All right, this was long and went in a lot of different directions. I'm on my mobile device at work giving myself arthritis in the thumbs so I'm not able to address every single individual point that I disagree with or what further evidence of, so instead I've gotta "strawman" you for lack of a better term, break it down into simplified arguments and give my respond to them individually.
"Straight men saying they're turned on by two women together is ingenuine/signalling/a cope":
To give the most crude/grug counter argument straight away it doesn't really make any logical sense at all that I wouldn't enjoy seeing twice the tits, twice the ass, twice the vagina, twice the soft lips interacting in an erotic/sexual way. Two women together is basically the same as foreplay, what you do to get her revved up before going to home base and if revving her up also revs you up... I just don't even see how this could need explaining.
I don't remember any examples from my lived experience at all that would suggest a man has anything to gain from lying about this and I don't know who you're talking about on "the right" who also talks about this. The reason I've mentioned it on notes a few times is to play in the sandbox with everyone else talking about their fetishes and also to signal I'm not a sex-hating prude chud. It can serve is a good bludgeon against the left by revealing them to not be nearly as sex positive as they claim (look up what poly redditors say about "unicorn hunters") and it signals 90s playboy "hedonism for the boys". Those are the reasons ive brought it up at all, I'm not really big on sex talk unless someone else brings it up first.
I wouldn't argue it was "pushed" in the 90s. Pushed implies it was a conscious agenda. It was there but I think it was more of a fashion than an agenda. My interest in the idea definitely predates any exposure to actual porn, if there was any external origin it would have been Xena Warrior Princess. I do believe I thought about it even before I saw that show but I'm not going to claim that as an absolute fact because memory from that long ago is known to be unreliable.
Your best argument that heterosexual-man-enjoying-girl-on-girl is not natural or intuitive is that zoomers arent into it. I could NAXALT this so hard right now because exactly three hours before writing this my zoomer co-worker told me all about the time he had an MFF threesome and how his favorite part was watching the girls together. But of course, we don't naxalt here and you are correct that overall there's much less interest in this than there was in the past and greater interest in the past coincided with greater exposure to the idea in media.
My response to that is just because people are going to be more into something if they're exposed to it while they're developing doesnt mean theyre faking it to "prove theyre not gay" or whatever, doesnt mean theres nothing inherently appealing about it. If you compare it to hetero anal for example, theres obviously way more interest in that than there ever was in the past and there are people into it because they saw it in porn when they were 13 who in another timeline would find it disgusting. There are also statistical outliers who would have been into it regardless. And, most importantly, whether 5% or 95% of people positively to the idea, it can still be argued that it objectively makes sense to find the soft, tight, forbidden hole of a woman appealing. Same dynamic basically.
I'll address your other points and the dykes vs fags question in another comment below because this comment is already long and I want to quickly double check you didn't pre-emptively refute the points I'm going to make on that topic
In the middle section where you make the case we should be more permissive of man+man same sex relations both in general and in comparison to woman+woman same sex relations, I basically agree with most of your points individually but reject the conclusion.
I have thought about the fact that more fags would mean more women left for me (if maximum bodies was still the goal) and that is a funny thought. I've heard a post-right WN eugenecist argue we should permit male homosexuality so they remove their genes from the gene pool instead of staying in the closet and procreating. There's something to that idea as well.
I also outright reject the idea homosexuality is caused by molestation. Thats a whole topic on its own so I'll just leave that there.
And I agree its very counter productive for a civilisation to have low IQ grugs bully all of the male children out of taking any interest in art, theatre, dancing etc. Its beyond the topic of this comment but "toxic masculinity" is most definitely real and is something I encounter every day. You can't win with these guys though, you take away their homophobia, they'll just find another weapon (often its agreeing and amplifying to "yeah i fucking love faggotry now lets talk about dicks and bumsex all day").
My position theres an optimal amount of homophobia in a society and its not 0. Being a bit grossed out by the idea of two dudes together is a natural instinct that helped us function as a species for a very long time and we should at the very least NOT bludgeon it out of young men by sheer force of propaganda as we do presently.
I believe this at the same time as feeling a mature, reasonable, intelligent person isnt going to care what people do in their own bedrooms with other adults and isnt going to discount a valuable individual on this basis.
