The Sneaky Fucker Strategy literally on steroids? It makes so much sense to me, especially the control part that I’ve noticed with my daughter and her trans-identifying friends all seeking to escape the bounds of womanhood but not because they want to be treated as men.
As one of these formerly captured women, this puts my prior end game quite succinctly. I was eliminating myself from the running—though my lesbianism did so by default, that didn’t keep far too many men from predating or sexualizing my existence (or force them to treat me as an autonomous human being with thoughts and feelings and preferences that had nothing to do with a sexual end goal).
The pacing of this was exciting—I felt you were hardly taking a breath as the thoughts were pouring out. Deeply enjoyable read!
I couldn’t figure out why they were attracted or even tolerated or embraced by lesbians but this hypothesis provided a simple answer - because that where women were, without men.
Absolutely. As a woman with a history of sa in childhood as well as adulthood, in the decade of identifying as trans, never was my sa more frequent. It increased tenfold, easily. It was truly a wild and confusing time.
I’ll be making my way through the whole series you’ve written! Though necessary to get your foot in the door with many, I find the need to front load the lack of value judgment a tiring one. Hopefully more and more move into a space lacking defensiveness around discussing these topics—humans really do get in our own way so often.
I had notes over 30-40 years and wanted a general theory of mimicry from them. It’s a completely tangential turn from everything everyone has ever said, and it’s a calm, non-political naturalistic explanation which synthesizes 100% of observed behaviors.
The only thing I might add for clarity is marking bathroom areas by urinating without men present, and more clear delineation of using sports to dominate harems of women without men present.
Psychology rarely if ever looks to biology for explanations, imagining humans are not animals, much like religion imagined humans have a priveliged place in the universe.
We don’t and we lose the story if we imagine we are priveliged.
I’ve not finished reading your essay but wanted to ask my question before I forget it. Could trans men, I think of girls having their breast removed, be women who want nothing to do with men, don’t want to be chased and being asexual or a lesbian isn’t enough and so in a sense they’re attempts to camouflage them selves so they might be overlooked by men seeking women?
Okay, you answered it here, “The female mimic does not imitate to deceive for entry, but to prevent pursuit, to regulate exposure, to shape the terms of her own vulnerability.”
It is an extremely common behavior in pubescent and post-pubescent women - dressing in large baggy clothes, muted colors, layers, think shapeless sweatshirts with hoodies. They aren’t trying to imitate men per se, they are disguising that they can be recognized as women
I would bet there are tens of thousands (or millions) of moms and dads who have seen the depressive daughter disguising that she is female, but not wanting to appear Lesbian which is not the point.
It's a wonderful phrase, it's the underlying theme one you've avoided male-male compeition. Then the last trick is to sustain the mimicry, that can only work so long.
But if your theory is true, what's the evolutionary advantage to men in mimicking women? I can see how it would take them out of the circle of more aggressive men, but not how it would help them in attracting women.
(Edited only to correct typos -- the letter "e" on my keyboard is sticking)
Special access, yes, but most women would want nothing to do with a man who dresses like a woman and goes around wearing lipstick and looking like a garish caricature of a woman.
True of course, but these men don’t want sex with all women. They want to avoid male aggression and reproductive access, which may manifest itself only as sexual gratification.
Also, what’s the biological “reward” for the mimicry? I love the theory, don’t get me wrong, but as you’ve said- biology rules and trumps all. So, what’s the end game of mimicry? Most MtF aren’t looking to have sex with women, right? Except for the sub category of MtF “lesbians”. I’d love to hear more.
One biological fact is very clear. Mimesexuals die much less frequently from violence that other men, 50% or more less frequently, it’s quite startling, and sex issues aside that enough would be a very strong explanation.
Secondarily then it also provides emotional and sexual gratification from women much more easily than average men. The ability to say, in sports to have unfettered access to women’s bodies on the field and in the locker room. Average men don’t have remotely the same setup.
Likewise, you’ll find that Mimesexual are more often sexually violent towards women than the average sex criminal, prison population of sex offenders who are mimesexuals are much higher than what you would expect of average sex offenders.
Imagine you were a violent heterosexual sex offender, what could possibly be more rewarding than being placed in a female prison with nary a man in sight.
It’s not conscious; men don’t sit down and say “ahh; I will start imitating women to get off.”. But in sexually competitive situations, the more intense the competition for gratification, the more life favors those who are willing to cheat. Little to lose and a lot to gain in access and gratification.
Pornography approaches sexual competition in a completely different angle but similar outcome. Less death from other men, high access to sexual gratification. It has the opposite effect of reducing sexual violence by reducing contact with women. Mimesexuality increases sexual contact.
I can see all that. But considering that the point of evolution is to propagate the species, especially one's own genes, I still don't see how mimicry helps those men do that, given that they're less likely to actually have sexual intercourse with women than other men are (except for mimesexual rapists, of course).
its about survival, and in that they do better than average. When it comes to reproduction they do better than a zero baseline. More men who are in women’s prisons have children than men in men’s prisons. I have not done the math so to speak, but an awful lot of anecdotal evidence of trans widows and children of trans.
