Scientist debunks claims about non-western “third genders”

A bit liberal with the term scientist but I suppose you’d need to be to press your point, Lola Falana.

R1 sorry sweetie – but Vasey is a scientist. By the way, he performs behavioural genetics research, so if you think the definition of a scientist is a lab coat then I guess he meets that too.

Ok, if sweetie makes you feel good, invoke sweetie. Feeling better, little person?

Yawn, the anti-trans brigade wants to have it both ways:

1.They're really gay, and in denial (which makes no sense since trans people are less accepted than gays in America)

2.They're straight men in dresses who want to rape women

Which is it?

The need for morons to create these "third gender" roles because they can't deal with the fact that dick wants dick sometimes shows how fucking retarded people can be.

I think I recall reading something decades ago (before trans became prevalent and controversial) about several Native American tribes recognising a third gender. It was either burdash, or berdash. Perhaps Berdache? Sorry, none of the variants pop up in my autocorrect or dictionary.

I think it makes sense for some actually. Before we judge something we find to be an odd phenomena in our own culture, it helps the mind to look to other cultures and traditions to make sense of it.

[quote] I think I recall reading something decades ago (before trans became prevalent and controversial) about several Native American tribes recognising a third gender.

I know that the twin spirit idea has been hijacked and twisted to mean trans when that isn't what it represents: it was used merely for ceremonial purposes and not real life or as a separate gender. Sorta like Shakespeare's male actors playing women.

R7 Are you Native American then? Or at least a scholar of Native Americans, and their cultural traditions?

I'm not, but distincly recall reading such individuals were accepted by their tribes, made same gender matches, shared a life assuming female gender roles. I'm not going out on a limb any further, yet it would seem other cultures did in fact recognise a man who would choose to dress as a female, have sexual relations with men, and take care of housekeeping and cooking. You can look it up yourself. I'm not always the best when it comes to spelling nomenclature terms, yet I have a an excellent memory which serves correct.

r8, Two-Spirits were just gay men. In the same way, until recently, most transsexuals were (self-loathing) gay men.

So what would warriors that fucked each other be called?

Good Friends

R9 I don't relish splitting hairs and devolving into semantic suicide, which almost always occurs on these threads, however I never did say they were trans per se. What I did say, was that they chose to live their lives as more of a female, rather than a male.

I've seen pictures, as well as illustrations: female dress and jewellery, social mores and tasks were with the females. These individuals did not hunt and fish, but rather hung with the females smoking fish, and preserving game. As a young gay man, the subject matter was highly fascinating, and I immersed myself in it thoroughly.

I believe it is fair to say, sans surgical alteration of one's anatomy, they certainly are a reasonable facsimile of a transperson in my estimation.

I cannot fully understand the predicament of being born transgendered, or what it entails, yet I'm wise enough to know it is fundamentally different to being and feeling like a gay man. I don't think we need to understand it fully to have compassion and exercise tolerance. I'm generally surprised by how many gay people have picked this up as some sort of new crusade, if you will.

R9 I should add you are wrong in your working hypothesis that they're all gay. Orientation has nothing to do with their feeling they are the other sex mentally, or otherwise. More than three quarters of MTF transsexuals live their lives as lesbians, as in the case of Bruce cum Caitlyn Jenner. These individuals have always professed an interest in females, never males.

It's not as reductionist as you fancy it is.

R8 conveniently ignores that gender presentation/identification are social constructs. Males replicating female dress and actions are responding to socially-inculcated diktats, not "feelings". To say nothing of that replication is stereotypical, demeaning and insulting.

R14 I'm out mate... Good evening, and Shalom.

These two-spirits, third-genders, etc. in other cultures are always biological men. How come tomboys and lesbians never get a category?

R4 prepare to be debunked.

Blanchard's typology of transsexualism has been around since the 1980's and has two main categories. 1) Transwomen who are attracted to men, are an extreme version of gay men – who are so feminine in childhood and their biology, that they are better off transitioning. The second kind, 2) are straight men who engage in fetishistic cross-dressing and usually transition later in life. This is known as autogynephilia. They are much more masculine and typically don't 'pass' as well.

