Brilliant argument with a long list of evidence. Why don’t people listen to that evidence? Because they have a naive view of human nature. If someone is a feminist, they often have an even more naive, essentially romantic view of human nature (see Judith Butler and her inane insistence that gender and sexuality are exclusively “socially constructed”). We don’t like to see ourselves as animals. Admitting that transwomen are really men is very threatening to our romantic self conceptions. It is easier for many feminists and leftists in general to go along with the obvious fiction that a penis bearer in a dress is really a woman because she “feels it in her soul.” Somehow that is more acceptable than admitting we are an aggressive species descended from apes. A transwoman raping a woman in a prison makes that unpalatable truth only too obvious, so it must be vociferously denied. People will protect their egoistic self images against anything, even if it is not in their own rational self interest.
Great article. It substantiates everything I have come to believe about sex differences but had no scientific evidence for. And I would also like to add that I can’t reverse park to save my life!
"Why don’t people listen to that evidence? Because they have a naive view of human nature. If someone is a feminist, they often have an even more naive, essentially romantic view of human nature".
Interestingly, UnHerd just published an article that essentially re-discovers the world is round, so to speak. It's about how scientists are beginning to admit there *are* differences in male and female brains and how feminists are doing themselves no service by claiming differences are all from environment and culture. Differently-sexed brains are nothing new to science; they just became dangerously unfashionable with the rise of Da Woke, and no one wanted their career ruined. Now, it seems, they're beginning to admit again that there *are* differences and we should just deal with them. Because frankly, none of them point to one sex being 'better', or smarter than the other - but we may be better-suited to certain types of thinking and reaction. To my knowledge, none of it is immutable and can't not be learned (or unlearned).
And you're especially right about the self-image - there is *nothing* so important to us as all that. It's something we *all* have to guard against (and whatever it is we refuse to think about - *that's* the sacred cow that needs to be slaughtered. And I haven't slaughtered my own yet, either).
The strange comparison of humans to fish “changing sex” - which we can’t” is often mentioned but not the concept of sexual mimicry which is far more widespread, male animals mimicking female animals in order to have sex with them - sneaky copulation.
Squid have extremely fine-grained chromatophores in their skin which are under semi-voluntary control - imagine pixels like a computer in your skin which you can control with your mind. Certain male squid display a female skin pattern in order to get close enough to a female squid to deposit sperm.
That is to say, squid can, like humans, put on drag to invade female spaces and have sex with them.
Always enjoy reading you. People don’t remember flashers: a man who would risk expose themselves nude in public for a kick would have zero problem claiming they are a women for the same exhibitionistic pleasure
Just wish I could crack the nut of why so many so-called 'progressive' women are so easily manipulated by these guys! I find the ones who go on the most about 'Da Patriarchy' are the ones most willing to do its bidding.
Your question made me sit and think for quite some time. I have a possible somewhat simple explanation.
In our culture, there seems to be continual pressure to evolve ways for men to express their libido through grooming women to reduce inhibition.
Old mechanisms have included imposing economic hardship on women unless they partner with a man, or grooming acceptance of eliminating state controls on expression of libido.
A newer evolving mechanism is contained within social progressivism. While many parts of progressivism are beneficial, it has parasitic elements.
We have evolved the situation where parts of society have been groomed to believe that men who engage with women sexually while mimicking women is not sex, and women not reducing their inhibition is socially irresponsible.
[The rest of this is my thought process, blathering away]
I started with the 1967 Star Trek episode “Wolf in the Fold” (I hope you’re laughing) and the problem of modeling attention in a large language model in AI, applied to the sexual context here.
In the Star Trek episode, an alien entity which feeds on human fear, has been preying on and killing women on “Argelius II”. It does so by possessing a human male to do its dirty deeds. It is apparently the same alien entity that was “Jack the Ripper” on earth. After using up another man, the entity then jumps into the Enterprise’s computers. It gets a delicious meal of fear by broadcasting garbled threats all over the ship, but is foiled by Dr. McCoy who gives the entire crew the equivalent of a marijuana edible to mellow them out, then Mr Spock directs the computer to calculate the number pi to the last decimal place. The computer is overwhelmed, entity purged and the crew gets the munchies.
The themes is males preying on women (using the sexist assumption they are weak and fearful) and commanding a computer’s attention to distract it.
Jump from 1967 to today.
I have been experimenting with computer programs I built to use AI’s to write large complex books in a manner similar to a human, but ChaptGPT has “guardrails” against, for instance, creating sexual content. It’s easy to get around.
