Isn’t she a man hater? So now she believes she is one? I never understood lesbians who make themselves look like dudes or women who date women that look like dudes. I’ve seen that a few times and then a lot of those women (big surprise) date men afterwards
I never understood lesbians who make themselves look like dudes or women who date women that look like dudes.
Couple of things.
1: Most lesbians who try to look like men usually come from a broken home where either the man wasn't present, the man was present but was abusive, or the man was neglectful. In some ways, they believe that imitating a man is a just compensation for not having a proper male role-model in their life, or as a way to become the man they always wanted in their life. In short, these people are typically really messed up.
2: Women who date women who look like dudes are the ones who always wanted male affection, but either didn't receive it or didn't like the kind they received. They oftentimes are looking for a way to connect to men emotionally but usually don't know how. Women pretending to be men are attempting to physically portray a man, but still connect with other women on an emotional level like a woman. This gives the impression to the women who are needy for male affection that the woman-pretending-to-be-a-man is a good surrogate for feeding them male affection through the conduit of a feminine lens. They usually use those kind of relationships to build what they believe to be some kind of connection to a father figure they didn't have but always wanted. In short, they too, are also very messed up.
1: Most lesbians who try to look like men usually come from a broken home where either the man wasn't present, the man was present but was abusive, or the man was neglectful. In some ways, they believe that imitating a man is a just compensation for not having a proper male role-model in their life, or as a way to become the man they always wanted in their life. In short, these people are typically really messed up.
Interesting observation. A close business colleague (works in a closely associated business) and a personal friend is butch lesbian. Actually, I'm not sure butch is the right term...she's not one of the fugly fat biker types. Short hair, skinny as fuck, etc, Maybe she would have been a "boi" when younger, I don't know. She's clearly the masculine in her relationship. Anyway, I only recently found out that she was adopted, her adoptive parents were fucked up, etc. She recently in her 50s got in touch with her birth parents. She loves them, says they're great people, has been totally accepted by them, and now goes on family holidays with them, etc., but the only thing is--they voted for Trump, lol. She's been having to come to terms with some shit, it's funny. But yeah, the abuse / missing male role model part is real.
I've always figured if there is a "real" lesbian it's the butch types. The femme ones seem to flip flop a lot and just can't make up their minds :-P
There is a compilation of research out there called "On the Psychogenesis of Homosexuality" that's also illuminating for anyone who wants to understand the phenomenon. Said compilation is mostly about male homosexuality, which seems to be a different thing than lesbianism. The author is clearly Christian but the info he gathers is legit.
Said compilation is mostly about male homosexuality, which seems to be a different thing than lesbianism.
Yes, the two are very different indeed, and almost every honest psychologist, neuroscientist and physiologist will attest to such.
Also, the research you suggested fits in line with much of what I discovered over the years after delving into the " hard science" behind homosexuality... namely, there wasn't any.
Just like in the research, there was zero evidence for any of the claims, and all of the tested hypotheses came back nil. That's when the light bulb finally came on as I realized the whole thing had been approached backwards, with activists having asserted a falsehood as truth and then sent everyone on a wild goose chase to find evidence to satisfy the claim (for which they never did, and never will).
The blatant answers were basically in the nitty gritty of neurophysiology, which inadvertently nullifies the whole "born gay" hoax, since it's simply physiologically impossible.
But the research you suggested makes another really good point...almost every Conservative, Republican, and Christian out there regurgitates the falsehoods put forward by the Left regarding the "born gay" nonsense. I just recently got into a minor kerfuffle with a Conservative who was going on and about how gays are just "born that way". I tried to explain to him why it was false and he claimed those were "conspiracy theories", so I linked him to the literature and asked him a lot of basic questions, and the one that finally got him to wake up to how he had been duped was "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so the burden is on you to provide any amount of evidence they're born gay?"
When I pointed out there was no evidence in any physiological field, and asked him to provide the evidence, he changed his tune.
When they do psychology of everything else, disorders and otherwise, they always want it to come back to the parents and the childhood. They should use the same strategy with sexuality. The "born this way" hypothesis was born out of political expediency and then became unquestionable dogma. Since it's no longer a political necessity -- we each are allowed to choose what we want to be every day now -- it should be discarded by even those who felt the need to ascribe to it before.