The evidence supports this typology. Transwomen who are attracted to men have the same biological ethology as gay men; including the same genes for homosexuality, the fraternal birth order effect (mothers antibodies released onto male foetuses) and the same evidence for androgen hypo-masculinisation in utero. Keep in mind, I support people who wanna transition. I literally don't care. I just think it's annoying every time someone makes a point that we can branded as 'transphobes' for actually knowing that the second kind of transsexuals are attracted to women and cross dress due to a brain wiring which puts their attraction to other women back on themselves. Many transsexuals identify as autogynephiles and get shut down by activists because they are a "bad look".

There's no scientific evidence to support any other typology.

R4 They aren't trying to be "trans", they're trying to be accepted as regular men and women. Including the homophobia, which will put them, again, ahead of the GLB. The "trans lesbians" just want a legal way to harass and rape women and couldn't care less about "acceptance" because they are narcissistic sociopaths.

That's not what the article says at all. The researcher talks about two men he knew who seemingly switched from identifying as fa’afafine to gay, one of whom said they did so because of Grindr.

It's anecdotal and hardly evidence of anything, let alone a scientific debunking of third gender cultural tropes.

[quote]Blanchard's

Who?

He's a sexual researcher who has defended pedos, R20. The anti-trans brigade brings him up all the time in hopes you won't know who he is. He says pederasty is a sexual orientation, it's natural and normal, and that there are a lot of "virtuous" (his word) pedos who don't act on it and are therefore great human beings who he likens to priests and nuns.

Oh, *that* guy, the "scientist".

I'd be happy if Queer is the third gender, which will include LGBT and trans as well.

There are two sexes: male and female. There are rare cases of “intersex”.

Gender is a whole other thing.

That’s the science.

I don't know anything about Samoa but they make delicious cookies.

Male and female are not terms that should be used to describe gender. Let's stop peddling in false information.

Free Nathan Lane in Birdcage!

[quote]He's a sexual researcher who has defended pedos, [R20]. The anti-trans brigade brings him up all the time in hopes you won't know who he is. He says pederasty is a sexual orientation, it's natural and normal, and that there are a lot of "virtuous" (his word) pedos who don't act on it and are therefore great human beings who he likens to priests and nuns.

To be fair there really are pedophiles who never act on their impulses. There was a British documentary about them a few years back, and I definitely felt empathy towards them. Are they "great human beings"? Well, life dealt them a shitty hand and they seem to be trying to deal with it without causing harm to others and that most certainly is commendable.

I've personally said for years that pedophilia should be viewed as a separate sexual orientation. I've been attacked here for saying it although I've never quite figured out why. I guess I've always been annoyed by homophobes regularly claiming that gays are pedophiles so I wouldn't mind it being viewed as something totally separate. Then again I realize that many pedophiles are totally capable of having sex with adults as well so things are not that simple.

Why don’t you just keep that to yourself? It adds nothing to anything

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

R29, you're talking to me? I was replying to R21 who pretty much portrayed the researcher Ray Blanchard as a monster, and that didn't sit quite right with me. I've personally never even heard of Blanchard before so I've no idea of everything's he said, I was just reacting to R21's claims.

R21 made the claim that Blanchard defended pedos then provided a link to back up its claim. Neither did.

O.K. since nobody answered my query, I did a little research on how various homophobic societies deal with gay and gender-nonconforming individuals. Many are assigned their own special category or “gender” which gives them status and special roles such as priests, healers, and leaders of sacred ceremonies. Here are some examples:

Feminine/gay biological male Indians: Hjiras

Feminine/gay biological male Navajos: Nádleehi

Feminine/gay biological male Samoans: Fa'afafine

Feminine/gay biological male Hawaiians: Māhū

Feminine/gay biological male Tongans: Fakaleitī

Masculine/lesbian biological women in various cultures: they’re not assigned ANYTHING, just correctively raped and forced into marriage.

[quote]How come tomboys and lesbians never get a category?

They're not considered deviant in the same way gay men are.

You know, I find it all very interesting. I am a 42 year-old gay man and I have never had any inclination to change my body. None. And I don’t question my sex or my gender identity.

