are morally wrong? I guess you do.

But I totally get the political problem with it and I totally understand the gendered issue with it.

However I can’t ignore the popularity of it with women. Honestly it’s just everywhere and in the subtexts and fantasies.

I think for many women it’s a case of “Why would I argue against a level of it I like? That’s what I want. I know myself and I like that. I like the fantasy fiction, I like the idea of that and that man. In fact not being it means being unhappy or being something that doesn’t work for me.”

I expect you probably have debated women who advocate it many times. Do you think they are all in bad relationships?

Huh, that's interesting. Do you think the straight crossdresser community has been adversely affected by the increasing popularity of transition?

My guess is the crossdresser community is feeling squeezed from both sides.

There can be a perception from the trans community of “just transition, stop being an egg.”

There is also anger at “erotic crossdressers.” I have issues with some of that rhetoric.

You know the old jokes about the trans hierarchy? “Trannier than thou”

But the trans community is more likely to be positive to the crossdresser than the gc side.

There is increasing anger at the trans community. Crossdressers are caught in the middle. Maybe an identity that isn’t going to survive? Hmmn I think it will carry on. For the same reasons it exists. There are still going to be gnc people that don’t feel transition is correct for them.

I was under the impression the majority of crossdressers were straight, while most drag queens were gay. But maybe crossdressers have fallen by the wayside.

From the stats I’ve seen the majority are same sex attracted. However the plurality are heterosexual. I’ve seen a study with something like 40% het, 30% bi, 30% gay. That’s why the stats come out like this. Most can be married and most can be attracted to men and it can still be true. The old crossdresser societies had a ban on gay men. This was controversial but you can see the issue.

Drag is somewhat confusingly a mixed role, theatrical performance and engaging in femininity. Depending on the person.

Like Eddie Izzard. He used to be just a regular transvestite. Now he says he's trans.

Yeah they’re a bit all over the place.

Funnily enough, Izzard is one of those crossdressers I disagreed with in a similar way to Contrapoints. When they stated “It’s not women’s clothes, they’re mine.” Implying it’s only fashion, nothing to do with gender. I think they are being disingenuous. They are selecting for gender when they crossdress. I’d just say you are acting on gender when you crossdress. Why lie? It seems only for gender theory reasons.

I say yes it is a riff on femininity and femininity is connected to women. Doesn’t make me a woman even if I think that connection is natural. But that’s me.

Certainly both GC and the trans side might look on a crossdresser in the same way and say “Admit it you’re trans.” Even if it’s from different agendas. But I think there are larger dangers in that position and it’s not helpful for either side. Even if I think gnc people are related to trans people.

Do you think you would prefer a world where you could crossdress 24/7 and have it be totally accepted? Or do you prefer it only coming out in certain scenarios that you are able to preselect for?

I’d prefer if I could do it whenever I like and for it not to matter. Not be so politically and socially fraught. But it is, so that’s that.

What would change if it was different? I would dress more for some occasions. I would casually dress other times. Remember I said I used to dress and looked too gay. Being too sensual in appearance is socially dangerous for a straight man. But it probably comes out in other ways. Like having a suit too colour co ordinated. You cannot be too precious as a straight man. Straight men can’t be seen too much with gay men. All those things.

And again all the minor sexual things about desiring dominant women are not gender conforming. You can’t express that desire. It isn’t represented and it’s not acceptable to show.

It’s a rare thing like /r/rolereversal. You know that subreddit?

Where I do find it more acceptable is the kink community, the fetish clubs. That is where crossdressing is more than tolerated, a straight crossdresser has a place not as part of gay culture but as a person outside sexual norms. There are also women there who appreciate gender non conformity in men and relationships.

I can see that. I have a hard time thinking about fetish clubs without feeling a sense of terror about the people involved in them. But I suppose for those who feel cast out from regular society, it would feel more like a refuge.

Sure. I understand. Last time I went I enjoyed them because they accept and embrace all kinds of sexuality, not all mine. All kinds of sensuality. It is not all bdsm. Being with women who appreciate femininity in a man is so rare.

But that does not mean you can disconnect masculinity from men.

I don't see why not. Masculine women have a long history.

Because men are naturally going to be the majority of people interested in expressing masculinity.

Men are going to have advantages in many cultural expressions of masculinity.

But of course I’m far from thinking this ought to be enforced as a moral requirement.

There have always been women who preferred to "live like men." There would be more of them, I believe, if femininity was not forced on girls so heavily. You have to be strong and unusual to reject femininity as an adult woman, however tolerant society is (or was) about prepubescent tomboys.

More yes. I’m not sure about equal. I’m just not sure it’s as easy as that.

But their gender expression is connected to their sexuality? There has to be some relationship.

Not everyone has a fetish like you do.

Ha well fetish, that's the question.

A butch lesbian woman can dress in men's clothes without it being sexual for her. As for why she's butch, you'd have to ask her. I wouldn't speak on a lesbian's behalf. All I can say is that my gender expression is not connected to my sexuality, as far as I can tell.

Right but masculinity isn’t a perfect inversion of femininity. It’s those great questions of sex and sexuality. Do men enjoy their masculinity? What is the relationship exactly?

Masculine gender expression seems strongly linked to social roles.

Right, but if someone is unable to be aroused without imagining BDSM, that's a fetish. BDSM was never considered standard. Most people, even if they have "kinks," can still enjoy vanilla sex.

I think people have all kinds of fantasies during vanilla sex. That is super common and bdsm fantasies are super common.

I just like female appreciation of my expression. It puts me in the mood and puts the right woman in the mood. So it's the anticipation of being seen and appreciated by women that is the draw?

That sounds perfectly normal aspects of sexuality.

I don’t think being a crossdresser is strictly normal but I don’t think it's completely disconnected from the rest of sexuality going on.

It doesn't sound like it's a non-sexual activity for you then.

I think that’s an uncharitable view on it. Lots of people do and act things in public they find sexual. I don’t think people should sexually expose themselves in public. Sexuality involves display.

We probably do disagree on the role of masculinity and femininity in sexual display.

The women who strongly embrace “femininity” to degrees we both might find absurd likely do connect their sexuality to their gender expression.

I heard Kathleen Stock on the radio saying she had an affinity with the masculine. What did she mean by this? by theory_of_this in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Is gender essentialism the only possibility if she doesn’t believe eliminating sexed stereotypes entirely is coherent?

That's sort of my question.

Is there a reason you’re asking other people what she means as though she is some icon of gc?

Because I thought a gc person is more likely to know the answers for example if they said, "I saw her give an interview and said she was a gender essentialist but not a gender identity essentialist." Or something I don't know.

I think that would be different from seeing gender as personality or gender as form of class hierarchy.

I heard Kathleen Stock on the radio saying she had an affinity with the masculine. What did she mean by this? by theory_of_this in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

ooh I'd rather avoid twitter. not my platform

I heard Kathleen Stock on the radio saying she had an affinity with the masculine. What did she mean by this? by theory_of_this in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

She said she doesn't think getting rid of different gender stereotypes is coherent. That she doesn't believe in the blank slate.

Could it also be that inherent traits have been gendered?

To me this is some of the crucial questions.

I heard Kathleen Stock on the radio saying she had an affinity with the masculine. What did she mean by this? by theory_of_this in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Fair enough but I did want to know if the gc people here new more precise details on it. I can see she is not entirely on board with mainstream gc. If I understand gc correctly. But then I've always said we probably need more political categories on gender.