But a healthy society will have some kind of social stigma around homosexuality if not legal restrictions on it and you better believe it should be way harsher on man+man than woman+woman relations just as the majority of societies throughout history have been.
Why? You made a decent case that having a large amount of women considering lesbianism an option (30% according to you) will create bad incentives. Here's what I think you can expect if every single male above 0% gay on the Kinsey scale has actually acted on it (I don't think we're anywhere near there):
- a large amount of men who bottomed before while they were still developing becoming "faggy" when they wouldn't have otherwise and therefore becoming far more susceptible to leftist BS
- a large amount having topped leading to a lot of alpha dudes walking around looking at us all as their catamites and being gross
- it will become difficult to have a male centric organisation of any sort (military, fraternity, sports team) that isnt infiltrated by a fag polycule and subjected to nepotism based on dick sucking skills
- patient zero, diseases etc
I'm not a hypocrite, I'm not saying lesbianism, heterosexual promiscuity or mff threesome polygamy wouldn't also have disruptive effects at scale and shouldnt also have stigmas attached, I just think the way people sort of intuitively rank man+man as the worst of the ones mentioned is pretty spot on and not in need of rethinking.
Of course I think trannies are way worse, but on to the next topic which is lesbians [who aren't doing it performatively for my enjoyment]....
I can't argue with your claim that zoomer girls are becoming lesbian wgtows, I have nothing to do with zoomer women generally (i worked with a very nice zoomer tomboy i got on with well last year who claimed to be bi, was covered in tattoos and had awful political opinions, so basically the meme personified, but she was/is lovely in spite of this).
It sounds completely plausible so I'll take your word for it. And its for sure a noble cause if you want to help zoomer guys increase their prospects by meming that female-female sexual contact is really gross and depraved (not true). I'm skeptical that it would move the needle when they are already so incentivised to wgtow for other reasons and are allegedly huge dildo masturbators. But go ahead.
I'll add my opinions and observations of actual lesbians if you have any interest:
- i worked security at a gay bar for a while. During that time, I observed that there were at least 5 distinct tribes of "lesbian" which had very little overlap. I summise that this is a reflection of the highly diverse motivations women have for pursuing relations with other women as well as the highly variable intensity and "flavour" of sexual and romantic impulses that exist among women. This is in contrast to the gay men who are monolithic, even if alpha tops and sissy bottoms present very differently theyre all intermingling all the time and they're all there for the same reason.
- the above is why I think the internet rightoid meme of "lesbians arent real" is a typical rightoid meme in that it originates with an observation of a nuance the mainstream narrative was missing (that lesbianism is nothing like male homosexuality because women are different to men) and its provocative and funny but if you actually literally believe it youre a moron and it ultimately results in socially inexperienced men believing shit thats actually MORE wrong than the mainstream narrative. If i'm not being clear enough: there are absolutely real lesbians with 0 attraction to men.
- "politically motivated man hating femenist lesbian" is ONE of the 5 tribes and they're not that significant, or weren't at that time in the early 00s. Hating lesbians is not much of a better proxy for hating leftists than just hating all women IMO
- it might be different with zoomer women but my experience with millenial women is "had a girlfriend in the past" is neutral. Whats in between "red flag" and "green flag"? Its an "orange/yellow flag". It doesn't matter, I don't give a fuck.
- as i described "fag polycule infiltration" in the above comment, I don't think the same threat exists with lesbians. For one, shitty ambitious annoying women are already behaving so much like a "femborg" I don't see how it could get much worse if they all muff dove each other. We don't want fags everywhere because we don't want them to behave like women sucking their way to the top but women are already women 🤷♂️
- I agree we would look huge pussies being too threatened by lesbianism. I don't see any need to transcend and rise above this
Dude, you seem like a high-IQ guy with a genuinely interesting and unique take on things, but please tighten it up. Brevity is the soul of wit. I see a piece of yours and click on it and when I see that little slider on my screen signifying a long piece I click away again. Or I quit on it 10 minutes in when I still don’t know what your point is.
All right, this was long and went in a lot of different directions. I'm on my mobile device at work giving myself arthritis in the thumbs so I'm not able to address every single individual point that I disagree with or what further evidence of, so instead I've gotta "strawman" you for lack of a better term, break it down into simplified arguments and give my respond to them individually.
