He was wearing a crop top at the time and talking about how he recently signed up for a burlesque class — things the other straight guys I was dating last year would definitely never do. Those things, the crop top and the burlesque class, are evidence of his internal freedom and his ability to express his full humanity.
His freedom from dehumanizing gender roles is extremely hot and also makes him a really good partner. I know that a lot of women pursue and prefer men who embody the truncated human expression of compliance with restrictive gender roles.
how's it been workingMALE LESBIANISM WAS CREATED TO RESPOND TO DESIRES EXPRESSED BY REAL WOMEN.
‘sexual selection’ don't know what it is about the internet but it makes people talk about such beautiful important things in this inorganic terminology. like you're nerds observing woodlice. 'sexual selection' Jesus christ .
Well one of them already has a salt-and-pepper beard and a receding hairline, so you can see how she might not have realised he was that young.Perhaps we're getting closer to a proper balance now that women having relations with underage boys has been normalized enough that it's an acceptable attention-grabbing reason to grab a magazine/tabloid.
View attachment 18092
you're probably not that wrong to be honest, I have no idea reallyI'm probably wrong, but it seems like shaming people for being "nerdy" when they have nvld/autism is like shaming with a physical disability for their physical disabilities.
i don't really have an alternative to hand but there's probably loads. it's not particularly directed at you, it's directed at the way people write about sec and love on the internet in general. there's a weird evolutionary science perspective that loads of people come at it from and I don't like it. I think it's an American thing but I'm not sureOh, come on - Genuine question - what words would you use to convey the same thing in a way that didn't offend your sensibilities?
mostly comes out of a harvard department that was funded mostly by Jeffrey Epstein. Sounds like a joke but isn't.i don't really have an alternative to hand but there's probably loads. it's not particularly directed at you, it's directed at the way people write about sec and love on the internet in general. there's a weird evolutionary science perspective that loads of people come at it from and I don't like it. I think it's an American thing but I'm not sure
Oh yeah, the Epstein School of Justified Noncing, I've heard of that.mostly comes out of a harvard department that was funded mostly by Jeffrey Epstein. Sounds like a joke but isn't.
It's not something that does or doesn't "work". It's not instrumental. You think all value is instrumental because you're possessed by patriarchal capitalist ideology. But we already knew that.how's it been working
We don't need to talk about sexual selection to make this point. Women do sometimes support the patriarchy, but they do this in many ways other than just their choices in partners, a point I've made repeatedly. What does it mean that they sometimes contribute to a system that hides and devales their own femininity? It just means that anyone can support the patriarchy regardless of identity.That twitter post has a truth I don't see much mentioned "I know that a lot of women pursue and prefer men who embody the truncated human expression of compliance with restrictive gender roles." - women are just as responsible for "patriarchy"/"toxic masculinity" by enforcing this through sexual selection - then again, if women are the people enforcing it, what does that mean?
All the women I've talked to about it support it, agree with it and like it. But you were the one who thought popularity determines a theory's value because again you remain attached to capitalist notions of success totally unrelated to any sort of intellectual achievement.you said it was created to respond, i just wanted to know if it was responding. How it was received. "Recieving" is a feminine virtue, you understand that one.
Go tell it to the other Mean Girls, Reg.And fashion is superficial. You are supposed to 'judge' someones fashion choices as far as innocuous judging falls under general communication. Clearly the guy described in the post wants to communicate something about his sensitivities with his fashion choices.
The talk of balance doesn't ring true to me as these discussions often seem to go one way: men "getting in touch with their feminine side." That isn't balance. That's pulling everything in one direction. Are women who get into combat sports and other traditionally masculine activities somehow reduced by it?
It doesn't sound like you want to "combine" masculinity and femininity, though. It just sounds like you want to eliminate masculinity (because it is bad) and promote femininity (because it is good).The point is actually that the dominant masculine culture pushes everything to one side. It tells men to eliminate their femininity entirely. So men need to reengage with their femininity since they are already masculine. We need to regain touch with feminine qualities the patriarchy tells us to destroy before we can achieve balance. It's like in Hegel, we need to understand the negation before we can combine both the reality and its negation (in this case masculinity and femininity)
It doesn't matter how it sounds. I know what I said. I argued that I wanted to combine masculinity and femininity in a balanced man. I never said I wanted to eliminate ANYTHING. And I repeatedly said that both masculinity and femininity involved both good and bad qualities.It doesn't sound like you want to "combine" masculinity and femininity, though. It just sounds like you want to eliminate masculinity (because it is bad) and promote femininity (because it is good).