I heard Kathleen Stock on the radio saying she had an affinity with the masculine. What did she mean by this? by theory_of_this in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Did she actually say the second part, or did you just infer it?

Well I did recently read this from her site.

I don't automatically assume the mind is a blank slate, so that all sex-based social characteristics are wholly acquired. That's an empirical question so let's see what the science eventually shows. I don't think that getting rid of different social stereotypes for males and females altogether is a coherent aim, though altering the highly regressive ones we have, is.

Not your feminist

All sounded good to me. Probably lots of people might agree with that.

I heard Kathleen Stock on the radio saying she had an affinity with the masculine. What did she mean by this? by theory_of_this in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Stock said she doesn't assume the blank slate, meaning that some of masculinity and femininity can be innate. That might mean she see here own masculine affinity as the same as the affinity in men to masculinity.

That's not the same as trans ideology but I do see it as something different from original gender critical thought and most of radical feminism.

A person can believe gender is essential and that divergent gender forms are essential but oppose trans politics.

I heard Kathleen Stock on the radio saying she had an affinity with the masculine. What did she mean by this? by theory_of_this in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Masculinity and femininity are things. Nobody is really denying that are they?

How it's handled, what it means, what can change is up for debate.

She says she has an affinity for the masculine, I was wondering how she explained that affinity. That is all. I wanted to understand her.

I heard Kathleen Stock on the radio saying she had an affinity with the masculine. What did she mean by this? by theory_of_this in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If she is essentialist about it then that complicates the politics.

Tra/qt how is ‘examine your genital preference’ not homosexual conversion therapy? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think people even have a right to a gender expression preference. But I'm a gender essentialist so I would think that.

Both: Is gender dysphoria a mental illness? & Is being trans a mental illness? by peakingatthemoment in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks. It's not a settled topic so everyone gets to comment and have a take.

Tra/qt how is ‘examine your genital preference’ not homosexual conversion therapy? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's a bad idea.

But I do find it ironic this coming from gender critical where Sheila Jeffreys is a leading figure.

Sheila Jeffreys supports political lesbianism as does Julie Bindel. "I think it's time for feminists to re-open the debate about heterosexuality, and to embrace the idea of political lesbianism."

Both: Is gender dysphoria a mental illness? & Is being trans a mental illness? by peakingatthemoment in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

ha yeah no my ideas, are just my ideas and theories. I don't think "sex" "gender" are settled topics so we can all speculate. I'd probably need to write an essay to explain all my thoughts.

I'd relate gender issues to homosexual issues. At least the appearance in societies is similar. A constant pattern, of a small percentage, that relates to gender norms.

I think "gender divergence" and "homosexuality" are related. An extension of "gender" and "sexuality" are deeply related.

How do we categorize homosexuality?

I don't think it's completely a spandrel.

It's so common, so pervasive, so regular in pattern in nature I think it might be more like a basic DNA error checking function of sexual reproduction. More like a side product of the code that keeps the code healthy, in a population.

It would be interesting to see what the lives of mammals that have no homosexuality are like.

It might also be repurposed by evolution in different ways. Nature is like that.

Would that be called a mental illness?

Psychopathy is a recurrent pattern in human behaviour, sometimes it is advantage, sometimes it is a hindrance. It appears in a competitive equilibrium with other behaviours. Is it a disorder? Only when it becomes a problem for an individual or a society.

Regarding gender "component." Possibly breaking down gender into components like gender expression, orientation, physical aspects.

I know that sounds like the dreaded ginger bread person of GC nightmares but the components seem to manifest in society. They are there. We are only debating what they mean.

How many components are there? I don't know. Does that sound like a weak aspect? Yes. But they patterns remain even if I can't name them all. I'd limit to as few as possible.

For instance gender expression covers lots of things. It varies by society but the pattern remains. I think gender expression is likely to effectively be "sexual display in humans." Sexual display is super common in animals. Especially where both sides exhibit sexual choice. Both sexes "peacock."

If someone has one cross gender component they are more likely to have others.

Regarding the "dynamic." I mean that the mix of cross gender elements does not create a perfect average.

So attraction to men is a natural component in women. The same component can appear in men. However males have a component that makes them more sexually driven than women. On average. So the androphilia does not express, on average, in exactly the same way.

There are women that are as sexually driven as men but it's rarer in women. But straight women are a larger percentage.

Similarly the female gender expression component in a man might be expressed differently than in a woman. Even if there is some overlap. The mixture of components creates non average forms.

lol but I would say that as a crossdresser. I have to rationalise things somehow, everyone does.

Here's another component. Romantic feelings. People really do report a difference between sexual feelings for a sex and romantic feelings for a sex. It exists outside of trans theory. Again a small minority but it does appear.

Does that make sense?

Both: Is gender dysphoria a mental illness? & Is being trans a mental illness? by peakingatthemoment in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

My understanding is what I call the "dynamic component model." That's how I navigate it.

"Mental illness" can be sort of another way of side stepping what exactly is going on. It depends on what you mean by mental illness.

By component I mean aspects of gendered behaviour like expression, body image and attraction.

By dynamic I mean the different combinations have dynamic results rather than perfect averages.

Both: Do you believe there are sexual components to masculinity and femininity? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

ha yes. It has been some time. I do catch myself thinking about our debates at times.

The debates on GCdebatesQT always felt more like the actual debates society ought to be having than any debates in the media and elsewhere.

Both: How would you define my sexual orientation? by theytookourjerbs in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you think that expression is natural in some way or entirely cultural?

Like, why is there this aspect to sexual attraction and expression?

Both: How would you define my sexual orientation? by theytookourjerbs in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You care about the gender expression then right?

Both: What do you think about the arrest in the Wi Spa transgender incident? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I think hormones do affect sexual behaviour. I'm also interested to see if they took hormones or only identified as trans.

Both: What do you think about the arrest in the Wi Spa transgender incident? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I'm interested to know if there are any behaviour patterns.

Both: What do you think about the arrest in the Wi Spa transgender incident? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Do we know if they'd taken hormones?

Which religions let one hate people? by fschmidt in AskSaidIt

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

qanon

For GC: what makes someone trans? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

You like the bits about paraphilia but reject the bits about gay men and femininity. That looks conveniently selective about his science.

Where is the anti Blanchard science saying men and women are equally masculine and feminine?

For GC: what makes someone trans? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

OK but that's how Blanchard classes them. He says his subject is gender identity disorders and paraphilias. If you use the term you are lending support to those ideas. It is part of a model gender.

For GC: what makes someone trans? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Do you class HSTS as a gender disorder?

What would you compare "agp" to?

For GC: what makes someone trans? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

What have I said here that's wrong?

For GC: what makes someone trans? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

His twitter bio says "Researcher in sexual orientation, paraphilias, & gender identity disorders"

His theory is that gay men are naturally feminine. As in the gender bits that gender critical is critical of are natural and that autogynephilia is not strictly a fetish but a sexual target error.

For GC: what makes someone trans? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm asking based on inferring what you are saying.

For GC: what makes someone trans? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It seems pretty directly that Blanchardianism is a model of gender. When he describes gender disorders it reflects his wider model of gender. I would think any description of gender disorders is going to reflect a wider model of gender. It's hard for them not to be related.