Maybe. But there’s a thing called echolalia that is a part of a developmental disorder associated with high IQ autism.
Max would pick up my hand, guide it to the fridge, look me in the eye and mimic my voice, saying “would you like some juice?”
My other son would say “I’m thirsty, I want a drink” or actually he would just get his own from a young age.
My youngest gags at Taylor Swift songs and the “pink pony club” song. He watches his dad deadlift and when he’s at the heaviest, most serious weight , Ash puts on pink pony club in order to infuriate his father who will then chase him in fury. It’s Homer and Bart. They are toxic masculinity normal. It’s innate.
vigintritet? Couldn’t find what it means. Also, I’m confused as to if you’re actually validating trans as a part of natural recurring strategies (but obviously, describing it as mimisexuality)? In that case I don’t understand where you put a boundary against trans ideology (except from the differentiation that’s quite clear to me between language construction and actual material, factual biology). What I mean is that this, the fact of this sexual strategy being natural, could be used, and has been used, as grounds for affirmation.
Group of 23 is a vigntritet in a musical système. We have many part of our
lives which are fixed numbers. 23 chromosomes (23 and me), 46 pairs of chromosomes, DNA is a double helix, dna is a quartet of base pairs - just 4 chemicals, there is always just one egg and sperm, we have one way to reproduce. Humans are monadic in reproduction, binary in sex, quaternary in genetic information, holding a vigntritet of genes orchestrating life.
Trans is entirely natural, as natural as femme fatales, introversion, as natural as gay or lesbian, or bi. as natural as mom and dad, as natural as a cat lady or a wino, as autistic, as anorexics, as grossly obese, as grifters and psychopaths, sexual compulsives and alcoholics, as natural as pedophiles and celibates.
Some men in a competitive sexual landscape find imitating women a way to feel safe (from men) and an avenue to sexual and emotional satisfaction. They can become sexually deluded while imitating, to appear more real. It is a real natural phenomenon repeating in all cultures and times. Some people have a compulsion to isolate themselves, some to wash themselves. It’s maladaptive.
To say it is unnatural is false. It arises naturally, it’s not the creation of social conditioning. Attempting to so has failed spectacularly.
Not all naturally arising behaviors are benign, or wanted or should be tolerated. Pedophilia is present in behavior even at a quite early age. It cannot be halted. But its expression can be.
A pedophile imitating a child for sexual access is forbidden.
A Mimesexual imitating women for sexual access and to avoid responsibility for behavior should be too. Forbidden in schools, in sports, forbidden in legal systems - no male criminal should ever be called female in legal proceedings.
Mimesexuals should be forbidden as trespass in women-only gatherings, forbidden as trespass in feminist enclaves, forbidden as trespass to harass lesbians. Forbidden in prisons, bathrooms, locker rooms.
Pedophiles exist. They don’t need to be locked up if they live by legal rules. Mimesexuals exist, they don’t need to be locked up if they live by legal rules.
Young women need to be informed to protect themselves from being taken advantage of due to their strong instincts of female solidarity.
Families must be protected strongly against their grooming of adults into damaging the psychosexual development of adolescents as part of their process of affirming Mimisexuals.
As pedophiles must be forbidden from
Interacting with children, it should be forbidden for Mimisexuals to interact with teens while they are forming adult identities.
Knowing it is natural or acceptable are two entirely different worlds.
I want the word Mimesexual to replace transgender which is meaningless.
Mimesexuality is a reproductive strategy which involves imitating the opposite sex to avoid male-male competition, and to get unchallenged access to female individuals and collectives. In humans it manifests itself as imitating women for emotional and sexual gratification. Mimesexuals may or may not be aware they are imitating women, sometimes the mimicry involves delusions that they are female so that the mimicry is more effective.
I doubt that "mimisexual" woud ever be accepted as a replacement for "transgender" by those who believe in it, and how do you replace a meaningless word with one that means something? If it's called sexual mimicry everywhere else, it should be used for humans too.
I knew a man who thought he was female inside (or at least SAID so—originally, he said he FELT AS IF he were, which is a subjective statement rather than delusional) who had bottom surgery. That didn't help him compete for the ability to mate with females to better reproduce!
No not at all. The point is to avoid competition with males for female attentions and to have expanded access to female spaces. If the delusion is profound, it can lead to sterilization, but that’s quite rare - fewer than 5% of 0.3% lead in that direction, or 0.015% or fewer. That why when you hear of a man who insists he’s a lesbian or a man in a women’s prison invariably they have a penis. They are heterosexual and quite intact. Thu mimic women for emotional and sexual gratification.
For each class in school which graduates, a simple way to think about it, over their lifetime perhaps 1500 may undergo some sort of sterilizing surgery or chemistry. However around 33,000 may in some way over the remaining 50 years of life begin imitating women for sexual and emotional gratification.