My sexuality as a gay male has always been flamboyantly on display, from early childhood, long before I was sexually awake. Kids used to make fun of me and call me a sissy, by fifth grade or so people would ask me if I was gay, and I would say no because sexually speaking I felt nothing. And then, lo and behold, out came the sexual feeling and there’s no question I was gay. When I finally had ‘the talk’ with my parents, my mom said ‘if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, it’s a duck. You have always been a duck!” And in recent years I have seen old family movies and I was the GAYEST little boy. By age four I was doing some sort of interpretive dance all by myself in the backyard. My mom said as we watch, “No idea where that came from. It’s like you were channeling something. And obviously you were gay.” Age four.

I say all this because I recall very vividly ‘channeling’ feeling like a girl sometimes. Not infrequently. I never felt like I was a girl or wanted to change into a girl, but I very distinctly remember playing around outside, running, and just for fleeting moments feeling like I was embodying my older cousin or a female friend or just the spirit of a girl. It came and went. It was always just little brief moments and I found it kind of thrilling. And it has happened more rarely as an adult, less as I get older. I have never felt in any way that I am transgender, but in those moments for whatever reason I felt like a female spirit moved through me. And I am one hundred percent sympathetic to and believe a lot of transgender people about how they feel because if that feeling ever “stuck” with me instead of passing through me, then I guess I would have been very upset by the body not matching the sense of identity.

Being alive is very complicated when you’re not just surviving to meet basic needs.

Some of those groups required castration, R33, and while they have/had a distinct status in some contexts, this didn't necessarily mean they were respected generally (the Indian Hijras have a pretty bad time).

More info I found: The term “two-spirit” was coined in 1990 by some progressive native people in Winnipeg to replace the white-Euro term “berdache.”

Also, does Dr. Blanchard explain the psychology of female to male transsexuals?

[quote] I say all this because I recall very vividly ‘channeling’ feeling like a girl sometimes. Not infrequently. I never felt like I was a girl or wanted to change into a girl, but I very distinctly remember playing around outside, running, and just for fleeting moments feeling like I was embodying my older cousin or a female friend or just the spirit of a girl. It came and went. It was always just little brief moments and I found it kind of thrilling.

[quote] but in those moments for whatever reason I felt like a female spirit moved through me

What exactly is feeling like a girl? The “spirit” of a girl? What I hear when men say this is identifying with or feeling envious of traits found in the females in their life— mom, sister, a female friend. But that presumes that all women are alike or that all females encompass this idea of a “female spirit”. Which simply isn’t true.

I wish that men and boys were given more room to explore (stereotypical) feminine traits and behaviors. I think much of this gender bullshit stems from the rigid restrictions placed on males— that they can only act or react a certain way. This is harmful to men and women both.

But it will not be found by appropriating femaleness or womanhood. There is no “female spirit” r35 any more so than there is a male one. Bio sex is simply an objective biological designation. There is nothing spiritual to being female or male.

The people who feel they should’ve been the opposite sex need to identify what it is that makes them feel this way and develop methods of coping with this anxiety.

R37 That is false, and it’s discussed here in this American Indian publication.

Two Spirit is not a contemporary “new-age” movement

While the term Two Spirit was coined in 1990 In Winnipeg, Canada as a means of unifying various gender identities and expressions of Native American/First Nations/Indigenous individuals, the term is not a specific definition of gender, sexual orientation or other self-determining catch-all phrase, but rather an umbrella term.

Two Spirit people have both a male and female spirit within them and are blessed by their Creator to see life through the eyes of both genders.

The term does not diminish the tribal-specific names, roles and traditions nations have for their own Two Spirit people. Examples of such names are the winkte among the Lakota and the nadleeh among the Navajo people.

These names and roles go back to a time before western religion. Two Spirit is not a “New Age” movement, but rather a reclamation of Two Spirit’s rightful place in Native culture.

We have proof of Two Spirit individuals in historical photos

A quick google search will render black and whites from decades ago with Two Spirit tribal members from various nations, such as We’wha, a very well-known and documented Two Spirit of the Zuni people, who crossed over in 1896.

Gay is not an interchangeable term with Two Spirit

Being a gay native is oftentimes confused with being Two Spirit. While the two may have parallels and intersections, they are not the same. Gay specifically is about attraction to a person of the same sex. Two Spirit is more about the embodiment of two genders residing within one person.

A Two Spirit person may be gay, but a gay person is not necessarily Two Spirit. Claiming the role of Two Spirit is to take up the spiritual responsibility that the role traditionally had. Walking the red road, being for the people and our children/youth, and being a guiding force in a good way with a good mind are just some of those responsibilities.