For males it's saying masculinity is always connected to gynephilia and femininity is always connected to androphilia. That's a pretty direct position on gender in males.

He seems to edge around committing to the female version.

GC is in a position of saying they don't like Blanchard, don't like his values and disagree with him apart from the bits where he calls straight transwomen gay men and lesbian transwomen perverted paraphiliacs.

GC likes the moral position of calling people perverts.

There are Blanchardian cis women who believe they are autoandrophiliacs. I'd say there are people who fit some of that evidence. Where is GC on that? I guess GC will call them perverts as well. Which of course means there are female "perverts" after all.

Maybe I think GC is too broad a term and we really could do with refining the schools of thought.

This typology is usually presented as an either-or, but I believe that those who think Blanchard's typology has merit have always observed that many homosexual men who identify as women are also AGP, and that this is especially the case of HSTSs today. But Blanchard's typology of men who wish they were women can hardly be described as a "model of gender."

Or maybe Blanchard is wrong. I mean you are saying you think he's wrong in some ways.

I think he captures aspects of "gender disorders" but I don't think ultimately holds entirely up. I do agree that his ideas are often connected to fairly misogynistic ideas about men, women and sex. It's often a very masculine male understanding of sexuality IMHO.

For GC: what makes someone trans? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I can't tell if this is serious or not.

For GC: what makes someone trans? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you think testosterone only causes perversion or do you think it has other behavioural effects?

For GC: what makes someone trans? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What do you think causes perversion in men?

For GC: what makes someone trans? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Does this mean you accept the Blanchardian model of gender?

Why are gnc males perverts but homosexuals are not? That seems a very morally loaded term.

I am assuming you are a masculine woman attracted to women, possibly feminine women.

Often masculine straight guys are very antagonistic towards femininity in other men. They will call them perverts, straight or not. It's difficult for me not to relate that antagonism in masculine woman attracted to women.

For GC: what makes someone trans? by [deleted] in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you think porn makes crossdressers?

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Leaving aside narrow trans topics. I think GC has at least two camps. One more radical and one more socially conservative. But they often both overlap with a conservative position on men.

I recall watching a video of a butch gc woman mocking transwomen. It was very focused on complaining about the femininity of those people. If it was a man talking it would easily fit into the category of a masculine man mocking femininity in men.

I'm for gender non conformity in men and women. But that pattern is going to include men doing things that are the very things gc women on the radical side are often looking to escape from.

Way to completely miss the point, dude!

Sexuality is part of gender norms.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not talking about men at all. Male socialization is not comparable to female solarization at all. I've already said what I think about women who fantasize about being dominated. If you mean women who fantasize about dominating then I don't see how that's relevant to the point you're attempting to make.

Well the claim is men enjoy sexual domination because they are brought into an environment that rewards those desires.

Why would a woman have those desires?

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I mean we know that trauma informs sexuality, so it makes sense, to me, that gender trauma informs sexuality.

So where do the men and women who enjoy sexualized dominance fit into that?

So you do think that rape fantasies are natural. Pick a position and stick with it dude. Don't be a coward.

You have cornered me on that and obviously I completely understand the terrible moral logic of it. I can describe it.

Pattern seems so overwhelming though I don't know what to make of that.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You need to reword this because your typos are obscuring your meaning.

Sorry, how about this.

So this would be; all societies have gender which traumatize women and this appears in sexualized forms of power which women use as a psychological defence mechanism.

Is that closer to the position?

Your "reflections" aren't evidence. As I've already said, you've admitted that not all common and consistent fantasies are natural.

I do find it hard not to think "all common and consistent fantasies are natural."

You can see how I'd think that?

Like I think criminality and morality are both natural tendencies. Widespread, recurrent and emergent.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think it's a trauma response.

So this would be; all societies have gender which traumatize women this appears a sexualized forms of power which women as a psychological defence mechanism.

Where do the men and women who enjoy sexualized dominance fit into that?

Even if this is natural, which you clearly have no evidence that it is, it's still a leap from this to fantasies about power in a gender context specifically being natural.

I'm reflecting on the reported patterns.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Rape fantasies are consistent and common

What do you think is going on with that?

It's pretty weird that you think the only two options are that fantasies involving gender roles are natural or that human sexuality is totally blank.

I do think it's a mix. There is an interaction between nature nurture.

I just see humans have a strong tendency to sexualise power. Maybe that's at it's widest interpretation. Is that unrealistic?

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I would think they are larger population sizes than I was thinking of in this.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Having boundaries is not the same as being conservative.

So what is the policy implication of this?

Can't you have a conversation that doesn't involve porn for once?

Sure we can talk about reported fantasies.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well take sexual fantasies. They are consistent enough to be categorized and widely shared. I don't think human sexuality is completely blank. I think it follows repeating and common patterns that you can see in regular sex surveys in social science. If human sexuality was completely blank I think it would vary more. People are prone to certain desires within a spectrum.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think they desire to be raped no.

But people do have anti social sexual fantasies that they do not want in reality.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Porn, erotica and sexual fantasies are relevant to discussing gender and sexuality.

All: "Trans women" at the Olympics by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I still think the situation will become too noticeable and sports rules will ban transwomen. I think that's just tough and trans people have to accept that.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think human desires are all perfect politically correct and morally justifiable.

I do think women on average are likely to find dominant men attractive. There are perhaps dark edges to that bias.

To me that explains a lot of consistent human behaviour. That's what I see from the evidence.

It's not the world as I would choose it.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think porn is perfect brainwashing that programmes people's brains to act in a certain way. The relationship details are unclear but a lot of it is serving desires not creating them.

Why do I think that? Because the pattern is so consistent and the pattern of changing people's desires through porn is weak.

Sounds like I do need to read you the plots to erotic that is popular with women. The lit is full of sexualized forms of masculinity.

Why does everything come back to erotica with you?

I was explicitly talking about the sexual elements of gender. It's literally the topic. Of course I'm going to talk about porn, erotica, sexual fantasies, desires and everything related.

Do you not see how gender norms exist outside of pornography?

Of course and I don't think sexuality all comes down to pornography. I think pornography reflects sexuality possibly more than it informs it because I don't think humans especially on drives likes sex are blank.

Disliking how someone presents their sexual proclivities in public isn’t dictating their sexuality.

This is basically back to "gay people need to keep in the bedroom stuff."

You think heterosexual conforming people don't show any sexuality in public? That there is no sexual display at all?

How is disliking it when a man wears a grown and calls himself strawberry lemonade and makes jokes about women being mean and awful dictating to him whether he is straight/gay/bi? Dresses is not a sexuality.

You are disingenuously mixing up dresses with misogyny here. They are different things.

By this reasoning everyone should be masculine.

We don’t comment on the sexual behaviour of anyone who doesn’t insert it into our lives when we don’t want it. It just so happens that men are the most invested in inserting their sexual behaviour into discussions and women’s spaces.

Again you are jumping between topics. Again this is a common socially conservative talking point. "Why won't the gay men stop inserting their perversion into our lives." You are using arguments used by social conservatives against gay people on trans people to complain about gnc males that aren't in women's spaces. Crossdressers do not identify as women. Billy Porter in a gown is not in women's spaces.

You don’t seem to recognise anything gnc that isn’t sexual and it’s so weird.

Yes I recognise non sexual gnc things. But we are discussing sexual aspects of gender.