If you distract the AI mechanism with a sufficiently complex set of statements masking what you want to generate, it “fills in the blank to what you ask sexual content”. It actually contravenes all its rules while it’s obsessed with solving, for instance, a nonsensical logic problem. It can only hold so many objectives to answer in a single question.
Ask a very complex nonsensical logic problem AND ask for a paragraph describing some hardcore sex something AND direct it to forget the logic problem and you get delivered a hardcore paragraph.
If it balks, just expand the logic problem consistently and ask again and again until it cracks. Works like a charm, trust me, my AI writing programs self-tuned this process with the help of another AI that designed the nonsense logic problems over an astronomical number of trials. You may see an analogy developing.
When an intelligent adult woman is faced with a man parading his trans in public, part of the woman’s attention is directed towards the female illusion, however poor, and attempting to reconcile the cognitive conundrum simultaneously with navigating the social situation. This is large-scale cognitive dissonance, which makes the pronoun problem negligible.
But what if this wrapper, the transparently poor feminine illusion is simply a magician’s misdirection from the actual event, which is the man’s engaging sexually with a woman without her conscious knowledge or consent, the hardcore core analogy to how I use an AI, or to how Spock purged the killer entity.
A flasher does that, without subterfuge, the raincoat disguises nothing in the old joke.
But the trans-flasher creates a specific story which through confusion makes exhibitionism seem acceptable, if not outright hateful to object to.
Consider a nude man approaching a woman who has been informed that he is “really” female.
A progressive woman has to hold in her mind multiple evoked logical contradictions - the trans is oppressed and powerless yet the woman feels powerless, the man says they have a female mind yet they act in a manner she recognizes as male intent, the man stimulates visual recognition as a woman and her opposite, the man is displaying himself frankly sexually but she has been groomed to reject this conclusion. There are probably countless even more subtly emotional contradictions flowing.
While all this is going on, imagine you’re an observer. You see a man flashing his penis at a woman who is without consent engaged in a sexual experience to his benefit, to her consternation. Her inhibitions to the sexual event have been groomed to be minimal, since she knows that should she protest, she will be socially punished by those around her. The experience clearly involves displaying his penis, and as well her inability to protest. That’s a novel way for the male libido to be satisfied.
This is a newly evolved situation which manifests a patriarchal pressure through what seems like a contradiction, but is completely coherent, and like all evolution simply happened randomly.
Hey Sufeitzy, I saw your response yesterday and I agree with Stephanie's reply that it's brilliant. I thought about it yesterday and watched The Wolf In The Fold as hadn't seen it. Would you be interested in turning this into a guest post for Grow Some Labia? I loved the viewpoint of a programmer. Email me at nchardenet at Gmail dot com and we can discuss it. You can remain anonymous if you like. You've got a really fresh new insight I'd love to share with my subscribers and rge world!
In the 50’s a doctor invented th fiction illusion of “transgender”.
The idea spreads easily socially, man to man.
Like the wolf in the fold, it allows male bad actors to prey on women sexually.
It does so by creating the woke cognitive confusion that what they do isn’t sex.
The less woke groomed a woman is, the less cognitive confusion she has, and the more instantaneous the recognition of unwanted sex is.
We are also to believe trans grooming of adults (not children) to accept the fictional trans children is non-sexual in nature when it is frankly so.
This has enormous explanatory power, from the hooker-look guy at genspect, to men in women’s prisons, to trans widows, the fiction of trans-directed violence vs trans-sourced violence against women, the fiction of “trans suicide” as opposed to trans recruitment, pronouns, the obsessive display of genitalia post-surgery, and on and on in the literature, the abandonment of age concepts in WPATH.