The Two Spirit Road is a road of long held traditions, prayer and responsibility

Two Spirit people held significant roles and were an integral part of a tribal social structures

Two Spirit people held a meaningful place in the sacred hoop. In many tribes Two Spirits were balance keepers. Thought to be the “dusk” between the male morning, and the female evening. As the role has evolved over time as necessary, the tradition is still alive. At Two Spirit gatherings and communal events, we can be found saying prayers that have needed to be said for decades, and fostering healing to all present. Restoring much needed balance to spirit.

Two Spirit Does Not Indicate Colonized Boxed Definitions of “L”, “G”, “B”, “T” or “Q”

We can be all of these, or none of these. A western mindset categorizes based on standards of ‘norm’ and ‘other’ in a kyriarchal (to rule or dominate) type structure. This mindset imposes a series of boxes to fit into (you’re either gay, you’re a lesbian, etc.) rather than being comfortable with gender fluidity, Two Spirit acknowledges the continuum of gender identity and expression.

Two Spirit is a term only appropriate for Native people

Are you a straight women, R38?

[quote]What exactly is feeling like a girl?

There is no such thing. You can physically feel parts of your body that are specifically male or female, but feeling like a man or woman is just feeling like you LOOK like something.

“What exactly is feeling like a girl? The “spirit” of a girl? What I hear when men say this is identifying with or feeling envious of traits found in the females in their life— mom, sister, a female friend. But that presumes that all women are alike or that all females encompass this idea of a “female spirit”. Which simply isn’t true.”

R38 I described that feeling as straightforwardly as I can. I had moments of feeling as if I embodied a girl—either someone specific whom I knew, which I’m sure is why I attribute it specifically to a feminine quality, or just “a girl” generically—moved through me. Conceptually, it’s as bizarre to me as it probably is to you. There’s no rational explanation aside from this weird feeling that in moments I moved like or felt like a girl. I wish I could articulate it better but I can’t.

A Tori Amos song called “Putting the Damage On” hit me like a hammer because of this phenomenon, because she sings, “I’m trying not to move/It’s just your ghost passing through/I said, I’m trying not to move/It’s just your ghost passing through...” And I have no idea what she meant by that, but I have personally experienced moments in which I am suddenly struck that I feel like someone is passing through me, and I usually do get still and just sort of feel like “what the fuck is this? This can’t be real.” However, I recall vividly having those feelings while I was dancing around and instead of becoming still and tracking it, I would give myself over to it and just sort of observe and think, “how weird...I’m a girl dancing,” and then it would pass.

I’m being honest. It could be a mental illness, it could be a neurological condition, a mini-seizure, a spontaneous way of empathizing with others—who knows? But it’s a phenomenon I’ve experienced occasionally all my life, but mostly as a child.

“But it will not be found by appropriating femaleness or womanhood. There is no “female spirit” [R35] any more so than there is a male one. Bio sex is simply an objective biological designation. There is nothing spiritual to being female or male.”

I don’t know what to tell you, R38, except that these are ways I perceive my being. I am a gay man and I always have felt male—unquestionably, I was a boy and I am an adult male now and I feel like my body and my spirit are matched in that regard; HOWEVER, I also feel very distinctly like a gay man, and in retrospect I felt distinctly like a gay boy even though “gay” was not a label to me. I was a typical gay boy. I didn’t like a lot of boy things like He Man and GI Joe and toy trucks and team sports. I liked arts, individual/independent sports and clothing, cooking, etc.—domestic activities typically associated with femininity and creative activities often associated with gay men. I liked pretty things including make-up and watching dresses twirl, but I never felt like those things belonged on my body; I was just attracted to them in an aesthetic sense. As I got older as my sexuality announced itself, I still was attracted to those things in an aesthetic sense and definitively not in a sexualized way. I was attracted to the male form in a sexualized way, which surprised me a great deal at first, and I always thought it was interesting that I don’t see my body in an objectified way as a male body that can turn me on—it’s just my packaging, but it’s the right packaging, the one that suits my sense of self.