You are also a person who likes to discuss sex and gender. That's why you are here.

Gendered socialisation happens to babies, saying boys like trucks and don’t cry. is that about a sexual kink? Can you talk about any topic without shoehorning it into sex and fetishes? It feels like you talk about that and nothing else.

We are discussing gender non conformity and sexuality is always going to be part of gender the debate.

When these topics come up gc puts it's blinkers on. All it can see is people doing things it doesn't like completely ignoring the majority of sexuality going on.

I'm here defending gnc men in their gnc sexuality. I'd also defend all gnc people and their gnc sexualities.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Interesting claim, what do you mean by most people sexualise gender?

Asides from physical sexual characteristics, humans sexualise expressions of gender in a wider sense. But they aren't perfect reflections of each other.

If you look at porn, erotic and reported sexual fantasises of "the straights" you'll see plenty of gendered roles, narratives, behaviours and expressions.

Do you want me to read out the plots summaries of the erotic lit popular with women and the porn popular with men? This is very clear. It's not that men and women are completely different but there are sizable biases.

What’s morally questionable about disliking the hypersexualised mockery of oneself?

Because this isn't all about you. Because you don't get to dictate other people's sexuality.

I think social conservatives calling lesbians a mockery of men, unnatural and perverted are making a moral mistake. They often take disgust and make it an moral issue.

Gender non conformity is going to have sexual aspects too.

GC takes calls male gnc sexual behaviour perverted, fetishistic and a mockery.

But doesn't seem to comment on female gnc sexual behaviour.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Can you give me an example. I'm not being dumb here or asking a trick question. I'm interested in the reality. I can change my understanding.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Are there small cultures with highly defined gender norms?

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think "fetish" is being used wrongly here as a moral justification for objecting to drag queens and crossdressers.

The majority of the population sexualise masculinity and femininity. It's natural.

The language that morally condemns gnc males for a fetish is the exact same rhetoric used by ultra social conservatives to in the condemnation of gay men and women, including their gender expression.

There aren't plenty of gnc men by percentage.

It looks like GC's idea of acceptable gnc behaviour in men is what would be acceptable for a gnc woman. Maybe that makes consistent internal logical sense but it doesn't work outside of GC.

GC also then has to deal with internal disagreement over that.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So 'strong gender differences' haven't existed for 95% of human history?

Not in the same way they exist in larger societies.

But then the societies have fewer resources and physical traits are more explicitly manifest.

I don't think it has anything to do with population size, no.

That raises my question, can you name a culture of any decent size without gender norms etc ?

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Are you saying that you believe that hunter-gatherers before the Neolithic Revolution lived in communities comprised of hundreds of people?

No.

Can you explain how communities larger than villages are relevant to my point, or better yet, quote where you believe I made this claim?

I think I was saying small communities do not manifest strong gender differences even if they are there in populations only in a small way.

If you agree they clearly emerge in larger populations then fine we agree.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A small village is a much larger settlement than most humans throughout history would have lived in (95%, at least). It seems like you've totally reversed your position on the ubiquity of gender.

That 95% of history is undocumented though.

Can you point to a culture larger than a village that has no gender?

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I am saying it's illustrative that "a good example" male of male gender non conformity is actually minor. It's also from 30/40 years ago.

I don't see how most people are gender non conforming. If that was the case gender wouldn't be the topic it is. Gender non conformity wouldn't be the issue it is.

Visual aspects are only one aspect but they are a regular aspect of it. Seems to be how gender works.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The fact that it's slight is what makes it seem oblivious.

I can see that angle but it's also in a background of suppression of male femininity.

Men who consciously and intentionally attempt to subvert gender norms seem like they generally have issues with subtlety

Subtlety isn't everything.

Either gender expression isn't always subtle. Why does it need to be?

Are you applying the same caution to women?

This is very different from 'all cultures across time have/had gender'-- what do you consider a 'decent size'?

Anything above the small village. Sure I'm theorising here. But that's as a I see it.

There could be natural traits in humans that only become visible above a certain size. I'm sure there are mental conditions that are hard to notice in very small populations but are recognisable in large populations. Trends become more obvious and established.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think a person has to be extreme to be gender non conforming. But the degrees seem to matter to society.

It's complicated by masculinity and femininity being different and therefore non conformity is different for the sexes.

Also as I see it, non conformity is more commonly allowed to be expressed socially by women. Though it appears less in the media. Where as male non conformity is expressed less in both.

The natural hair of women is true but then so is the natural hair's head hair.

The degree of non conformity is an interesting question. But it's very much one of those fuzzy logic, Sorites paradox situations. Surely we can agree on that even if we disagree on other issues?

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I would not call Hall oblivious. Slightly ignoring boundaries perhaps.

We're here for debate. You make major claims about this topic and hypocritically complain when I make comments on it. Of course we're going to all make claims about gender. We are all making our claims. You have the right to it.

I do claim all cultures of a decent size have gender norms including expression. They might vary in form and their enforcement but they are there. I do ask for tolerance but I don't expect them to vanish.

I very much do not say the norms must be enforced or that people ought to follow a rigid form of them. That has never been my position. You are imagining that.

Of course I can think of people not conforming to gender norms. I can see androgynous expression in people.

Crossdressers are not setting the rules for men and women on gender. It's absurd to think that.

You want to discuss fetishist ideas men and women have about men and women?

I don't think GC is strictly right wing or conservative however it often takes similar positions, similar rhetoric and falls into alliances.

Amy Bloom in "Conservative Men in Conservative Dresses" does not describe all crossdressers. Are some crossdressers conservative? Of course. There are socially conservative gay people, I'd call them hypocrites.

Both: Do you believe there are sexual components to masculinity and femininity? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, but if the entire female sex is innately inferior, then there is no point to feminism.

I don’t see this as thinking the female sex is inferior. Aggression does not mean better.

It’s a tool that can be useful or destructive for other purposes.

There are some that believe in the flatter bell curve for men but really when I think about it. It could all come down to that aggression. Which can also be self destructive.

So your belief is just like Red Pill,

I can see the problem with that and I don’t know what the answer to that is. Red pill is an extreme form of it.

But I do see the repeated lighter forms of it in regular life. This is what often radical feminism is complaining about and I agree it is there in subtle forms. Patriarchal norms but it is not absolute. I don’t think it’s absolute.

What do you make of these credit academic reports.

Women's Sexual Fantasies – The Latest Scientific Research

Fantasy does not mean they wish these desires fulfilled.

But they pattern of desire for sex and power remains very strong.

Everything that is natural is not necessarily a moral good. I think that’s one of my starting points.

I think I was born with an inability to conform to gendered expectations. To me, “born with an inability to conform to gendered expectations” isn’t entirely accurate. That isn’t escaping gender. That is embracing the gender norms of the opposite sex.

As such, you could certainly raise little girls to embrace neutrality and most of them would.

I don’t see it as being technically possible. That isn’t how humans are. I think there are natural biological tendencies within humans plus a natural desire to create gendered things.

What's your social circle like?

Of course I’ve lived a life and at times been very social. Known and sought out many men and women of different flavours.

Specifically the straight crossdresser community is very thin. The community is very androphilic. It is often very based around sex with men and other gnc men. That’s super awkward as a straight man not attracted to other crossdressers. Online I got a lot of attention from men, even after saying I’m straight. There are a lot of assumptions. There can be an assumption that a straight crossdresser is a liar. Back to that pattern of gnc men being either gay or perverts.