It may not be all the time - fetishistic cross dressing, is most likely, hidden, or with women who participate, or other men. It used to be fairly hidden, but now it’s more visible, and advances through stages of demanding to be affirmed as female. For protection - mimesexuals have half the rate of death by male violence of other men. And for access, to women’s bathroom, gyms, sports, collectives, to surround themselves with sexual interests without the presence of male competition.
It's a feature of human culture, and culture has a biological basis. Humans would be a strange species of mammal if they didn't indicate sex/receptivity in some way, and it would be strange for any human behavior to not be shaped in some way by culture.
True, which is why we have gender in language. In biology, we have sex. When I say female, it connotes sex; when I say feminine, it connotes declension.
A female bird doesn’t have feminine behaviors, she has female behaviors. However when referring to a female bird, I use ‘she’ the feminine declension.
Interestingly when I refer to a penis, in French, the male sex organ takes the feminine declension in slang - la bite or la pine .
If I refer to bird in French it takes masculine declension even if a female bird - un oiseau femelle.
Sex is culturally independent. Gender, a feature of culture and language isn’t.
So a boy who doesn’t act like other boys, and a girl who doesn’t act like other girls are not abandoning conformance to their pronouns - which is literally gender nonconformity. They act in an unanticipated way - like other boys or girls. Untypical, atypical, unanticipated, differently, unexpected, in contrast to, in a different direction from most boys girls.
And finally when I refer to behavior I refer to reproductively directed behaviors.
"Sex is culturally independent. Gender, a feature of culture and language isn’t."
But language and culture are not independent of biology.
"They act in an unanticipated ways..."
Yes, and the expectation is for their behavior to honestly reflect their sex.
"...when I refer to behavior I refer to reproductively directed behaviors."
Yes, men mimicking women is a culturally mediated behavior. What it means to look like a woman will vary from culture to culture (although there are no doubt universals).
With humans, you pretty much cannot talk about any behavior (including sexual behavior) without also talking about culture. And you cannot understand human culture without considering biology.
We should probably agree to disagree on some items, I’m not sure what you want to assert.
What it means to be a woman I’ll leave to women, but biologically speaking it’s not very culturally determined.
Sex is not fluid, it’s binary, it structures the body very differently. From that fact also arrives behaviors.
Culture arrives to bound and shape them but not generate them.
We have innumerate behaviors which are consistent with primates, social animals, mammals, and vertebrates with which we cannot share “culture”. They are biological.
We are animals. As animals we will occasionally mimic the opposite sex, which can use culture but doesn’t require it, and the behavior, which we share with primates, social animals, vertebrates and invertebrates, is a manifestation of biology just as aggression, sex drive, or curiosity.
"We should probably agree to disagree on some items, I’m not sure what you want to assert."
You've said nothing in this comment that I disagree with. But in your post, you said that you "...reject the word gender in the domain of biology..." This presently makes sense for rhetorical purposes, but merely stating that a trans man is mimicking a woman leaves out some non-trivial details. Ultimately, the *way* in which sex mimicry works in humans is something sociobiolgy can and should address. In most human cultures the sex phenotype is obscured by clothing. So we assume behavioral roles to clearly broadcast our sex. Since these behavioral patterns need not align perfectly with sex, a different term is needed.
I'll add that we shouldn't leave the gender ideologues in control of the cultural discussion. The claim that there are 72 different genders is almost as removed from reality as claiming that sex is a spectrum. In most cultures there are only two genders, and in some you arguably have three. And that's about it.
Good piece. I do think that another dimension of the FTM strategy is recognizing that one presents poorly as female, no matter what. In such cases, it’s just easier to “do male.” I can’t say that I blame them.
Female mimisexuality always seems to be the mirror image fortunately, not defusing men but using male recognition to deflect reproductive instinct and to ascend female hierarchies.
Male mimisexuality is a reproductive and survival strategy to evade males, a compulsion to enter women’s spaces, and drives a systematic delusion requiring thought policing. Female mimisexuality is reproductive and survival strategy which challenges males and creates more control over reproduction. Women who imitate males don’t seek to enter male spaces to sneakily reproduce. It is much rarer historically, and I think recent versions are much more about the need to control the reproductive script, something has escalated that need immensely.
I think the "something" that has escalated the need for females to mimic males in order to increase women's dominance and control in heterosexual relationships is online porn. I've heard that a great deal of online porn shows men being violent toward women as an integral part of sex -- men choking women during sex, for example. Young girls see this porn and are deeply frightened by it.
I think exposure to online porn -- which I hear features a great deal of male violence against women, such as men choking women during sex -- drives many girls to want to avoid sex with men or find ways to become dominant in male-female relationships so they can "call the shots" in sex.
Online porn is quite convenient for research because it is exquisitely labeled so the users don’t have to search through millions of clips. If you checked on tagged categories, a small minority of clips are aggressive towards women. The vast majorly of producers and consumers are focused on comfortable seeming pleasures. Most men watch a clip and probably finish in 3-5 minutes.
