Originally posted 2023-07-14 19:05:20.
There are several sexual nexuses which affect gender in those born male. These depend on the three sets of parameters which underlie it. In turn these are: sex itself, that is our biological sex following whether we are male (XY) or female (XX) and all those entail; sexuality, which is either male (active, the desire to penetrate) or female (passive, the desire to be penetrated) and gender, our outward expression, masculine or feminine.
The First Sexual Nexus
These are to some extent variable. At the first nexus, a male might, in a small number of cases, have female sexuality. This we call Sexual Inversion. This person desires to be penetrated and will therefore seek partners who can do this. Mostly those will be heterosexual men, so the subject here becomes completely feminine, in order to attract them. Similarly, some females are sexually Inverted and have male sexuality. They become as masculine as they can, the classic butch lesbian.
The Second
The second nexus is often not appreciated. In this (remaining with males) a male has male sexuality, that is the desire to penetrate, but for some reason expresses feminine gender, which is at odds with this. Why does that happen? Doesn’t it blow the whole previous argument out of the water?
Autogynephilia and the ETLE
No. In this instance, the subject has a paraphilia called Autogynephilia. In this he becomes attracted to the idea of himself as a woman and may try to experience life ‘as a woman’ including appearing to be one, but, crucially, he retains a heterosexual attraction to women.
Autogynephilia depends on a mechanism known as the Erotic Target Location Error (ETLE). In most people, the Erotic Target is outside the self, located on someone else. In the ETLE it is inside the self, actually a construction of the person’s own consciousness – a figment of the imagination, to be blunt. Obviously, this is the wrong place for it to be, since the whole point of this system is reproduction.
This is not the only paraphilia that depends on an ETLE but it is by far the most widely described one. So let’s see how it might work in practice. Remember that the subject is actually a heterosexual male. So he is attracted to feminine women. He should be performing masculinity to attract them but instead he does the opposite and performs a version of femininity instead.
In order to get round this, he has to represent himself as a ‘lesbian’ or, more fashionably, a ‘transbian’. But he is not a lesbian at all, he is a man with conventional male sexuality, who has become the target of his own erotic desire. Since he is heterosexual, indeed ‘hyper-heterosexual’ and he is overwhelmingly aroused by femininity and everything feminine, he makes himself as feminine as he can, to satisfy this erotic urge. But his understanding of himself as a man, not to mention what he sees in the mirror, conflicts with his image of himself as his own erotic target.
Gender Dysphoria
This causes cognitive dissonance, which is usually represented as non-homosexual gender dysphoria. This can be such a problem, especially for older transitioners, that some avoid sex with others altogether and become fully auto-erotic. Many will attempt to ‘kill’ their male host, because he rejects his gender presentation as a woman.
Sexual Inversion
A similar issue can occur at the same nexus but in Sexually Inverted males, otherwise known as homosexual males. These have female sexuality, that is, they want to be penetrated and are usually strongly phallus-oriented. They should, as above, appear as glamorous women, to attract the men they desire. Instead they present in as masculine a manner as they are able to. Why?
It’s because they too have a paraphilia, this time called Autoandrophilia (AAP). In this, the fixation is on themselves as masculine men, so they perform aggressive masculinity, become gym-flies, take testosterone and so on. They are attracted to masculinity and reinvent themselves as masculine men in order to satisfy their own sexual fantasy.
Autoandrophilia appears to be rare outside the West and it seems fair to suggest that it is the result of the peculiar conditions in the West, where the prevailing power-structures within the ‘gay’ lifestyle condemn femininity, Inverted males may try to cope with this by becoming ‘hyper-masculine. This will usually result in a narcissistic obsession with their own bodies as those of the masculine males that they actually desire. They will work out excessively, take supplementary testosterone and so on, to enhance the effect.
Clone Wars
This strange accommodation eventually becomes the Western ‘clone’ form of male homosexuality, where everyone looks and dresses exactly the same. This is diametrically the opposite of how the gender binary actually works, in which opposites attract.
As a result, homosexuals in this state will become increasingly attracted to a narcissistically-induced image of themselves. Professor Sam Vaknin has written eloquently about this, saying
Preoccupation with body and sex makes most homosexual narcissists somatic narcissists. Moreover, the homosexual makes love to a person of the same sex — in a way, to his reflection. In this respect, homosexual relations are highly narcissistic and autoerotic affairs. (From the book Malignant Self-love: Narcissism Revisited by Sam Vaknin.
The reference to the somatic, that is, to do with the body, which Vaknin repeats many times, is interesting because ‘gay’ males often talk about their attraction to ‘sexed bodies.’ Indeed, this form of attraction has spread more widely than the ‘gay’ lifestyle.
Attraction is, in normal relationships, partly conceptual. Yes of course we do desire a certain type of body but while the object of our attraction is dressed, we take that on the word of his or her gender. In other words, gender becomes a promise of a certain type of body, as well as a willingness to use it in particular ways. The basal urge involved is reproduction so naturally, the actual nature of our partners’ bodies is crucial, but initial attraction is conceptual; even in today’s Western culture, meeting someone who is actually naked is rare.
Cheating the system
The homosexual transsexual, even if she has had Genital reconstruction Surgery, cheats the system. She promises, with her sexy clothing, pretty face and hormone-altered appearance, a female body, but she doesn’t actually have one; instead she has a feminised male body. For a significant number of men, that is an issue that can be dealt with. Such a man simply suspends his disbelief. However, the narcissistic homosexual, while he might be overjoyed to find a penis, will never get that far because the gender wrapper it comes in is much too feminine; he’s attracted to masculinity. She might actually have a male body, but what the homosexual transsexual promises is a female one.