I have been in circles entirely of women, falling into a kind of honorary member. But it’s not sexual. I mean that in a bad way. We were not seeing each other as sexual figures because I was not doing the masculinity they prefer and they were not being the aggressive female figures I prefer.

I have been male circles and I don’t quite fit the casual masculinity of them. Certainly not after they are aware of my crossdressing.

There is a common refrain of “don’t let your crossdressing/sexuality” become your whole identity and I can see the good reasons and logic for that. But then you suppress and end up being a person that “springs” it on others. You drift into the closet only to find yourself around people who are not accepting.

I realise now I ought to have placed it more central to my life. I accepted it when I was very young but that acceptance became internal and not external enough.

Where I do find it more acceptable is the kink community, the fetish clubs. That is where crossdressing is more than tolerated, a straight crossdresser has a place not as part of gay culture but as a person outside sexual norms. There are also women there who appreciate gender non conformity in men and relationships.

I had initially gone to these clubs when I was younger but drifted away as I got older because they were too small, cliquey, badly attended and amateur. I was also groped by men there. That pattern is strong.

However in the last few years I returned to find the clubs better organised, better policed, friendly and well attended. I wish that had been the case when I was younger. I find it a place of tolerance of people not criminal but outside regular norms of different sexual types.

There are certainly women there who are dressing for sex in a way that turns themselves on.

Well, I feel you. They keep lumping GNC women like me in with trans. Which is why so many of us are fleeing womanhood.

Well obviously I think a “failed woman” is the wrong way of looking at it. I’d see you as embracing masculinity. That does not mean you need to embrace a transman identity. But that does not mean you can disconnect masculinity from men.

No? I think the fetish in question is getting aroused by the idea of wearing female clothing.

But their gender expression is connected to their sexuality? There has to be some relationship.

The gay male scene has plenty of sexualized ultra masculinity that is linked to pleasure.

You do see women who see their femininity as part of their sexuality. It does put them in the mood.

I consider BDSM a harmful kink/fetish. If they can't get off without imagining that, then yes, they are fetishists.

But a lot of this is super common. The bdsm scene in my opinion is people theatrically expressing extremes forms of this.

Or of course mild gender non conforming forms.

Well I enjoy the female aesthetic. Nothing wrong with that in and of itself. Would you put on a non-revealing dress and go out in public without feeling any hint of arousal about it?

Hint? It depends on what you mean.

I’m not demanding pronouns or a different name or anything like that. I just like female appreciation of my expression. It puts me in the mood and puts the right woman in the mood.

Really that’s what a lot of gender expression is about IMHO.

He can, as long as he doesn't give a shit about what others think. He just needs to own them and not allow other people to rule his life.

I don’t think you’re getting how harsh men are policed on gender.

Even small things will be judged by even liberal people. Tolerance does not mean people don’t act on it.

A man has to constantly police himself, especially a straight man.

If I let society determine those things for me, I'd have a very unhappy existence. I do agree gnc women do get a rough ride. But the line is very tight for straight men. You can see the line in regular pop culture.

Dude, you seriously don't. Dress how you want, act how you want.

This is my experience after hanging with men and women. This is what I see. I have experienced enough to know what they believe and what they react to.

A lot of that is just passion. Some of it I find problematic. But most of it is benign. You've never had a so-called "normal" woman grab you or initiate a kiss or something?

I have had women grab me at times. Pinch my bum, hand down my trousers.

But generally I think the gender norms hold in patterns.

Sexually passive women are far more common. That does not mean they are without desire. I don't believe that's really the case.

I think the data points to that on average.

At one point you said you like to have women do things to you, but you also said you like to do things to your female partners. So it's not like you're just lying there like a dead fish, right?

Ha yes no, I can see it might come across that way. More that any action by me is welcomed and preferred. That they don’t feel action from them is enjoyable, it is entirely not for their pleasure. Any action from me means they don’t need to reciprocate. To the point that all the action and desire comes from me. As I said this is not true of all women. Just a general bias.

Compatibility is the issue.

Though growing up I did lack the PIV obsession that seemed to be the norm and expected from me as a boy. I wasn’t obsessed with sticking it in. Is that relevant? I still don’t know. All part of the unusual sexual behaviour.

You don't think women have genuine sexual desire of their own?

I wouldn’t characterise it like that. I think it is a desire. I don’t think sexual desire is entirely about that.

I mean what do you think these women are enjoying about it? Lust, desire, wanting, all the normal things people like about having sex.

But the women who are sexually passive?

If 2/3 of my partner's girlfriends were active, how rare can it be? Remember that he's very gender conforming. Unless you think he's abnormal just by virtue of being with me.

By being with you he is experiencing something statistically unusual.

Just as a woman with a male crossdresser would be.

I still think there are on average differences between men and women in sexual behaviour and desires.

I think we both believe that but we disagree on the causes.

I'm still not entirely sure how you define passive. He's really not very strong-willed in terms of having to have a certain thing in bed.

You both sound active.

I’d add rarely initiating sex but expecting it, is passive. As if initiating it, is a turn off, at the same time being annoyed if the other person does not initiate it.

I know I respond more to active pursuit than my active pursuit. It took me some time to realise this. Just not being wired the same way as the average straight man.

That’s a wider point I’d make. I do see trans identities. I do see elements of myself as more accepted as female. But after looking a long time at the subject I remain seeing myself as a man. I don’t see myself as a woman sexually. I see myself as a crossdresser sexually. That is who I identify with no matter how good or bad that figure is. I can’t escape that.

I’m not demanding some extreme BDSM thing, mild is fine. I find some things women seem to want on /r/sex too extreme. Aggressive passion and appreciation of my expression is what I want.


I got it down to one! lol

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

An issue I have is that the Hall is being very mildly gender non conforming here.

The socially conservative might see this as wildly gender non conforming but I think most liberal people would see this as not boundary breaking.

I don't mean that gc is right wing by that. But I do mean the borders are often tighter.

What is gender nonconformity to you? by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think when people use the phrase it's generally referring to enacting behaviours that are usually associated with the opposite sex.

These behaviours can be a universal or culturally defined. This can include personality elements, expression, roles.

One element isn't likely to make a person gender non conforming. But a collection will.

I don't think you can choose your desires and suppression comes with psychological distress.

Aggressively adopting the norms of the opposite sex is nonconforming, but it is conforming to the opposite sex norms. It isn't escaping gender. I believe that quite strongly.

Very gender non conforming people can appear to be stereotypes of the opposite sex. But I think that's unfair on anyone who expresses it of either sex. Especially non conforming people as I don't think they actively choose it as a moral decision.

But then gender is a social thing. Humans are social animals and gender is part of that social interaction.

I hope you don't mind me replying I know I can infuriate you.

Both: Are sexual stereotypes about men and women in the bedroom true? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you think women and men could choose not to be neither the sumissive or the dominant one in a relationship?

Yes.

I do not think sex or relationships are entirely about erotic power relations.

I just think people are prone to eroticising power in mild or strong ways, often gendered.

It appears very common.

In other words, do you think a relationship could not be based in power plays?

Yes I think it can be based on equality or at least not driven by a strongly sex power games at all.