"Straight men saying they're turned on by two women together is ingenuine/signalling/a cope":
To give the most crude/grug counter argument straight away it doesn't really make any logical sense at all that I wouldn't enjoy seeing twice the tits, twice the ass, twice the vagina, twice the soft lips interacting in an erotic/sexual way. Two women together is basically the same as foreplay, what you do to get her revved up before going to home base and if revving her up also revs you up... I just don't even see how this could need explaining.
I don't remember any examples from my lived experience at all that would suggest a man has anything to gain from lying about this and I don't know who you're talking about on "the right" who also talks about this. The reason I've mentioned it on notes a few times is to play in the sandbox with everyone else talking about their fetishes and also to signal I'm not a sex-hating prude chud. It can serve is a good bludgeon against the left by revealing them to not be nearly as sex positive as they claim (look up what poly redditors say about "unicorn hunters") and it signals 90s playboy "hedonism for the boys". Those are the reasons ive brought it up at all, I'm not really big on sex talk unless someone else brings it up first.
I wouldn't argue it was "pushed" in the 90s. Pushed implies it was a conscious agenda. It was there but I think it was more of a fashion than an agenda. My interest in the idea definitely predates any exposure to actual porn, if there was any external origin it would have been Xena Warrior Princess. I do believe I thought about it even before I saw that show but I'm not going to claim that as an absolute fact because memory from that long ago is known to be unreliable.
Your best argument that heterosexual-man-enjoying-girl-on-girl is not natural or intuitive is that zoomers arent into it. I could NAXALT this so hard right now because exactly three hours before writing this my zoomer co-worker told me all about the time he had an MFF threesome and how his favorite part was watching the girls together. But of course, we don't naxalt here and you are correct that overall there's much less interest in this than there was in the past and greater interest in the past coincided with greater exposure to the idea in media.
My response to that is just because people are going to be more into something if they're exposed to it while they're developing doesnt mean theyre faking it to "prove theyre not gay" or whatever, doesnt mean theres nothing inherently appealing about it. If you compare it to hetero anal for example, theres obviously way more interest in that than there ever was in the past and there are people into it because they saw it in porn when they were 13 who in another timeline would find it disgusting. There are also statistical outliers who would have been into it regardless. And, most importantly, whether 5% or 95% of people positively to the idea, it can still be argued that it objectively makes sense to find the soft, tight, forbidden hole of a woman appealing. Same dynamic basically.
I'll address your other points and the dykes vs fags question in another comment below because this comment is already long and I want to quickly double check you didn't pre-emptively refute the points I'm going to make on that topic
"Dykes vs fags"
In the middle section where you make the case we should be more permissive of man+man same sex relations both in general and in comparison to woman+woman same sex relations, I basically agree with most of your points individually but reject the conclusion.
I have thought about the fact that more fags would mean more women left for me (if maximum bodies was still the goal) and that is a funny thought. I've heard a post-right WN eugenecist argue we should permit male homosexuality so they remove their genes from the gene pool instead of staying in the closet and procreating. There's something to that idea as well.
I also outright reject the idea homosexuality is caused by molestation. Thats a whole topic on its own so I'll just leave that there.
And I agree its very counter productive for a civilisation to have low IQ grugs bully all of the male children out of taking any interest in art, theatre, dancing etc. Its beyond the topic of this comment but "toxic masculinity" is most definitely real and is something I encounter every day. You can't win with these guys though, you take away their homophobia, they'll just find another weapon (often its agreeing and amplifying to "yeah i fucking love faggotry now lets talk about dicks and bumsex all day").
My position theres an optimal amount of homophobia in a society and its not 0. Being a bit grossed out by the idea of two dudes together is a natural instinct that helped us function as a species for a very long time and we should at the very least NOT bludgeon it out of young men by sheer force of propaganda as we do presently.
I believe this at the same time as feeling a mature, reasonable, intelligent person isnt going to care what people do in their own bedrooms with other adults and isnt going to discount a valuable individual on this basis.
But a healthy society will have some kind of social stigma around homosexuality if not legal restrictions on it and you better believe it should be way harsher on man+man than woman+woman relations just as the majority of societies throughout history have been.