At the same time, a homosexual transsexual will quickly read the man as being homosexual himself, which is something she will not accept, at least outside the West.
A heterosexual man — who might well entertain a beautiful male homosexual transsexual — will be repulsed by the narcissistic homosexual’s masculine appearance.
Femboys
One other type is the femboy, who in the West is usually an Autogynephilic cosplayer, interested in having sex only with others like himself. However in southeast Asia he appears as an intermediate condition. Homosexuals here are classified as ‘shorthair’ who wear somewhat masculine clothes and obviously, short hair, and ‘longhair’ who live as women. Both types may be taking hormones and both seek masculine men.
So the Asian femboy is a cute feminised boy who seeks to be penetrated by men. As she ages she may either become a longhair full time or she may stop hormones, if she’s taking them, and let herself masculinise.
So another cultural nexus appears here, because femboys can’t date homosexual transsexuals and although men might well be interested while they’re in their teens and hardly masculinised, that comes to a full stop in their twenties. As a result, males like this may accommodate each other. In the West, they are likely to increase their pseudo-masculinity, since that is what both they and their partners are attracted to, but in Asia, if such a relationship is established, normally one partner will become as masculine as possible, while the other becomes much more feminine and may complete as a woman. In other words, they stop switching and being, in the local sense, bisexual and become a conventional hetero-gender couple. although in this case one adopts a pederastic role and the other retains a homosexual one.
A sexual nexus of confusion
All this means that there can be significant variation, but it is readily explainable. Unfortunately, for political reasons, a great deal of confusion has been introduced. Largely, this depends on the myth that gender and sexuality are not related, when in fact, gender is the direct product of sexuality.
For example, a recent Stonewall page said:
‘Sexual Orientation’ (who you are attracted to) is completely unrelated to gender identity (who you are).
However, it is clear from the explanation above that this is at best a distortion of the truth. How has this been done? By pretending that somehow ‘trans’ people are all the same.
Before 1970
Prior to the 1970s, in the West, almost all homosexual males were markedly feminine and they sought masculine partners. These partners were not seen as homosexual, since they only penetrated. This is exactly the same as the understanding current outside the West today. So one partner had male sexuality and the other female. So far so good. This had been the case time out of mind and remains so across the planet. Unfortunately, during the sixties, the ‘gay movement’ came under the influence of ideas that originated with, amongst others, Benedict Friedlaender, a German pederast. As a result, a new ‘egalitarian’ form was developed, in which homosexual males presented as ‘manly men’ and their partners were homosexual too.
This illustrates another sexual nexus which has been largely ignored in the West. It is between homosexuals and pederasts. Because both of these pursue males and have sex with them, after Kinsey, both were considered to be homosexuals. because, after Kinsey, their sex was homosexual. Kinsey, an inset taxonomist, absolutely refused to consider the different personality types involved. Although he was careful to say that the occasional same-sex encounter did not make someone homosexual, he simply did not recognise a nexus that is absolutely recognised across the Western ‘gay’ lifestyle: in vernacular, tops, bottoms and switchers.
Tops and bottoms and switchers: another sexual nexus
Switchers we are already familiar with. They are identical to the Asian bisexual in behaviour, but often appear as masculine as they can. Sometimes they penetrate, top, a partner and sometime they are penetrated by him, bottoming.
These males are therefore bisexual because they sometimes are penetrated like a woman and sometimes they penetrate like a man. So they play both sexual roles and are thus bisexual.
Homosexuals are the classic form that everyone would have recognised, certainly prior to about 1970. They tend to be small, light for height, fine-boned, pretty, artistic, and so on but most importantly they are exclusive of near exclusive bottoms. They like to be fucked.
Pederasts
Pederasts are men who are attracted to youthful masculinity. There seems to be a narcissistic or auto-erotic component in their profile and they may be lusting after themselves as teenage boys. There definitely seems to be a correlation between the ages of their sexual targets and the age at which they themselves were first pedicated. They are never penetrated themselves and only penetrate.
These are not homosexuals. They tend to be masculine, big, athletic and so on. They can be domineering and indeed, see penetrating their partners as an act of domination, which gives them sexual gratification. This is much in line with Benedict Friedlaender’s ideas. However, while some treat their partners badly, often with physical abuse, others seem to genuinely love their boys.
Possibly because of the HIV epidemic,but partly because they are naturally dominant men, this wing eventually became took control of the ‘gay’ lifestyle.
By 2000 and perhaps before, this, the ‘egalitarian’ model, that I call the New Gay Man, had taken over both the discourse and the public perception of male gayness, in the USA and UK. So now, in these territories, all femininity had to be suppressed (at least in public) and ‘gays’ were not only to be manly men, but were also expected to switch sexual roles. At the same time, the conventionally masculine men who previously might have been tempted, perhaps after Julian Clary’s four pints, had run for it. They were not homosexual and they were not going to have their careers ruined by vicious queens like Peter Tatchell, who might feed the newspapers with tasty lines like ‘Well known local businessman caught with rentboy.’ They were heading for the hills – the hills in Thailand, that is, where a far more reasonable attitude to all this is maintained, the girly-boys revel in their femininity and nobody cares.