I think sexual attraction is based on a number of things. Physical attraction, personality but I don't think they are generally identical for men and women. I do think masculinity and femininity often play a role in sexuality. That being separate from power.

I do think non sexual power is likely always being negotiate in relationships. I don't think it's a thing that can be ignored.

Do you think someone can consent to abuse?

I find that too charged a question.

Do I think people are in abusive relationships? Yes. Do I think all consent is valid? No. People might consent to something that is wrong and illegal.

People have fantasises they do not want to come true. That does not make them bad broken people.

People have all kinds of fantasises, act out things in bedrooms without being terrible broken people.

For all that consumption of porn and erotic literature they are not broken on that level. They are in fact happy.

Do you think abuse is erotic and desirable?

I think do a lot of people find power erotic. We might think it wrong but it appears so common and a normal part of life.

It has to be carefully handled.

Do you think women must accept to be dominated by men because is "natural"?

No. Firmly not.

A tendency is not universal. An "is" is not an "ought."

I do think people need to be educated. Adults need to be aware of dangers of behaviours and be responsible caring lovers.

BTW, there is no "sex work", only sexual slavery. "Sex work" is a euphemism used by pimps to normalise and, eventually, legalise prostitution.

I recall hearing Julie Bindel on this she was saying there are women who are forced in to this activity and there are middle class women who are playing in some kind of recreation for kicks. I think there is truth in that. I don't think sex can be normalised as any other job because sex is so emotional and open to abuse. I don't think it a healthy form of relations.

I can see it's possibly therapeutic in places, maybe. I don't want to be the person telling women the can't sell sex either. But it's not something I think is mentally healthy, for everyone.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

By action I think I'd observe that most people behave in accordance to those patterns. Most people act on the sexes having different sexual behaviours. I don't care if that is labelled MRA or Red Pill. That tribalism doesn't interest me.

There is a difference between saying someone fits the stereotypes of a group and saying all members of a group are like that.

Oh I completely agree.

That is why I think your assertions about women and men are overly simplistic: you see a pattern and immediately assume that must be the natural state of things and that cannot be changed.

It's not immediate and it's not an absolute thing. It's usually a bimodal model where quantity has a quality all of it's own.

I would prefer that society had less baggage about what men and women must do.

I probably would to. At the same time I think there are limits to it.

Also I come back to that issue of gender non conformity often being cross gender conformity.

That often gender non conforming people are effectively waving a flag of the opposite sex.

I'd like women be treated as people, and that men were not jacking off of the abuse of women. I'd prefer men were not claiming to be women because they are not "manly" enough or whatever.

But "not manly enough" is a euphemism for femininity here right?

Regarding abuse I completely understand your anger and concern.

But men engaging in any form of non conforming sex play are not the icons of female abuse.

Does porn contain a lot of what is sexual abuse of women by men? Yes, yes it does.

We have to be honest about how popular erotica is, with strong gender norms and in the broadest terms sexualised power, with women.

All the studies point to that. That's a far far bigger demographic that non conforming men.

We can say this ought not to be the case, this is the case because of social reasons.

Also I am saying masculinity and femininity are sexual separately from any category of power and sex. You do see and recognise that claim I make? I am not claiming all sex is power or all is some extreme version of that.

I was talking particularly of trans identified males only because they are the ones who really hold the power within the trans movement. There are two reasons for this. First, historically most people with a cross-sex identification were males. It's only recently that females whith a "trans identity" are increasing in numbers. However, most of these females are still quite young and, therefore, unlikely to be in positions of great influence. The second reason is females who identify as trans are still treated as women and they must prioritize the wishes of males who identify as trans.

I don't agree with everything trans activism says and does. This seems to remove all agency from transmen as if they don't exist, don't have opinions and have only just appeared.

You are conflating crossdressers who specifically do not identify as transwomen at the same time as ignoring transmen. I don't think that's reasonable.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

OK well I think I disagree with this assessment and I think it goes against a lot of economic and sociological research.

With the exception of child rearing and child care the 20th century had an explosion of machines in the home, office, factory, farm that all eased labour demands. This labour was re purposed. To see it as anything else don't make economic or sociological sense.

Housework Now Takes Much Less Time: 85 Years of US Rural Women's Time Use

Abstract Based on her analysis of published tables from US homemakers’ 1924–32 week-long time use diaries collected by the US Department of Agriculture, Vanek (1974) concluded that housework time had not declined over the previous half-century—despite the diffusion of many “time-saving” home technologies. Although frequently challenged, this claim still survives in parts of the sociological literature; we use newly available evidence to refute it. Analysis of the original USDA diaries (many of which have now been recovered from the US National Archives), alongside more recent diary microdata from the American Heritage Time Use Study, reveals a pair of clear and contrary trends: a continuing decline in women's core housework (cooking and cleaning), partially offset by an increase of time in childcare and shopping. Names and addresses attached to the original diaries allow the identification of more than 93 percent of the USDA diarists in one or both of the 1920 and 1930 US Federal Censuses. Analysis (Oaxaca decomposition) of the household- and individual-level information from this source shows that most of the historical time shifts result not from changes in family demography or women's growing attachment to paid work over this period but from “behavioral” change, reflecting in part the spread of labor-saving domestic technology.

Hans Rosling And Ha-Joon Chang Agree, The Washing Machine Is A More Important Invention Than The Internet

There has been a decline in marriage and living together over the same period. People live alone more. The practicalities of living alone have gone up due to the change in household technology and consumerism. People did not start living alone at the same time as housework become more demanding.

Machines needs more time goes against time goes against the very utility of them. Housework was gruelling as often was the workplace.

All: What do you think about "non-binaries" and other "gender identities"? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm sorry if you are frustrated with discussing with me and I apologise if it comes across as bad faith. Often people here are coming from very different perspectives.

I do want to hear your opinions, I'm not always going to disagree like some contrarian.

If I don't always respond it might be because I'm busy or tired or need some time to think about it.

If it sounds like I'm putting words in your mouth, think of it more as "this is how I understand your argument and feel free to point out where I'm wrong."

Regarding breastfeeding and femininity it did give me pause for thought. I'm still pondering that question of the difference between those words and categories.

You said you connected breastfeeding to femaleness but not to womanhood or femininity. Which I think is an interesting question. But then it would also prompt me to ask how many categories and what are they for?

Bringing up other animals can be useful but everyone (on all sides) has a tendency to see what they want in other animals. But I don't think we can escape nature.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think I agree with all of that. There is also the white goods revolution in the 20th century. "Homemaking" stopped being the job it was. Child rearing very much still is a job.

The surplus labour from white goods pulled women into the work place. Also just as house work was eased hard labour was eased and work became less arduous in general. Fair take?

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

And I didn't say all the other things you think I said, either. The problem is that you see the world through your paraphilia lens. You can only see romantic and sexual relationships in terms of domination and sumission, therefore, when I challenge your ideas you think I want men to be all dominant and masculine. I don't that at all, I think this is a very messed up way to see human relationships. Why would I want women to be subjected to abuse of men?

I don't think power is the only aspect of sexuality at all. It is a recurrent one however. I don't agree with every expression of it.

What femininity in men do you accept then?

By the way, I think it's pretty funny you think I want you to man up. The way ignore you keep ignoring what women have to say about our own experiences, they way you pretend to listen to us, the way you think you know better than us what we really want, the fact that you have a paraphilia (or several, maybe), they way you obsess over sex... all of that scream stereotipically male behaviour, dude.