So these things are complex, but in my perception of being who I am, I do have innate feelings of male and female spirits and distinctly gay male and gay female spirits. You’d know I am gay; you know Andy Cohen is gay; you know Jodie Foster and Melissa Etheredge are gay, just as readily as you’d know I have blue eyes and brown hair if you saw me. These things just are. And they are innate, and you can reject my innate senses of what I referred to as a “female spirit,” and that’s fine but it doesn’t change my perception. I don’t know what to tell you.

[quote][R37] That is false, and it’s discussed here in this American Indian publication. Two Spirit is not a contemporary “new-age” movement.

R39 What exactly did I say that was false? I never claimed it to be a “new-age movement.” May I ask if you yourself are a member of an indigenous nation?

R44 I didn’t say you said it is a New-Age movement; that line is where the article excerpt begins. I should have applied quotation marks to make that clear.

I am not a member of an American Indian tribe and I can’t speak with authority as such; however, I have spoken with members of American Indian nations about it and they have told me that two-spirit/twin-spirit identities have a long history, and the information in the article comports with that. Two-spirit was not invented to lend credence to the gay-rights movement or to the transgender-rights movement. The concept is not exactly analogous to either gay or transgender concepts, and typically, people in history known to have been two-spirit had civic/community responsibilities that accompanied the identity. So the idea precedes the LGBT movement and it’s not “I fuck guys” or “I feel like a woman,” but a nuanced and different sensibility that bore a community governance and spiritual advisory responsibility.

Anna Madrigal was two spirited in the Native sense.

As a girl is simply a female child and you are male how do you know what it is to “feel” female? Might as well say you feel canine.

It's true. A lot of these native societies had a third gender but opposed Homosexuality.

It's possible third genders were a way to 'other' gay men. Lesbians, who face no persecution in any society, were not put into another category to disenfranchise then as people; which lends credence to that theory.

[quote]As a girl is simply a female child and you are male how do you know what it is to “feel” female?

Here's a radical feminist arguing that 'transmen' are men.

[quote]It's possible third genders were a way to 'other' gay men. Lesbians, who face no persecution in any society, were not put into another category to disenfranchise then as people; which lends credence to that theory.

I searched for “lesbian two spirits” and pictures of male couple dressed in female native dress came up. So apparently there WAS a “lesbian” category? Just not what I expected.

People kept questioning the seeming absence of females in these cultural labels etc.

How much more does it take to realize that women were not considered important enough in ANY of these cultures to be part of this discussion or, as some want to ironically excuse it away, by suggesting females weren't threatening enough to society if they stepped outside "normal" boundaries - wonder why that is?

[quote]How much more does it take to realize that women were not considered important enough in ANY of these cultures to be part of this discussion or, as some want to ironically excuse it away, by suggesting females weren't threatening enough to society if they stepped outside "normal" boundaries - wonder why that is?

These third spirits seem to actually face persecution. They were not special or important.

Stop trying to dykesplain.

R38, exactly. This was clearly written by a woman. I don't care if she's gay or straight.

[quote] The people who feel they should’ve been the opposite sex need to identify what it is that makes them feel this way and develop methods of coping with this anxiety.

Of course this makes absolute sense but if some of the so called "trans conversion" legislation is passed then this may become illegal. So rather than trying to sort through what could be a psychological disorder that could enable someone to better understand their bodily discomfort (be it gender dysphoria or a natural adolescent discomfort with a changing body) and find peace of mind and acceptance, the trans community would deny struggling people their right to have appropriate professional counseling that might resolve their issues short of life long medicalization or drastic bodily modification.

[quote]The people who feel they should’ve been the opposite sex need to identify what it is that makes them feel this way and develop methods of coping with this anxiety.

This sounds like gay conversion stuff.

Maybe living your life as the opposite sex would be what's best for you.

R52 Also, men with passive or overly emotional traits were seen as a liability in hunting and defense and had to be assigned to household or religious roles (as gay men in feudal Europe were encouraged to be clerics) while women who were stoic, strong and level-headed simply applied those traits to the role of homemaker because masculinity was seen as an advantage in ANY societal role.

Correct, R56. That explains why -- then and now -- lesbians don't experience homophobia.

R57 I should also point out that WOMEN with passive or overly emotional traits were seen as a liability in hunting and defense and had to be assigned to household or roles but were EXCLUDED from religious leadership because of their vaginas - and that includes lesbians. So, they do experience that!