Interestingly I know of nobody who has died making porn, but it happens in feature films, it seems to happen every 7-10 years in a way which gets people riled up.
Likewise I’m sure people can get hurt in porn, but stunt performers in feature films are routinely hurt, often badly - that’s why it’s called stunts. If you considered porn simply a stunt without acting, it’s vastly safer than feature films.
You'll see i cover some of these; particularly LGB being co-opted is how mimisexuality tends to leverage things in change or which are uncertain, as well as redefining the entirety of gay rights. My key concern is actually that the sources of this - psychiatry and psychology - have totally misread the phenomemon, which is at its core a delusion as reproductive strategy. if you pivot to seeing that, it's quite startling - it was to me - that imitating women to hide from male compeition, and sneakily get sexual satisfaction drives a huge number of downstream behaviors, from perpetual redefinition of female to redefining of teen angst into.... itself. Read on, enjoy your comments.
I have observed one of these AGPs in their evolution. They started by trying to get into contact with women by being their friend, offering quid pro quo (this was in th the art scene; they would blog, try to get time with the female artist). The person is unappealing and sets off alarms just by their presence, so that didn't work. Next they moved to adopting a feminine persona and trying to ooze and weasel a little more. Then they moved into fullblown trans, and with the politics of the scene being what they were, they were able to both compel female attention and proximity, and dominate conversations: and so they did.
I think it may be the access to AGP-inducing porn which informs some of these men that there is another path. 20 years ago they might not have considered it, because it would have had them too far out on the bleeding edge, and there would be no built-in requirement for women to proactively make room for them and invite them into their social sphere.
In fact I met a trans person, same MtF a bit over 20 years ago (this was in one of the most sex-weirdo positive cities in the USA, and even so they were a bit avant garde), who was attempting to obtain female friendship--by giving away wooden hangers on craigslist, and then insisting that one who came to get them sit down and spend social time with them. On craigslist one doesn't have to respond to anyone who sends an inquiry email, so of course this person would be able to filter out respondents. This person was definitely using a lure to try to get people into their proximity. This person then had a big sob story to tell about how feminine they are and how much they want to learn from women etc. etc.
Then there was another person who was using a trans identity to obtain stature and power, but in this case it might have been a mask intended to make up for lack of art talent. They were in a grad program and really did not have the chops but they were nonetheless there, and basically every arts grad program has to have at least one trans person, from then until now. It is de rigeur.
So 2 out of 3 isn't bad, in my view, and if I thought some more about what the third person was doing perhaps I would see something there too. But they were very hard to get to know, and it was very unpleasant to even contemplate trying--narcissism, aggression, stupidity--a whole host of problems.
wow. This is so right on target. I've been thinking about truth and hyperreality and dissolution into oral culture (McLuhan) and this is like putting on a wingsuit through all thst terrain. Thank you
I have a question related to other places this might exhibit (it could be debated and I would try to start debates as to why and whether it's partly an erotic target error, but in any case I have a question for you about use of your theory); may I DM you?
Wow! Thank you for this contribution to the discussion. I think understanding the patterns in "individual evolution" will be important in figuring out how to intervene...right now I'm more concerned with intervention with so-called trans teens and young adults; but mature men who abandon their wives and children are harming their family members and effective intervention with them would be a good addition to the psychotherapy "toolkit."
it sure would be great to have an intervention but ... since it seems to be rooted in narcissism i'm not sure one exists. narcissists can even wrap therapists around their finger if the therapist isn't top notch and as for family therapy--forget about it it's a minefield of manipulation
The Sneaky Fucker Strategy literally on steroids? It makes so much sense to me, especially the control part that I’ve noticed with my daughter and her trans-identifying friends all seeking to escape the bounds of womanhood but not because they want to be treated as men.
You hit it on the nose. If the male strategy is sneaky fucker, the female strategy is the "don't fuck with me" strategy. Ironically, on steroids.
As one of these formerly captured women, this puts my prior end game quite succinctly. I was eliminating myself from the running—though my lesbianism did so by default, that didn’t keep far too many men from predating or sexualizing my existence (or force them to treat me as an autonomous human being with thoughts and feelings and preferences that had nothing to do with a sexual end goal).
The pacing of this was exciting—I felt you were hardly taking a breath as the thoughts were pouring out. Deeply enjoyable read!
I couldn’t figure out why they were attracted or even tolerated or embraced by lesbians but this hypothesis provided a simple answer - because that where women were, without men.
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-5-accessus-liber?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Absolutely. As a woman with a history of sa in childhood as well as adulthood, in the decade of identifying as trans, never was my sa more frequent. It increased tenfold, easily. It was truly a wild and confusing time.
I’ll be making my way through the whole series you’ve written! Though necessary to get your foot in the door with many, I find the need to front load the lack of value judgment a tiring one. Hopefully more and more move into a space lacking defensiveness around discussing these topics—humans really do get in our own way so often.
The affirmative model is a problem. You nailed it - affirmation should be replaced with inquiry.