Well my experience of women of GCdebatesQT is not the same experience women in general.

Are you saying stereotypes are true? Of course I don't claim to be woman. I express an interest in expressing aspects of femininity in my culture. I have to reason out why that is.

You keep saying how you're feminine and are rejected because of that by women.

I say that in general women prefer masculinity. I really don't think that's a controversial idea.

never mind any questions about power.

Yet when you talk about women naturally desiring to be subdued by dominant men, you sound a lot like a run-of-the-mill MRA. Sumissive in the bedroom or not, you don't sound stereotipically feminine like at all.

Specifically on Red Pill men, one aspect I think is true, I don't think men and women are in general attracted to the same things.

Straight men are generally attracted to femininity and straight women are generally attracted to masculinity. I think that's pretty natural.

And I disagree that society don't listen to male cross-dressers. They have a lot of political power right now. It's just that most of them are calling themselves "women".

And where are transmen in that argument? Do they have opinion or influence? Are they really butch women with a lot of political power?

All: What do you think about "non-binaries" and other "gender identities"? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I was of course meaning GC there not "QC."

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We can acknowledge that there may very well be some average behavioral differences that may be innate to men and women respectively,

Right. On average in some areas.

but it is extremely difficult to separate nature from nurture.

It is difficult I agree.

Sexism is a very likely reason why women are pushed out of certain fields and why pay raises when a field becomes male dominated and falls when it is female dominated. Women's work isn't respected, and it isn't valued.

Yes I think sexism does take over at times. It often is related to rank misogyny.

Telling women they're not succeeding, because they aren't aggressive enough is just more sexism. Many women leave tech and high earning careers, because the bullying & sexual harassment just isn't worth it anymore.

But are we acknowledging that baseline of aggression that men might have?

If a male person behaves in a more stereotypically feminine fashion that does not make that male person a woman, that just means that some male people have personalities that are considered feminine. This proves that feminine and masculine gender roles being innate are bullshit, because if it was there wouldn't be so many exceptions to the rule.

To me though this creates a clash between "acknowledging that there may very well be some average behavioral differences that may be innate to men and women"

and "feminine and masculine gender roles being innate are bullshit"

There is some pattern to some things being innate and some things being cultural.

I understand with things being "bullshit" at times, at the same time I don't see how all of it is going to go away.

All: What do you think about "non-binaries" and other "gender identities"? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I agree with everything there. That's pretty much one of my basic opinions here.

Both: Are sexual stereotypes about men and women in the bedroom true? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I suggested there might be a bimodal relationship with aggression in people. That might have a sexual element.

There is overlap in that. I don't think all of sexuality is about power at all. It is also about other things. Physical appeal, personal connection, there is also gendered aspects which are appealing to people that are not to do with power. But people are prone to erotic elements of power. On a large scale extremes will be more visible.

Is that black and white?

Do you think competitions for power are something humans are liable to do? That a sex element of that is something is humans might fall into but is something that should always be avoided?

I do think society can be better. But I think there are limits.

I don't think sexualizing masculinity means necessarily sexualizing dominance. Even if it is related it is separate.

I don't think accepting a relationship between power and sex, or sexuality and gender, means endorsing all of sex positivity, pornography, sex work and abuse.

When I debate here and say "I think straight women think x" it's because I see huge difference between what the women of gc here think and what I see in the wider world.

I don't think all the women enjoying popular erotic fiction with strong gender norms within a fantasy or enjoying mild sex games are broken women with no agency. That's taken as me endorsing extreme libertarian misogyny.

All: What do you think about "non-binaries" and other "gender identities"? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The point that went over your head is that you often seem to be tilting at windmills.

I think that depends on the particular point and the particular person. GC isn't all one position, neither is qt.

If it looks like I'm arguing only against one false, unclaimed position. But I see positions I disagree with.

You tend to debate & disagree not with what other posters here have actually said or what we believe, but with what you'd like to think or pretend we've said & believe.

I think think I can make the same arguments back.

I asked you before what is your general take on gender? How should things be done? I was genuinely interested, didn't assume you had to take a "party position," wanted to know where you were coming from.

All: What do you think about "non-binaries" and other "gender identities"? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Well we debate with people we disagree with. We're likely to see things differently. If you aren't going to have people with different points of view there isn't gong to be much debate here.

What would agreement from me look like? Stop being a crossdresser?

EDIT Also I'd explicitly believe there are more than one take on both sides. There are in fact many positions. I'd like to see more positions categorised.

All: What do you think about "non-binaries" and other "gender identities"? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

So what's your take? How would you describe it?

All: What do you think about "non-binaries" and other "gender identities"? by BiologyIsReal in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I think gender is messier than gender theory often presents. I take a dynamic gender component view.

Most people are straight and conforming. A small percentage are behaviourally variant.

So that's a behavioural spectrum with two poles. A sharp bimodal model.

Gender variant people are always trying to fit into that society of a large population of conforming people.

A lot of the time gender variant people seem to be trying to name underlying frameworks going on at an unconscious level. Working with a Western society that says "men and women are the same" while they live in a society where most people, men and women, act very much like they are not. GC and QT have a take on why that is the case. GC sees it as entirely cultural, QT takes a rather "quantum" position, both nature and culture.

A very small percentage of people seem to have a problem identifying with any regular identity. I think attaching an identity to a group is a perfectly natural human activity. It connects to self identity, sexual identity, morality, philosophical place within the world. This is often stronger in early adulthood where people create an identity. That does not mean those identities are popular or have any wider meaning.

I think covers some "otherkin" people. I think there is something natural there but it is dysfunctional. There's a natural process there that is misfiring to a degree.

But I'm more of a realist in that I think we should keep male and female, as difficult as that is for some variant people. Something closer to truscum. I think there are societal benefits to that.

So I think someone like Bunce is in the wrong.

What do you think about cases of young boys raised as girls, but eventually realizing they are boys? by FlanJam in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

There was a science paper on some cases. We discussed in the before time in the other place. More things we lost in the fire.

The report was on a very low number so it was hard to judge what was going on.

I think a good number reverted to their biological gender. One of the adjusted from what I inferred was living as a butch a lesbian.

Both: Are sexual stereotypes about men and women in the bedroom true? by worried19 in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

A male cross-dresser is far from being an authority on female sexuality, and theory usually miss the point of what he is told in this sub to suit his own ideas about essentialism.

I find off-putting men who think women are a prize to win over. I don't want to be anyone's sex toy.

OK lets chat about it here.

Do you think straight men and women on average have the same sexuality? Similar fantasies, behaviour, pleasures?

Do you think men on average find femininity erotic? Do you think women on average find masculinity erotic?

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I would think you are wanting to prevent it but don't seem to be interested in any understanding that might help that.

You want a man not to be submissive in order to prove that straight women are on average not attracted to dominant men?

Or the other trait.

You want a man not express femininity in order to prove that straight women are on average not attracted to masculinity?

Why can't you say yes they are attracted to those things, because of society, that a man breaking those norms is a good thing. You'd say it's because I am demonstrating a connection between dominance and masculinity. But I don't think society is taking lessons from crossdressers, mildly dominant or submissive. At all.

You have no real interest on what women may think about and you want to naturalise abuse by using euphemisms like "erotic play".