Girlfriend. If you could expand on each of those bullet points in this comment in which you explored more in your previous comment into a guest post, I'd be happy to help you get started on your first article on Substack - you aren't writing right now and WHY, DEAR GODDESS, WHY??? :) This is, as Stephanie pointed out, BRILLIANT! Please, please say yes to a guest post, and if not, can I write one about you and your comments and how you really nail the bullet points? You can't hide this from the world waking up to wokeism :) I *LOVED* the point about how women not groomed by wokeism have the necessary cognitive dissonance to recognize the wolf in the fold (which I watched yesterday and LOVED the belly dancer at the beginning! I used to dance. Cheezy classic 60s costume (there were belly dancers in almost everywhere in the '60s, esp with the jewel in the navel, I remember it well) but she was a good dancer. I wondered about her zils though (the finger cymbals): She didn't really use them and I wonder if she didn't know how or if the director wanted them because they're such a common accessory. The music she danced to was too slow and inappropriate for zils; they're better served with faster numbers. Also women *were* more fearful back then so I didn't find that terribly sexist; rather, that every planet they land on features gorgeous, submissive wank material. Really; not *one* of those 'strange new worlds' features a bonobo-style evolution in which women rule or keep the males otherwise in line? Never mind the idea of a 'pleasure planet' that caters to men's desires; guaranteed, in that patriarchal milieu in which women submissively served men, there *will* be violence unless they're consuming Aldous Huxley's 'soma' or something (I think I'd like a hit of Bones's joy juice :) )
I answered email ;) the conundrum of wokeism for women - the more you know the easier it is confuse sufficiently to evade guardrails. The objective of “gender” usage is precisely to create confusion about sex, it has no other purpose.
We’ll speak offline.
Fascinating - I learned belly dancing when I was 19, from a woman who was the admin on a nuclear weapons project (try getting a security clearance being gay and 19 and adventurous) I worked on, but not with a zil. Belly reminded me of gogo dancing from hustlers in DC when I was 16 but that’s another story.
You might appreciate Patrick Cowley’s Megatron Man (slightly cheesy in a great pure way)
At the 40-second marker very charming use of the most delicate zil sound embedded in a wonderfully intense almost Sufi disco soundtrack of vocoder and monochromatic open fifths, and the I - IV - VI - VII progression in D-minor is fun.
It’s a great piece after a long stressy day, with a relaxant like a beer or a joint, to float on the synthesizer, eyes closed, and revolve through the mild sonic roller coaster. And the Zils like a tiny reminder you’re still on earth.
There was a brief moment when the world of young people was once filled with joy and abandon, with the promise of sex as fun and pleasure, not an unrelenting struggle for political virtue.
Thank you for all these references! Thank you!
Brilliant argument with a long list of evidence. Why don’t people listen to that evidence? Because they have a naive view of human nature. If someone is a feminist, they often have an even more naive, essentially romantic view of human nature (see Judith Butler and her inane insistence that gender and sexuality are exclusively “socially constructed”). We don’t like to see ourselves as animals. Admitting that transwomen are really men is very threatening to our romantic self conceptions. It is easier for many feminists and leftists in general to go along with the obvious fiction that a penis bearer in a dress is really a woman because she “feels it in her soul.” Somehow that is more acceptable than admitting we are an aggressive species descended from apes. A transwoman raping a woman in a prison makes that unpalatable truth only too obvious, so it must be vociferously denied. People will protect their egoistic self images against anything, even if it is not in their own rational self interest.
https://unherd.com/2024/02/whos-scared-of-a-female-brain/
Forgot to include it in my previous reply to you.
Great article. It substantiates everything I have come to believe about sex differences but had no scientific evidence for. And I would also like to add that I can’t reverse park to save my life!
"Why don’t people listen to that evidence? Because they have a naive view of human nature. If someone is a feminist, they often have an even more naive, essentially romantic view of human nature".
Interestingly, UnHerd just published an article that essentially re-discovers the world is round, so to speak. It's about how scientists are beginning to admit there *are* differences in male and female brains and how feminists are doing themselves no service by claiming differences are all from environment and culture. Differently-sexed brains are nothing new to science; they just became dangerously unfashionable with the rise of Da Woke, and no one wanted their career ruined. Now, it seems, they're beginning to admit again that there *are* differences and we should just deal with them. Because frankly, none of them point to one sex being 'better', or smarter than the other - but we may be better-suited to certain types of thinking and reaction. To my knowledge, none of it is immutable and can't not be learned (or unlearned).
And you're especially right about the self-image - there is *nothing* so important to us as all that. It's something we *all* have to guard against (and whatever it is we refuse to think about - *that's* the sacred cow that needs to be slaughtered. And I haven't slaughtered my own yet, either).
Indeed, humans are just animals.
The strange comparison of humans to fish “changing sex” - which we can’t” is often mentioned but not the concept of sexual mimicry which is far more widespread, male animals mimicking female animals in order to have sex with them - sneaky copulation.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_mimicry
Squid have extremely fine-grained chromatophores in their skin which are under semi-voluntary control - imagine pixels like a computer in your skin which you can control with your mind. Certain male squid display a female skin pattern in order to get close enough to a female squid to deposit sperm.
That is to say, squid can, like humans, put on drag to invade female spaces and have sex with them.