When someone needs help, the helping professions need to INQUIRE as to what is going on.
Powerful stuff poetically written. Thank you!
Brilliant
Thank you. Very kind.
I am, Still (get it?), digesting this. I mean, wow! And telling others about it l!
I had notes over 30-40 years and wanted a general theory of mimicry from them. It’s a completely tangential turn from everything everyone has ever said, and it’s a calm, non-political naturalistic explanation which synthesizes 100% of observed behaviors.
The only thing I might add for clarity is marking bathroom areas by urinating without men present, and more clear delineation of using sports to dominate harems of women without men present.
Psychology rarely if ever looks to biology for explanations, imagining humans are not animals, much like religion imagined humans have a priveliged place in the universe.
We don’t and we lose the story if we imagine we are priveliged.
There are 9 other corollaries.
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-1-incipendum?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-2-videor-ergo-sum?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-3-scutum-mimesis?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-4-subdolus-fornicator?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
https://sufeitzy.substack.com/p/mimesexuality-5-accessus-liber
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-6-sagitta-recta?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-7-ludus-incognitus?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-8-tempus-fugit?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-9-terra-dubia?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-10-apparentia-inexorabilis?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-11-ad-finem?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
I’ve not finished reading your essay but wanted to ask my question before I forget it. Could trans men, I think of girls having their breast removed, be women who want nothing to do with men, don’t want to be chased and being asexual or a lesbian isn’t enough and so in a sense they’re attempts to camouflage them selves so they might be overlooked by men seeking women?
Okay, you answered it here, “The female mimic does not imitate to deceive for entry, but to prevent pursuit, to regulate exposure, to shape the terms of her own vulnerability.”
It is an extremely common behavior in pubescent and post-pubescent women - dressing in large baggy clothes, muted colors, layers, think shapeless sweatshirts with hoodies. They aren’t trying to imitate men per se, they are disguising that they can be recognized as women
I would bet there are tens of thousands (or millions) of moms and dads who have seen the depressive daughter disguising that she is female, but not wanting to appear Lesbian which is not the point.
The pop avatar of this is Billie Eilish
Without disguise
https://content.api.news/v3/images/bin/589dbbf77fcc8bbfac6cb7e1dd2a5eb9
With disguise
https://people.com/thmb/f07KkQ1lBb2J6bXCO9Ie617cPfc=/4000x0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(656x0:658x2)/billie-eilish-iconic-looks-34-14307d97723f42c8b7b989c560de3439.jpg
Brilliant, lucid, clarifying. Thank you.
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-2-videor-ergo-sum?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
Kleptogamy, also known as "sneaky fucker"
It's a wonderful phrase, it's the underlying theme one you've avoided male-male compeition. Then the last trick is to sustain the mimicry, that can only work so long.
OK, fascinating, I admit.
But if your theory is true, what's the evolutionary advantage to men in mimicking women? I can see how it would take them out of the circle of more aggressive men, but not how it would help them in attracting women.
(Edited only to correct typos -- the letter "e" on my keyboard is sticking)
It’s called “sneaky fucker” and widely measured in animals. Special access to females
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-4-subdolus-fornicator?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
Special access, yes, but most women would want nothing to do with a man who dresses like a woman and goes around wearing lipstick and looking like a garish caricature of a woman.
True of course, but these men don’t want sex with all women. They want to avoid male aggression and reproductive access, which may manifest itself only as sexual gratification.
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-3-scutum-mimesis
The garishness is the hypersexual version of a woman, it’s called supernormal near the end of this.
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-4-subdolus-fornicator?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
Thanks. Will read.
Also, what’s the biological “reward” for the mimicry? I love the theory, don’t get me wrong, but as you’ve said- biology rules and trumps all. So, what’s the end game of mimicry? Most MtF aren’t looking to have sex with women, right? Except for the sub category of MtF “lesbians”. I’d love to hear more.
One biological fact is very clear. Mimesexuals die much less frequently from violence that other men, 50% or more less frequently, it’s quite startling, and sex issues aside that enough would be a very strong explanation.
Secondarily then it also provides emotional and sexual gratification from women much more easily than average men. The ability to say, in sports to have unfettered access to women’s bodies on the field and in the locker room. Average men don’t have remotely the same setup.
Likewise, you’ll find that Mimesexual are more often sexually violent towards women than the average sex criminal, prison population of sex offenders who are mimesexuals are much higher than what you would expect of average sex offenders.
Imagine you were a violent heterosexual sex offender, what could possibly be more rewarding than being placed in a female prison with nary a man in sight.
It’s not conscious; men don’t sit down and say “ahh; I will start imitating women to get off.”. But in sexually competitive situations, the more intense the competition for gratification, the more life favors those who are willing to cheat. Little to lose and a lot to gain in access and gratification.
Pornography approaches sexual competition in a completely different angle but similar outcome. Less death from other men, high access to sexual gratification. It has the opposite effect of reducing sexual violence by reducing contact with women. Mimesexuality increases sexual contact.