[quote]I should also point out that WOMEN with passive or overly emotional traits were seen as a liability in hunting and defense

So it's actually people. Effeminate people are punished. So gay men are punished. Lesbians are not.

R59 So masculine woman are lesbians, and lesbians are masculine women? The prison movies were correct!

I know of very few men who are effeminate but not gay.

I knew it would be Paul Vasey before I clicked the link. He's got some interesting research on female homosexuality among Japanese macaques and male bisexuality among (human) Samoans, by the way, suggesting the large role of culture on human sexual orientation.

All women were ‘punished’ in at least most Western societies in human history just be virtue of being women. You can say that masculine women were not punished—but for most of history, women were men’s property with no rights. So OK, maybe a lesbian would not have been tormented in the way a gay man might have been, but like all women, she would be handed off to a man and made to serve him, including being made to have sex with him when he wanted. It’s not as if gay women were just set free to live as men most of the time. Women were women first, the property of men, and if they wanted to diddle with their women friends, no one cared because they didn’t matter to anyone at all.

Meanwhile in not all but many societies, men could get away with the same. As long as they paired off with a woman, they could still fuck around with a man or men on their own time as long as they were discreet. And men who lived this way of course were tortured but they automatically had it much, much better than straight or gay women if you consider free will to be “better.”

[quote] Effeminate people are punished. So gay men are punished. Lesbians are not.

I don't know what world you live in but in my world not all gay men are effeminate.

Not all gay men are effeminate, but once a man announces that he is gay society views him as effeminate whether or not he is.

So it seems, R63, like things were only better for straight men.

Not gay men.

[quote]How much more does it take to realize that women were not considered important enough in ANY of these cultures to be part of this discussion or, as some want to ironically excuse it away, by suggesting females weren't threatening enough to society if they stepped outside "normal" boundaries - wonder why that is?

In a tiny minority of Native Americans societies, there did exist "third gender" women. It's just that the number of Native societies with "third gender" men was much higher. This is probably because homosexuality and transgenderism are naturally more common among men; the extremely quick rise we've been experiencing in the number of young girls saying they're bisexual or transgender is unheard-of in history, and very likely a byproduct of cultural shifts and heightened female suggestibility rather than any innate female tendency towards sexual and gender variation.

[quote]This is probably because homosexuality and transgenderism are naturally more common among men; the extremely quick rise we've been experiencing in the number of young girls saying they're bisexual or transgender is unheard-of in history, and very likely a byproduct of cultural shifts and heightened female suggestibility rather than any innate female tendency towards sexual and gender variation.

Industrialization and modern society has made gender more fluid so naturally some people will chose to live as the other one.

Even most lesbians are just asexual, not same-sex attracted. That's not true for gay men.

This leads me think trans women are really women. 'Transmen' are just butch lesbians, taking butchness to its obvious conclusion.

[quote] This is probably because homosexuality and transgenderism are naturally more common among men;

Poor men. So befuddled and so put upon. Yet somehow we let them control the world. That has to be some form of collective insanity.

[quote] the extremely quick rise we've been experiencing in the number of young girls saying they're bisexual or transgender . . . very likely a byproduct of . . . heightened female suggestibility

[quote] most lesbians are just asexual, not same-sex attracted. That's not true for gay men. This leads me think trans women are really women. 'Transmen' are just butch lesbians, taking butchness to its obvious conclusion.

Yikes! The innate sexism just oozes. More like a tsunami of condescending.

Yes - culture actually has a role on sexual behavior. Sexual orientation is the innermost preference which might have to be ignored in order to survive, like gay people coerced into having hetero sex on order to reproduce and not be ostracized from the community.

The Etoro tribe is an EXTREME example of sexual behavior being culturally dictated. In the U.S. we would consider all adult Etoro males gay pedophiles. I’m not linking it here, so if you are curious, google at your own risk.

[quote]Yet somehow we let them control the world.

Men do not control the world.

Women are much more socially dominant.

Also, corrective rape of lesbians is common in parts of Africa - whoever said lesbians don’t get persecuted pulled that out of his ass.

[quote]The Etoro tribe is an EXTREME example of sexual behavior being culturally dictated. In the U.S. we would consider all adult Etoro males gay pedophiles. I’m not linking it here, so if you are curious, google at your own risk.

Yes, sexuality is weirdly interpreted in different cultures. Wildly so.