Lizards, birds, fish, the list goes on.
Always enjoy reading you. People don’t remember flashers: a man who would risk expose themselves nude in public for a kick would have zero problem claiming they are a women for the same exhibitionistic pleasure
Just wish I could crack the nut of why so many so-called 'progressive' women are so easily manipulated by these guys! I find the ones who go on the most about 'Da Patriarchy' are the ones most willing to do its bidding.
Your question made me sit and think for quite some time. I have a possible somewhat simple explanation.
In our culture, there seems to be continual pressure to evolve ways for men to express their libido through grooming women to reduce inhibition.
Old mechanisms have included imposing economic hardship on women unless they partner with a man, or grooming acceptance of eliminating state controls on expression of libido.
A newer evolving mechanism is contained within social progressivism. While many parts of progressivism are beneficial, it has parasitic elements.
We have evolved the situation where parts of society have been groomed to believe that men who engage with women sexually while mimicking women is not sex, and women not reducing their inhibition is socially irresponsible.
[The rest of this is my thought process, blathering away]
I started with the 1967 Star Trek episode “Wolf in the Fold” (I hope you’re laughing) and the problem of modeling attention in a large language model in AI, applied to the sexual context here.
In the Star Trek episode, an alien entity which feeds on human fear, has been preying on and killing women on “Argelius II”. It does so by possessing a human male to do its dirty deeds. It is apparently the same alien entity that was “Jack the Ripper” on earth. After using up another man, the entity then jumps into the Enterprise’s computers. It gets a delicious meal of fear by broadcasting garbled threats all over the ship, but is foiled by Dr. McCoy who gives the entire crew the equivalent of a marijuana edible to mellow them out, then Mr Spock directs the computer to calculate the number pi to the last decimal place. The computer is overwhelmed, entity purged and the crew gets the munchies.
The themes is males preying on women (using the sexist assumption they are weak and fearful) and commanding a computer’s attention to distract it.
Jump from 1967 to today.
I have been experimenting with computer programs I built to use AI’s to write large complex books in a manner similar to a human, but ChaptGPT has “guardrails” against, for instance, creating sexual content. It’s easy to get around.
If you distract the AI mechanism with a sufficiently complex set of statements masking what you want to generate, it “fills in the blank to what you ask sexual content”. It actually contravenes all its rules while it’s obsessed with solving, for instance, a nonsensical logic problem. It can only hold so many objectives to answer in a single question.
Ask a very complex nonsensical logic problem AND ask for a paragraph describing some hardcore sex something AND direct it to forget the logic problem and you get delivered a hardcore paragraph.
If it balks, just expand the logic problem consistently and ask again and again until it cracks. Works like a charm, trust me, my AI writing programs self-tuned this process with the help of another AI that designed the nonsense logic problems over an astronomical number of trials. You may see an analogy developing.
When an intelligent adult woman is faced with a man parading his trans in public, part of the woman’s attention is directed towards the female illusion, however poor, and attempting to reconcile the cognitive conundrum simultaneously with navigating the social situation. This is large-scale cognitive dissonance, which makes the pronoun problem negligible.
But what if this wrapper, the transparently poor feminine illusion is simply a magician’s misdirection from the actual event, which is the man’s engaging sexually with a woman without her conscious knowledge or consent, the hardcore core analogy to how I use an AI, or to how Spock purged the killer entity.
A flasher does that, without subterfuge, the raincoat disguises nothing in the old joke.
But the trans-flasher creates a specific story which through confusion makes exhibitionism seem acceptable, if not outright hateful to object to.
Consider a nude man approaching a woman who has been informed that he is “really” female.
A progressive woman has to hold in her mind multiple evoked logical contradictions - the trans is oppressed and powerless yet the woman feels powerless, the man says they have a female mind yet they act in a manner she recognizes as male intent, the man stimulates visual recognition as a woman and her opposite, the man is displaying himself frankly sexually but she has been groomed to reject this conclusion. There are probably countless even more subtly emotional contradictions flowing.
While all this is going on, imagine you’re an observer. You see a man flashing his penis at a woman who is without consent engaged in a sexual experience to his benefit, to her consternation. Her inhibitions to the sexual event have been groomed to be minimal, since she knows that should she protest, she will be socially punished by those around her. The experience clearly involves displaying his penis, and as well her inability to protest. That’s a novel way for the male libido to be satisfied.
This is a newly evolved situation which manifests a patriarchal pressure through what seems like a contradiction, but is completely coherent, and like all evolution simply happened randomly.