I can see all that. But considering that the point of evolution is to propagate the species, especially one's own genes, I still don't see how mimicry helps those men do that, given that they're less likely to actually have sexual intercourse with women than other men are (except for mimesexual rapists, of course).
It’s not only about reproducing,
its about survival, and in that they do better than average. When it comes to reproduction they do better than a zero baseline. More men who are in women’s prisons have children than men in men’s prisons. I have not done the math so to speak, but an awful lot of anecdotal evidence of trans widows and children of trans.
WOW!! A conclusive evaluation of this essay would take up as much space & time as the bulls..t it is.
Oh, it’s worse, there are 11 of these. I tend to worry an idea to death.
Just a spoonful of worry makes the medicine go down. Helps to keep your edge.
Spell it “concern” .
Brilliant.
Maybe. But there’s a thing called echolalia that is a part of a developmental disorder associated with high IQ autism.
Max would pick up my hand, guide it to the fridge, look me in the eye and mimic my voice, saying “would you like some juice?”
My other son would say “I’m thirsty, I want a drink” or actually he would just get his own from a young age.
My youngest gags at Taylor Swift songs and the “pink pony club” song. He watches his dad deadlift and when he’s at the heaviest, most serious weight , Ash puts on pink pony club in order to infuriate his father who will then chase him in fury. It’s Homer and Bart. They are toxic masculinity normal. It’s innate.
vigintritet? Couldn’t find what it means. Also, I’m confused as to if you’re actually validating trans as a part of natural recurring strategies (but obviously, describing it as mimisexuality)? In that case I don’t understand where you put a boundary against trans ideology (except from the differentiation that’s quite clear to me between language construction and actual material, factual biology). What I mean is that this, the fact of this sexual strategy being natural, could be used, and has been used, as grounds for affirmation.
Group of 23 is a vigntritet in a musical système. We have many part of our
lives which are fixed numbers. 23 chromosomes (23 and me), 46 pairs of chromosomes, DNA is a double helix, dna is a quartet of base pairs - just 4 chemicals, there is always just one egg and sperm, we have one way to reproduce. Humans are monadic in reproduction, binary in sex, quaternary in genetic information, holding a vigntritet of genes orchestrating life.
Trans is entirely natural, as natural as femme fatales, introversion, as natural as gay or lesbian, or bi. as natural as mom and dad, as natural as a cat lady or a wino, as autistic, as anorexics, as grossly obese, as grifters and psychopaths, sexual compulsives and alcoholics, as natural as pedophiles and celibates.
Some men in a competitive sexual landscape find imitating women a way to feel safe (from men) and an avenue to sexual and emotional satisfaction. They can become sexually deluded while imitating, to appear more real. It is a real natural phenomenon repeating in all cultures and times. Some people have a compulsion to isolate themselves, some to wash themselves. It’s maladaptive.
To say it is unnatural is false. It arises naturally, it’s not the creation of social conditioning. Attempting to so has failed spectacularly.
Not all naturally arising behaviors are benign, or wanted or should be tolerated. Pedophilia is present in behavior even at a quite early age. It cannot be halted. But its expression can be.
A pedophile imitating a child for sexual access is forbidden.
A Mimesexual imitating women for sexual access and to avoid responsibility for behavior should be too. Forbidden in schools, in sports, forbidden in legal systems - no male criminal should ever be called female in legal proceedings.
Mimesexuals should be forbidden as trespass in women-only gatherings, forbidden as trespass in feminist enclaves, forbidden as trespass to harass lesbians. Forbidden in prisons, bathrooms, locker rooms.
Pedophiles exist. They don’t need to be locked up if they live by legal rules. Mimesexuals exist, they don’t need to be locked up if they live by legal rules.
Young women need to be informed to protect themselves from being taken advantage of due to their strong instincts of female solidarity.
Families must be protected strongly against their grooming of adults into damaging the psychosexual development of adolescents as part of their process of affirming Mimisexuals.
As pedophiles must be forbidden from
Interacting with children, it should be forbidden for Mimisexuals to interact with teens while they are forming adult identities.
Knowing it is natural or acceptable are two entirely different worlds.
Thanks for that explanation.
What is mimisexuality called when other species do it?
Sexual mimicry.
I want the word Mimesexual to replace transgender which is meaningless.
Mimesexuality is a reproductive strategy which involves imitating the opposite sex to avoid male-male competition, and to get unchallenged access to female individuals and collectives. In humans it manifests itself as imitating women for emotional and sexual gratification. Mimesexuals may or may not be aware they are imitating women, sometimes the mimicry involves delusions that they are female so that the mimicry is more effective.
I doubt that "mimisexual" woud ever be accepted as a replacement for "transgender" by those who believe in it, and how do you replace a meaningless word with one that means something? If it's called sexual mimicry everywhere else, it should be used for humans too.
I knew a man who thought he was female inside (or at least SAID so—originally, he said he FELT AS IF he were, which is a subjective statement rather than delusional) who had bottom surgery. That didn't help him compete for the ability to mate with females to better reproduce!