I watched a recent talk given by Germaine Greer and she was talking about how she once kissed a female baby's vagina to stop her crying and while that might've had her ostracized (the statute of limitations is long up now) it would be considered a perfectly naturally thing to do to stop an infant crying.

[quote]Also, corrective rape of lesbians is common in parts of Africa - whoever said lesbians don’t get persecuted pulled that out of his ass.

African societies are matriarchal. Blame women for that, dyke.

[quote]Industrialization and modern society has made gender more fluid so naturally some people will chose to live as the other one.

The West has urbanized and industrialized since the 18th century. The increase in the number of girls who call themselves trans boys, on the other hand, is much more recent: it can be traced to the end of the 2000s. This increase is a result, not of economic changes, but of the emergence of certain cultural trends, especially the glorification in popular culture of homosexual experimentation among women, which then became an obsession with presenting as queer. And, in order not to exhaust itself, this tendency has given birth to different forms of psychological queerness: hence the excessively large number of sexual orientation and gender identity labels that proliferate on the internet today, which have no support in Western cultural tradition, and sometimes present only minor differences between one another. The culmination of this trend is the existence of people (especially teen girls, as in the less extreme forms of queerness) who claim to belong to other animal species, that is, who are "otherkin".

None of this has any basis in human biology. It is all the result of the queer obsession.

[quote]The West has urbanized and industrialized since the 18th century.

But it might've been the 2000s when it developed to point where all this normal. Wealth maybe.

R74 Are you insane? “African societies” are countless among a huge continent. They are not monolithic at all. The greatest ethnic and cultural diversity on the planet is throughout nations in Africa, which have different languages and customs.

Some African tribes are matrilineal but that doesn’t mean that they, or certainly that all societies in Africa, are under the control of women. Some cut women’s sex organs off and sew up their vaginas so that their husbands can tear them open on their wedding day. In some parts of Africa, men famously raped virgin girls during the AIDS epidemic believing that doing so would prevent HIV infection. None of this was women’s design. Good God.

[quote]“African societies” are countless among a huge continent. They are not monolithic at all. The greatest ethnic and cultural diversity on the planet is throughout nations in Africa, which have different languages and customs.

There's far less ethnic diversity in Sub-Saharan Africa than any other comparable continent. Most are of Bantu descent. Of course, in a continent the size of Africa there will be many different peoples (don't use the tribe in that context) but trends can exist and be observed.

[quote]Some African tribes are matrilineal but that doesn’t mean that they, or certainly that all societies in Africa, are under the control of women. Some cut women’s sex organs off and sew up their vaginas so that their husbands can tear them open on their wedding day.

It's women who do that.

But you refuse to give them any agency.

I think it's an interesting concept to think that with the advent of specialized labor in childcare, on-demand abortion, the Pill, labor no longer being divided between the farm and home, that difference between male and female has diminished enough for lesbians to decide to be male if they want to.

heterosexuality and transgenderism, even bestiality are basically the result of a neurological condition that is taboo in neuroscience and it is the concept of heteromorpho- sensitivity. it occurs when a neural system has what could be thought as a need to " feel" exogenous stimuli from others whose functions, and morphology is opposite to the ones they've got. the contrary condition is that of homomorpho-sensitivity. when males experience sexual desire for the opposite sex, this desire is actually expressed as a need to exchange or swap "parts" in such a way that they can feel like they are one or an extension of that opposite, and they can feel " incomplete" if they don't get to experience stimuli such as smelling distint scents or tasting bodily fluids from that opposite morphological group. Without this exogenous components from "contraries" theirs neurons won't be able to fire up, excite and absorb the stimuli. the brain of the heteromorpho-sensitive males are very receptive to the morphological aspects of the opposite sex or morphological group. the brain of the homomorpho-sensitive males are simply transparent to those unlike morphologies and don't exibit any absortivity. all this phenomena is actually qualitative and measurable, in others words, it is based on information.

all that macho, alpha behavior you observe from heterosexual males is nothing but a form of submissive behavior to the weaker opposite sex. it is the tale tale sign of a feminization down deep at the neural level. society's sexual norms and "science" invented the concept of heterosexuality vs homosexuality to portray homosexuality or attraction to the same sex as feminization and submissive behavior whereas heterosexuality as a masculinization and dominance trait in males. the truth is that there is ZERO scientific proof to this. In fact, all real evidences point to the contrary.