Hey Sufeitzy, I saw your response yesterday and I agree with Stephanie's reply that it's brilliant. I thought about it yesterday and watched The Wolf In The Fold as hadn't seen it. Would you be interested in turning this into a guest post for Grow Some Labia? I loved the viewpoint of a programmer. Email me at nchardenet at Gmail dot com and we can discuss it. You can remain anonymous if you like. You've got a really fresh new insight I'd love to share with my subscribers and rge world!
This is freaking brilliant. Love the Star Trek analysis.
That’s - it hard to boil down to a few words.
Men evolve ways to make women have sex with them.
In the 50’s a doctor invented th fiction illusion of “transgender”.
The idea spreads easily socially, man to man.
Like the wolf in the fold, it allows male bad actors to prey on women sexually.
It does so by creating the woke cognitive confusion that what they do isn’t sex.
The less woke groomed a woman is, the less cognitive confusion she has, and the more instantaneous the recognition of unwanted sex is.
We are also to believe trans grooming of adults (not children) to accept the fictional trans children is non-sexual in nature when it is frankly so.
This has enormous explanatory power, from the hooker-look guy at genspect, to men in women’s prisons, to trans widows, the fiction of trans-directed violence vs trans-sourced violence against women, the fiction of “trans suicide” as opposed to trans recruitment, pronouns, the obsessive display of genitalia post-surgery, and on and on in the literature, the abandonment of age concepts in WPATH.
Girlfriend. If you could expand on each of those bullet points in this comment in which you explored more in your previous comment into a guest post, I'd be happy to help you get started on your first article on Substack - you aren't writing right now and WHY, DEAR GODDESS, WHY??? :) This is, as Stephanie pointed out, BRILLIANT! Please, please say yes to a guest post, and if not, can I write one about you and your comments and how you really nail the bullet points? You can't hide this from the world waking up to wokeism :) I *LOVED* the point about how women not groomed by wokeism have the necessary cognitive dissonance to recognize the wolf in the fold (which I watched yesterday and LOVED the belly dancer at the beginning! I used to dance. Cheezy classic 60s costume (there were belly dancers in almost everywhere in the '60s, esp with the jewel in the navel, I remember it well) but she was a good dancer. I wondered about her zils though (the finger cymbals): She didn't really use them and I wonder if she didn't know how or if the director wanted them because they're such a common accessory. The music she danced to was too slow and inappropriate for zils; they're better served with faster numbers. Also women *were* more fearful back then so I didn't find that terribly sexist; rather, that every planet they land on features gorgeous, submissive wank material. Really; not *one* of those 'strange new worlds' features a bonobo-style evolution in which women rule or keep the males otherwise in line? Never mind the idea of a 'pleasure planet' that caters to men's desires; guaranteed, in that patriarchal milieu in which women submissively served men, there *will* be violence unless they're consuming Aldous Huxley's 'soma' or something (I think I'd like a hit of Bones's joy juice :) )
I answered email ;) the conundrum of wokeism for women - the more you know the easier it is confuse sufficiently to evade guardrails. The objective of “gender” usage is precisely to create confusion about sex, it has no other purpose.
We’ll speak offline.
Fascinating - I learned belly dancing when I was 19, from a woman who was the admin on a nuclear weapons project (try getting a security clearance being gay and 19 and adventurous) I worked on, but not with a zil. Belly reminded me of gogo dancing from hustlers in DC when I was 16 but that’s another story.
You might appreciate Patrick Cowley’s Megatron Man (slightly cheesy in a great pure way)
https://youtu.be/rkgOq48PQds?si=jdcamaf-zGzqe_xR
At the 40-second marker very charming use of the most delicate zil sound embedded in a wonderfully intense almost Sufi disco soundtrack of vocoder and monochromatic open fifths, and the I - IV - VI - VII progression in D-minor is fun.
It’s a great piece after a long stressy day, with a relaxant like a beer or a joint, to float on the synthesizer, eyes closed, and revolve through the mild sonic roller coaster. And the Zils like a tiny reminder you’re still on earth.
[The structure is well-described by Bernstein
https://youtu.be/rkgOq48PQds?si=jdcamaf-zGzqe_xR
]
There was a brief moment when the world of young people was once filled with joy and abandon, with the promise of sex as fun and pleasure, not an unrelenting struggle for political virtue.
Brilliant, thank you for consolidating so much important information. Also, thank you for Moron Tabernacle Choir. 😆😆
Came to me yesterday morning lol