Very few do.
But isn't that the whole point of male sexual mimicry of females?
No not at all. The point is to avoid competition with males for female attentions and to have expanded access to female spaces. If the delusion is profound, it can lead to sterilization, but that’s quite rare - fewer than 5% of 0.3% lead in that direction, or 0.015% or fewer. That why when you hear of a man who insists he’s a lesbian or a man in a women’s prison invariably they have a penis. They are heterosexual and quite intact. Thu mimic women for emotional and sexual gratification.
For each class in school which graduates, a simple way to think about it, over their lifetime perhaps 1500 may undergo some sort of sterilizing surgery or chemistry. However around 33,000 may in some way over the remaining 50 years of life begin imitating women for sexual and emotional gratification.
It may not be all the time - fetishistic cross dressing, is most likely, hidden, or with women who participate, or other men. It used to be fairly hidden, but now it’s more visible, and advances through stages of demanding to be affirmed as female. For protection - mimesexuals have half the rate of death by male violence of other men. And for access, to women’s bathroom, gyms, sports, collectives, to surround themselves with sexual interests without the presence of male competition.
My definition of "gender": the culturally mediated behavioral phenotype normally indicative of sex.
But it doesn’t work in biology. At all.
Fish, Bonobos, and birds don’t have gender, and that’s what I compare with. They have no culturally mediated behavioral phenotypes indicative of sex.
It's a feature of human culture, and culture has a biological basis. Humans would be a strange species of mammal if they didn't indicate sex/receptivity in some way, and it would be strange for any human behavior to not be shaped in some way by culture.
True, which is why we have gender in language. In biology, we have sex. When I say female, it connotes sex; when I say feminine, it connotes declension.
A female bird doesn’t have feminine behaviors, she has female behaviors. However when referring to a female bird, I use ‘she’ the feminine declension.
Interestingly when I refer to a penis, in French, the male sex organ takes the feminine declension in slang - la bite or la pine .
If I refer to bird in French it takes masculine declension even if a female bird - un oiseau femelle.
Sex is culturally independent. Gender, a feature of culture and language isn’t.
So a boy who doesn’t act like other boys, and a girl who doesn’t act like other girls are not abandoning conformance to their pronouns - which is literally gender nonconformity. They act in an unanticipated way - like other boys or girls. Untypical, atypical, unanticipated, differently, unexpected, in contrast to, in a different direction from most boys girls.
And finally when I refer to behavior I refer to reproductively directed behaviors.
"Sex is culturally independent. Gender, a feature of culture and language isn’t."
But language and culture are not independent of biology.
"They act in an unanticipated ways..."
Yes, and the expectation is for their behavior to honestly reflect their sex.
"...when I refer to behavior I refer to reproductively directed behaviors."
Yes, men mimicking women is a culturally mediated behavior. What it means to look like a woman will vary from culture to culture (although there are no doubt universals).
With humans, you pretty much cannot talk about any behavior (including sexual behavior) without also talking about culture. And you cannot understand human culture without considering biology.
We should probably agree to disagree on some items, I’m not sure what you want to assert.
What it means to be a woman I’ll leave to women, but biologically speaking it’s not very culturally determined.
Sex is not fluid, it’s binary, it structures the body very differently. From that fact also arrives behaviors.
Culture arrives to bound and shape them but not generate them.
We have innumerate behaviors which are consistent with primates, social animals, mammals, and vertebrates with which we cannot share “culture”. They are biological.
We are animals. As animals we will occasionally mimic the opposite sex, which can use culture but doesn’t require it, and the behavior, which we share with primates, social animals, vertebrates and invertebrates, is a manifestation of biology just as aggression, sex drive, or curiosity.
"We should probably agree to disagree on some items, I’m not sure what you want to assert."
You've said nothing in this comment that I disagree with. But in your post, you said that you "...reject the word gender in the domain of biology..." This presently makes sense for rhetorical purposes, but merely stating that a trans man is mimicking a woman leaves out some non-trivial details. Ultimately, the *way* in which sex mimicry works in humans is something sociobiolgy can and should address. In most human cultures the sex phenotype is obscured by clothing. So we assume behavioral roles to clearly broadcast our sex. Since these behavioral patterns need not align perfectly with sex, a different term is needed.
I'll add that we shouldn't leave the gender ideologues in control of the cultural discussion. The claim that there are 72 different genders is almost as removed from reality as claiming that sex is a spectrum. In most cultures there are only two genders, and in some you arguably have three. And that's about it.
Good piece. I do think that another dimension of the FTM strategy is recognizing that one presents poorly as female, no matter what. In such cases, it’s just easier to “do male.” I can’t say that I blame them.
Female mimisexuality always seems to be the mirror image fortunately, not defusing men but using male recognition to deflect reproductive instinct and to ascend female hierarchies.