Why? You made a decent case that having a large amount of women considering lesbianism an option (30% according to you) will create bad incentives. Here's what I think you can expect if every single male above 0% gay on the Kinsey scale has actually acted on it (I don't think we're anywhere near there):
- a large amount of men who bottomed before while they were still developing becoming "faggy" when they wouldn't have otherwise and therefore becoming far more susceptible to leftist BS
- a large amount having topped leading to a lot of alpha dudes walking around looking at us all as their catamites and being gross
- it will become difficult to have a male centric organisation of any sort (military, fraternity, sports team) that isnt infiltrated by a fag polycule and subjected to nepotism based on dick sucking skills
- patient zero, diseases etc
I'm not a hypocrite, I'm not saying lesbianism, heterosexual promiscuity or mff threesome polygamy wouldn't also have disruptive effects at scale and shouldnt also have stigmas attached, I just think the way people sort of intuitively rank man+man as the worst of the ones mentioned is pretty spot on and not in need of rethinking.
Of course I think trannies are way worse, but on to the next topic which is lesbians [who aren't doing it performatively for my enjoyment]....
On the topic of actual lesbians
I can't argue with your claim that zoomer girls are becoming lesbian wgtows, I have nothing to do with zoomer women generally (i worked with a very nice zoomer tomboy i got on with well last year who claimed to be bi, was covered in tattoos and had awful political opinions, so basically the meme personified, but she was/is lovely in spite of this).
It sounds completely plausible so I'll take your word for it. And its for sure a noble cause if you want to help zoomer guys increase their prospects by meming that female-female sexual contact is really gross and depraved (not true). I'm skeptical that it would move the needle when they are already so incentivised to wgtow for other reasons and are allegedly huge dildo masturbators. But go ahead.
I'll add my opinions and observations of actual lesbians if you have any interest:
- i worked security at a gay bar for a while. During that time, I observed that there were at least 5 distinct tribes of "lesbian" which had very little overlap. I summise that this is a reflection of the highly diverse motivations women have for pursuing relations with other women as well as the highly variable intensity and "flavour" of sexual and romantic impulses that exist among women. This is in contrast to the gay men who are monolithic, even if alpha tops and sissy bottoms present very differently theyre all intermingling all the time and they're all there for the same reason.
- the above is why I think the internet rightoid meme of "lesbians arent real" is a typical rightoid meme in that it originates with an observation of a nuance the mainstream narrative was missing (that lesbianism is nothing like male homosexuality because women are different to men) and its provocative and funny but if you actually literally believe it youre a moron and it ultimately results in socially inexperienced men believing shit thats actually MORE wrong than the mainstream narrative. If i'm not being clear enough: there are absolutely real lesbians with 0 attraction to men.
- "politically motivated man hating femenist lesbian" is ONE of the 5 tribes and they're not that significant, or weren't at that time in the early 00s. Hating lesbians is not much of a better proxy for hating leftists than just hating all women IMO
- it might be different with zoomer women but my experience with millenial women is "had a girlfriend in the past" is neutral. Whats in between "red flag" and "green flag"? Its an "orange/yellow flag". It doesn't matter, I don't give a fuck.
- as i described "fag polycule infiltration" in the above comment, I don't think the same threat exists with lesbians. For one, shitty ambitious annoying women are already behaving so much like a "femborg" I don't see how it could get much worse if they all muff dove each other. We don't want fags everywhere because we don't want them to behave like women sucking their way to the top but women are already women 🤷♂️
- I agree we would look huge pussies being too threatened by lesbianism. I don't see any need to transcend and rise above this
Dude, you seem like a high-IQ guy with a genuinely interesting and unique take on things, but please tighten it up. Brevity is the soul of wit. I see a piece of yours and click on it and when I see that little slider on my screen signifying a long piece I click away again. Or I quit on it 10 minutes in when I still don’t know what your point is.
Try taking some Vivanse or Modafinil
Do you know queer women are killed everyday? Why spout this homophobic creepy stuff? Gross article
That’s one helluva 5 page run on sentence you got there
Looksmaxxing is clearly an evolved response to some of the things mentioned here, though not just Gen Z lesbianism but also straight women
I love your writing but I wish you used periods more often
It really should
Lesbianism being akin to joining a religion whereas gayness is akin to hair color is a good heuristic.