[quote]heterosexuality and transgenderism, even bestiality are basically the result of a neurological condition that is taboo in neuroscience and it is the concept of heteromorpho- sensitivity. it occurs when a neural system has what could be thought as a need to " feel" exogenous stimuli from others whose functions, and morphology is opposite to the ones they've got.

R80 Does the term “erotic target location error” (which was coined by the aforementioned Dr. Ray Blanchard) have any connection to your claim? It was his theory of why paraphilia exist, yet he did not consider homosexuality in that category. (He’s a gay man, so he might be biased against the idea that homosexuality is the result of crossed wires in the brain). Instead, he blames same-sex attraction on in-utero hormone exposure that feminizes boys, but as far as I know, he does not study lesbians.

Enough of these hate cranks posting on the DL.

Out.

this is not the site to discuss these topics, cuz we all come here for gossip but some people here might find what I going to explain interesting and will do their own research about this matter. So, as long as we continue letting philosophers, psychologists, social scientists have a say on topics that only mathematical modeling can answer such as arousal, neural systems etc we will continue having all these kind of debates about sexuality.

it is an opinion, not a mathematically proven fact, that hormones feminize males's brains. computational informatics can clearly debunk this claim with the concepts of sensory distance. if anything,what the hormones are actually doing, is paradoxically a masculinization. however, mainstream science won't accept this truth because there is too much politics and interests involved.

if society were to accept proven qualitative scientific theories there would be a change in paradigm and we would have to accept that in order for animals to reproduce they have to pay a very high cost. males have to feminize in the sense that they become heteromorpho-sensitive in such a way that they are the ones who can objectively be said, as per information theory, that they are sensory distance closer to females than homomorpho-sensitive ones.

mathematical models points to equations that function on the basis of scaling laws and control neural systems based on asymmetry/ symmetry/ heteromorphism/homomorphism principles.

so called heterosexual and homosexual males are in a conumdrum, a human made paradox. in truth, nature generates multiple mixed information states. what trully exist in nature is a conflict between heteromorpho-sensitive and homomorpho-sensitive individuals with varying sensitivities to morphological characteristics such as parts of the body, scents, vocal sounds, and gestures.

because the paradigm that we have been taught is not real, but an illusion. human have conflicting views about our reality. humans constructed a performative , highly emotional, role based system where paradoxically the feminized heteromorpho-sentive males appear to be masculine and dominant. whereas the homomorpho- sensitives ones are viewed as feminized and submissive.

this is why at some point in the future, psychologists and psycho-physicists/ neuroscientists will have serious problems, because their views will be totally different and will contradict each other.

for instance, if an advanced human civilization were to design and build two humanoid male robots each capable of completely exchanging "parts" either with a homomorph (male) or heteromorph (female) and therefore establishing a pairing dichotomy between the two, we could see that the homomorpho-sensitive robot does not undergo a topological transformation after completely exchanging parts with its homomorphic partner (male). mathematicians describe this condition as a one to one, isomorphic, symmetric order, and this is why symmetry is said to be conservative. the case of the heteromorpho-sentive robot is different because we do observe a change, or transformation after the exchange of parts with his heteromorphic partner( female robot) has taken place. the heteromorpho-sensitive robot can no longer claim to be a male after being subjected to this exchange because a topological change has occurs, in other words, nature has produced a topological inversion.

For a homomorpho-sensitive male( aka homosexual) any form of arousal and exchange of sensations, parts, fluids etc with his homomorphic partner( male) does not produce a transformation ( change in state) or destruction of those morphological characteristics that make him a masculine male. in other words, in nature, like does not invert like. By natural law, homomorpho-sensitive males are simultaneously both, dominant/submissive of his homomorphic partner without androgenizing each other. this is a symmetry principle.

Nature has its own ways of inducing weakness and disadventages to the heteromorpho-sensitive males. these males become dominant-submissive not only of a much physically weaker partner, but ones that can actually invert them. these males always move sensory distance apart from the homomorphs and sensory distance closer to the heteromorphs. they will do so by wrongly perceiving that they are becoming more masculine and dominant than their homosensitive counterparts (gays).

just don't take everything you read in those scientific papers about "homosexuality" as true. they will never disclose the truth.