Isn’t she a man hater? So now she believes she is one? I never understood lesbians who make themselves look like dudes or women who date women that look like dudes. I’ve seen that a few times and then a lot of those women (big surprise) date men afterwards
Couple of things.
1: Most lesbians who try to look like men usually come from a broken home where either the man wasn't present, the man was present but was abusive, or the man was neglectful. In some ways, they believe that imitating a man is a just compensation for not having a proper male role-model in their life, or as a way to become the man they always wanted in their life. In short, these people are typically really messed up.
2: Women who date women who look like dudes are the ones who always wanted male affection, but either didn't receive it or didn't like the kind they received. They oftentimes are looking for a way to connect to men emotionally but usually don't know how. Women pretending to be men are attempting to physically portray a man, but still connect with other women on an emotional level like a woman. This gives the impression to the women who are needy for male affection that the woman-pretending-to-be-a-man is a good surrogate for feeding them male affection through the conduit of a feminine lens. They usually use those kind of relationships to build what they believe to be some kind of connection to a father figure they didn't have but always wanted. In short, they too, are also very messed up.
Very interesting and I tend to agree. Plus I’ve seen women who dare manly women leave them for actual men
Interesting observation. A close business colleague (works in a closely associated business) and a personal friend is butch lesbian. Actually, I'm not sure butch is the right term...she's not one of the fugly fat biker types. Short hair, skinny as fuck, etc, Maybe she would have been a "boi" when younger, I don't know. She's clearly the masculine in her relationship. Anyway, I only recently found out that she was adopted, her adoptive parents were fucked up, etc. She recently in her 50s got in touch with her birth parents. She loves them, says they're great people, has been totally accepted by them, and now goes on family holidays with them, etc., but the only thing is--they voted for Trump, lol. She's been having to come to terms with some shit, it's funny. But yeah, the abuse / missing male role model part is real.
I've always figured if there is a "real" lesbian it's the butch types. The femme ones seem to flip flop a lot and just can't make up their minds :-P
There is a compilation of research out there called "On the Psychogenesis of Homosexuality" that's also illuminating for anyone who wants to understand the phenomenon. Said compilation is mostly about male homosexuality, which seems to be a different thing than lesbianism. The author is clearly Christian but the info he gathers is legit.
Yes, the two are very different indeed, and almost every honest psychologist, neuroscientist and physiologist will attest to such.
Also, the research you suggested fits in line with much of what I discovered over the years after delving into the " hard science" behind homosexuality... namely, there wasn't any.
Just like in the research, there was zero evidence for any of the claims, and all of the tested hypotheses came back nil. That's when the light bulb finally came on as I realized the whole thing had been approached backwards, with activists having asserted a falsehood as truth and then sent everyone on a wild goose chase to find evidence to satisfy the claim (for which they never did, and never will).
The blatant answers were basically in the nitty gritty of neurophysiology, which inadvertently nullifies the whole "born gay" hoax, since it's simply physiologically impossible.
But the research you suggested makes another really good point...almost every Conservative, Republican, and Christian out there regurgitates the falsehoods put forward by the Left regarding the "born gay" nonsense. I just recently got into a minor kerfuffle with a Conservative who was going on and about how gays are just "born that way". I tried to explain to him why it was false and he claimed those were "conspiracy theories", so I linked him to the literature and asked him a lot of basic questions, and the one that finally got him to wake up to how he had been duped was "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so the burden is on you to provide any amount of evidence they're born gay?"
When I pointed out there was no evidence in any physiological field, and asked him to provide the evidence, he changed his tune.
When they do psychology of everything else, disorders and otherwise, they always want it to come back to the parents and the childhood. They should use the same strategy with sexuality. The "born this way" hypothesis was born out of political expediency and then became unquestionable dogma. Since it's no longer a political necessity -- we each are allowed to choose what we want to be every day now -- it should be discarded by even those who felt the need to ascribe to it before.
There's also "The Born Gay Hoax".
I’m not sure how people got this impression, but this ain’t Gadsby…
I can’t be bothered looking up Gadsby to see whether she has actually trooned out, but nah, this one’s a “guy”…
Moses Storm (apparently), to be precise… 🤷🏻♂️
I would’ve thought the accent was a giveaway, but anyway…
Gotcha. Thank you
Sorry about that. I watched the clip and this was the only thing that came to mind. At first, I thought it was her.