Male mimisexuality is a reproductive and survival strategy to evade males, a compulsion to enter women’s spaces, and drives a systematic delusion requiring thought policing. Female mimisexuality is reproductive and survival strategy which challenges males and creates more control over reproduction. Women who imitate males don’t seek to enter male spaces to sneakily reproduce. It is much rarer historically, and I think recent versions are much more about the need to control the reproductive script, something has escalated that need immensely.
I think the "something" that has escalated the need for females to mimic males in order to increase women's dominance and control in heterosexual relationships is online porn. I've heard that a great deal of online porn shows men being violent toward women as an integral part of sex -- men choking women during sex, for example. Young girls see this porn and are deeply frightened by it.
I think exposure to online porn -- which I hear features a great deal of male violence against women, such as men choking women during sex -- drives many girls to want to avoid sex with men or find ways to become dominant in male-female relationships so they can "call the shots" in sex.
Online porn is quite convenient for research because it is exquisitely labeled so the users don’t have to search through millions of clips. If you checked on tagged categories, a small minority of clips are aggressive towards women. The vast majorly of producers and consumers are focused on comfortable seeming pleasures. Most men watch a clip and probably finish in 3-5 minutes.
Interestingly I know of nobody who has died making porn, but it happens in feature films, it seems to happen every 7-10 years in a way which gets people riled up.
Likewise I’m sure people can get hurt in porn, but stunt performers in feature films are routinely hurt, often badly - that’s why it’s called stunts. If you considered porn simply a stunt without acting, it’s vastly safer than feature films.
You'll see i cover some of these; particularly LGB being co-opted is how mimisexuality tends to leverage things in change or which are uncertain, as well as redefining the entirety of gay rights. My key concern is actually that the sources of this - psychiatry and psychology - have totally misread the phenomemon, which is at its core a delusion as reproductive strategy. if you pivot to seeing that, it's quite startling - it was to me - that imitating women to hide from male compeition, and sneakily get sexual satisfaction drives a huge number of downstream behaviors, from perpetual redefinition of female to redefining of teen angst into.... itself. Read on, enjoy your comments.
I have observed one of these AGPs in their evolution. They started by trying to get into contact with women by being their friend, offering quid pro quo (this was in th the art scene; they would blog, try to get time with the female artist). The person is unappealing and sets off alarms just by their presence, so that didn't work. Next they moved to adopting a feminine persona and trying to ooze and weasel a little more. Then they moved into fullblown trans, and with the politics of the scene being what they were, they were able to both compel female attention and proximity, and dominate conversations: and so they did.
I think it may be the access to AGP-inducing porn which informs some of these men that there is another path. 20 years ago they might not have considered it, because it would have had them too far out on the bleeding edge, and there would be no built-in requirement for women to proactively make room for them and invite them into their social sphere.
In fact I met a trans person, same MtF a bit over 20 years ago (this was in one of the most sex-weirdo positive cities in the USA, and even so they were a bit avant garde), who was attempting to obtain female friendship--by giving away wooden hangers on craigslist, and then insisting that one who came to get them sit down and spend social time with them. On craigslist one doesn't have to respond to anyone who sends an inquiry email, so of course this person would be able to filter out respondents. This person was definitely using a lure to try to get people into their proximity. This person then had a big sob story to tell about how feminine they are and how much they want to learn from women etc. etc.
Then there was another person who was using a trans identity to obtain stature and power, but in this case it might have been a mask intended to make up for lack of art talent. They were in a grad program and really did not have the chops but they were nonetheless there, and basically every arts grad program has to have at least one trans person, from then until now. It is de rigeur.
So 2 out of 3 isn't bad, in my view, and if I thought some more about what the third person was doing perhaps I would see something there too. But they were very hard to get to know, and it was very unpleasant to even contemplate trying--narcissism, aggression, stupidity--a whole host of problems.
Thanks for the big response! You describe so much of what I call “they can’t know it’s a game”
https://open.substack.com/pub/sufeitzy/p/mimesexuality-7-ludus-incognitus?r=o79yv&utm_medium=ios
It really seems all out getting closer and closer to women.
wow. This is so right on target. I've been thinking about truth and hyperreality and dissolution into oral culture (McLuhan) and this is like putting on a wingsuit through all thst terrain. Thank you
I’m not familiar with wingsuit?
It's my alternative way of referring to the heady heights of theory, integrated! https://youtu.be/1haac5NbVx0
I have a question related to other places this might exhibit (it could be debated and I would try to start debates as to why and whether it's partly an erotic target error, but in any case I have a question for you about use of your theory); may I DM you?
Wow! Thank you for this contribution to the discussion. I think understanding the patterns in "individual evolution" will be important in figuring out how to intervene...right now I'm more concerned with intervention with so-called trans teens and young adults; but mature men who abandon their wives and children are harming their family members and effective intervention with them would be a good addition to the psychotherapy "toolkit."
it sure would be great to have an intervention but ... since it seems to be rooted in narcissism i'm not sure one exists. narcissists can even wrap therapists around their finger if the therapist isn't top notch and as for family therapy--forget about it it's a minefield of manipulation