Of course I have an interest.

To be honest, I have no idea why you come here to discuss about this stuff if you're so conviced that you know far better what women want than we do.

Well you're convinced of your ideas too right? It's enjoyable to chat about this.

Funny how you said nothing about what we said in the thread about sex stereotypes in the bedroom.

I commented there. I'm commenting here.

I'll respond there.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think men and women are behaviourally the same but I think the differences have to be limited. It has to be down to one or two things. I think the differences would be more like bi modal preferential desires.

For example, women were often employed as "human computers." Doing the maths for larger projects.

Why did computing and those roles become more male dominated? Because the pay went up and men sought that pay. The male power aggression aspect edged women out. Nothing to do with cognitive ability. Men in competition with other men feel they need the money.

Even a slight average difference might have effects on a larger scale. So not a big difference between the sexes, nothing to do with ability, only that average slight aggression power dynamic.

The singular power aggression dynamic might explain a lot of common differences we see across cultures, the crime difference, male propensity for organised violence and sex crime.

Not an absolute difference but an average which is more clear in larger populations.

This does not mean "patriarchies" are stable or the only system. Societies can find that bias in male behaviour has to be better managed. It has to be controlled for greater good of society.

I'm speculating here as are we all because the science is not clear.

There are people who identify as "trans women" saying outrageous sexist things. I'm not justifying them. They are frankly absurd.

I still can't see men and women on average behaving innately identically. Sex is one of those things they have different behaviour on.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

lol well I've heard worse here.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I don't know how you developed this paraphilia, but I think the how is irrelevant.

The hows and whys of sex, gender and "deviancy" are intellectually fascinating on their own.

The reasons are also important if you explicitly want to suppress some.

If enjoying bad internet porn was a thing that made crossdressers then suppressing then it would create less crossdressers. But for me personally that was not the case. I don't see it being true in a wider sense either.

If it was something I was doing in my life I'd stop it because I wouldn't chose this identity. But I have to get on with life.

It matters more that you still choose to endulge it despite that you supposedly understand why it's problematic.

What is the problem to wider society exactly?

You think people are wandering around an alternative bar thinking "Well I was all for gender equality until saw a man in a dress with a woman that looks sexually dominant."

If there is a wider trigger in society it is not from crossdressers who are not significant figures in popular culture.

Regarding the sexualization of power. I think it's something society needs to reconcile itself with because it's so prevalent and common. It's taken for granted and we'd be better off recognising it and coping with it. That does not mean accepting every form of it.

I think that claiming you were born this way it's a conforting lie that you tell yourself.

Comforting? Comforting that I can't do anything about something I'd prefer not to be? More like accepting reality. Not being delusional.

This way you cannot be held risponsible for your sexual desires and be asked to do something about it.

What does being held responsible for liking crossdressing and enjoying sexually passionate aggressive women mean?

What does doing something about it mean? Corrective therapy to "man up" ?

Promotion of masculinity? Suppression of ideas of dominant women? Support for sexual gender norms?

Telling yourself that women are naturally sumissive and naturally attracted to dominant men is also self-serving because it affirms your ideas about men and women.

How on Earth does that make sense? Why would I be pleased that straight women are more likely to be attracted masculine dominant men?

It allows you to see yourself as a victim: if only women were interested in men like you, your sexual life surely would be more satisfactory.

There are women that find it attractive, erotic and pleasing. They are just naturally rarer. They like to express their sexual desire in a very aggressive manner. It's not abuse it's erotic play.

The last thing the women who find crossdressers attractive are concerned about is it's putting a crossdresser in the mood.

It also allows you that avoid thinking in the uncomfortable possibility that many women may not be attracted to you not because you're sumissive, but because they may be put off about you getting off of a woman's caricature and/or about the idea of BDSM in general.

BDSM? Have you checked what erotic lit straight women enjoy? They love that fantasy world. Have you checked the social science reports on sexual fantasy and bedroom activities and porn use? I know gc will say they are being forced to enjoy it by the system but I see it as so common I can't deny their agency. This does not mean I think those fanatsies should rule their lives.

So the erotica consumed, the science reports and my personal experience to me all point to straight women enjoying that kind of thing. Don't shoot the messenger.

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I not purely into anything, I believe what makes sense to me. I don't call myself a radfem as I don't believe in the blank slate. I don't believe everything in Blanchardianism either.

Fair enough I sympathise with not being able to accept one side completely. Part of the story here is the science is not complete which leaves us open to debate. We have to speculate as we best know.

I don't see that as bad thing per se, if something is erroneous then it should be corrected. And if the theory starts not making sense at all, then it should be replaced with a better theory. And we if think Blanchardianism does a fairly good job at getting things right but has holes, and we have no better theory, and the other theories are worse, then I don't really see a problem with Blanchardian model being tweaked into a better model. Theories don't get born perfect.

It's not that it's completely inaccurate in some of the things it records but I don't think it ultimately holds together.

I do think the science will move on.

It's not uncommon for people to be romantically attracted to those they are sexually attracted to. I would imagine many paraphilias, including AGP, also have romantic components. I think such a component would be easy to create an identity around. Many trans people (who I suspect are AGP/AAP) talk about their gender identity in with what I perceive as some type of romantic longing. But I am an outsider though, so I can't say for sure if it's like that. Maybe you could describe.

I really don't relate to the romantic idea of it. It's more like it puts me in the mood. So I would think it unusual behaviour but not unrelated to the rest of sexuality going on. I can read and see women putting themselves in the mood for sexual play through gender expression. It's not absolutely common but it looks more related than not.

A couple points I'd add. I wasn't fixated on one aspect. I didn't masturbate endlessly. I didn't masturbate at all. I just knew it was vaguely sexual, as well as the interest in some form of dominant women. It didn't make sense until a few years into adulthood. That's not from seclusion but from it making no sense in a regular heterosexual world. I knew of gay men in dresses or transwomen but I never saw myself as those.

I am saying what i said before, I think there might be a biological mechanism to self-socialization and that early hormones could perhaps influence who we are more likely to imitate as children. You are free to interpret that as essentializing if that is essentializing to you.

I'm probably in agreement on that.

I often compare gender to language and we do have a natural ability as children to learn language.

It feels like my personality, I assume feminine women often feel their femininity is just their personality too (if we don't count things people only do reluctantly because they feel they have to). I am assume I was socialized, I didn't invent a new gender expression, I was probably imitating other people unconsciously. And I was seen as a girl, so I was treated like a girl. I was quite intensely bullied by girl gangs for many years for being a tomboy (they wanted to teach me being more feminine and were angry at me for not complying), and that was social experience I probably wouldn't have had had I not been a girl, and it probably affected me somewhat.

That makes sense to me.

Though there is a question in gender that goes like this. It does look cultural, or maybe like we most have a natural talent for learning gender. Sometimes that can vary. But how much is innate? How much of the canvas is blank?

Like masculine women such as yourself. Are you learning the language of masculinity or are you expressing innate elements of masculinity as well as cultural aspects? I hope we learn the science on this.

I will probably have to get back to this another day, as I'm a bit short on time right now.

About the masculinity and femininity. I think people can find masculinity and femininity in men or women sexually appealing. Would you agree?

QT, if gender is innate to identity by Houseplant in GCdebatesQT

[–]theory_of_this 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

This has gotten silly. It really isn't the topic.