Being androgynous

[BurnedOut]

is hard...

 

[Black Rose]

I tried to imagine myself as female. Fail to say I only felt it on the inside a few times. It is not something I can just make happen. I need to be sensitive to it. I do not fully know what being male is either but I am closer to it. The point of male and female is firm and soft. I can tell the difference but it is not something I can formally describe. I can tell it from whether is happening in the opposite gender or not. Gender fluidity is somewhat difficult to understand because of the descriptors society uses. But the way people are can be very clear.

Submissiveness is usually seen as female.

 

[Cognisant]

is hard...

Why?

Post a photo, see what reaction it gets, at worst you're absolutely hideous and it'll just be a confirmation of what you already know.

 

[BurnedOut]

There is some schizophrenic notion about androgyny being only about appearance. That is similar to thinking that all gay men look ostensibly effeminate. No, I don't run a music group in South Korea.

In my case, I look like your average masculine guy. When I say androgyny is difficult, I refer to the specific sensitivities that are gotten with it.

I have these specific ones :
1. Women - Somehow my preferences strongly lie in androgynous women. This is unlike men in poverty who are unable to access the feminine females who are claimed by the masculine men. I simply have a natural preference for andro females. i don't know if it because of my upbringing in which women played a big role in it and I was able to witness a complete overlap in male and female behaviors. Feminine females seem annoying to me. In my experience, they have this particular quirk independent of their cognition regarding some innate expectation of men (sex). I have experienced the following:
a) If you look masculine enough, you should be naturally take the lead and woo her.
b) If you look masculine enough, you should naturally practice chivalry.
c) IYLME, given that you are interested in an interaction, you should provide them a cognitive pedestal. This comes in the form of 'being her toy' or 'acquiescing to everything she says' or 'at least refrain from disagreeing'. I don't want to mention all the extremes but you can use recursive logic and figure out what these mean in their primitive forms too.

All these things happen when I either want to befriend a girl or if I am just interested in that girl and I feel a bit shy and she can witness it but she will continue to tease. I say tease because it is very clear that it is teasing and not reticence on their part. While they may say that my masculinity makes them flush, I feel that is untrue when during the first interactions, I try very hard to be apparent about the fact that I don't type myself as particularly masculine.

However, when I do like a woman, I do try to court her. But I try to court her with friendship with and clear proclamation of my adoration based on a particular set of traits that are more than mere appearance and behavior (kind/nice/motherly). This does not mean that I do not care about the appearance at all. Perhaps it is sole thing that attracted me and that is biological but it does not construe that my attraction stemming from her appearance subsumes all other modalities of beauty that are not physical. I mention this specifically because I do get affirmative glances from the opposite sex. If I take it up due to similar reasons and after the interactions, it becomes clear that my personality traits are under the aegis of my physical appearance. My mind is the sentient part of my body. My body bolsters it. But it does not work the other way around. If you were to like my body and if I were to submit to your flattery based on my nonsentient traits, I will follow your sentience, not mine. I will be your slave, not independent. Does that bode well for any relationship ?


I believe that if I am direct regarding my assertion, it is doubly flattering because it is genuine and not a result of my lascivious needs which sporadically lead to the utterance of false words. I understand the need of some suggestions and some courting but I expect the woman to court me too and not be the sole receiver of fake bullshit which is merely to bolster the ego. I want it too if I am indulging in insulting practices. I want reciprocity. I have faltered and I have used conventional courting in my not-so-lucid moments and they did not bring my any kind of pleasure.

This has led to a lot of hostility - both and implicit and explicit. I come off as sexist/asshole/haughty man after an argument many times when I am simply trying to treat the woman at par with me. The accusation results after I refuse to heed to a daft argument adeptly coated with bathos to slice my argument into a half. I can use sharp logic and at the same time retain sensitivity (also a result of SPS) which is feminine. While you may say that destroying other's logic evokes strong reactions, I say that their crux does not lie in some obligation, which in this case is - 'You are a man, why do you not pay me attention like other men ?'

This is not to say that I have never had female friends or girlfriends, I have and I do (but I am single right now). I have enjoyed deep friendships with a lot of them simply because I never felt that I was masculine enough to not open up regarding some things. I was and am able to fluidly reflect both the genders. I have many people say to me that I have a motherly personality.

***

2. Masculine appearance, masculine behavior or you are out.

I like to be fit. Goddamnit, that does not mean I have testosterone oozing out of my orifices. I detest masculine males not because they are hormonally naturally inflicted by it but because they display behaviors that are deliberate and self-destructive and harmful to other men and women too. Since I have done a course in Psychology of Gender for a year, I have quite some idea about these things.

Men -
1. Do not talk of misery in terms of how you felt. It should be in terms of how you acted. You should not seemed resigned when you say it. If you do, you should be able to portray some aggression. Such silly notions are so widespread that they can be regularly observed all ages. The TV shows exacerbate this issue even more. For fuck's sake if James Bond is to live like that, he definitely has some limbic system malfunctioning. Real life spies are not without emotions. They are not mentally well either. I choose to go against the norm and be heartfelt about what I felt. If I felt elated, I did. If I felt dejected, I felt dejected and vulnerable. If I tell this to my male best friends, what is so wrong in it in order to label me 'incapable of managing emotions' ?

2. It is okay to share your deepest vulnerabilities to a woman. But only to a woman. A male alliance should be made aware of your misery in a manner that does not portray you as a victim but a fighter. Yes, I have been forced to do this too due to obvious reasons - MEN REPRESS VIOLENTLY. There is ample scientific evidence proving this.

3. Do your regular masculinity drills - compete with hot women are around; ostensibly display a lack of interest in not-so-good looking women whose insulting essence can be detected; rate women according to their appearance; be interested in masculine hobbies. I am a former gymnast and it is prima facie feminine. My gymnast physique weights less than a gym-going man's physique.

4. An apostle, a homo (gays only), an andro.
Effeminate guys suck, they are sensitive and they are gay but not in the literal sense.

Homo guys are perhaps the worst inflicted. There are so many homo insults sprinkled like salt in your conventional speak - 'I am going to fuck your ass'; 'Stupid cocksucking bastard.';

***

Perhaps there is some respite for homos because they are a distinct identity. A minority.

What about andros ? We are absolutely splintered, in denial about being andros in a lot of cases, embarrassed and closeted. We are shot down in some rare moments we express.

And for the love of god. Andros are not 'males' and 'females' 'crossing their conventional boundaries.'. You do not have to be so goddamn ostensible about it.

 

[Cognisant]

By your own admission you're not androgynous, you're a pretty boy, your problem isn't that the broad shouldered and strong jawed women that you like are hard to find, again by your own admission it's not the physical it's the mental, you want a woman that thinks like a man.

Yeah we all want that.

For you the solution seems straightforward enough, stop letting women approach you and go hunting you lazy bastard, although that being said it's a lot easier said than done, but still if attractive women are approaching you at least you're hunting with a gun while I'm working with a pointy stick.

The fundamental problem is best illustrated by the term "basic bitch" which to be fair isn't exclusively a female thing, there's basic men too there's just less of them (well it varies by age but I'll get to that) because there's a sort of biological favoritism towards women. Every woman can find a man in her lifetime, maybe not the one she wants, maybe not one that meets her standards, but the great game of life is a lot like musical chairs and women are the chairs at least in terms of passing on one's genes.

Consequently, statistically, women have it easier and when someone follows the path of least resistance they're "basic", they didn't have to deviate from the path, they didn't have to adapt. There's a reason why philosophers tend to be such dour fucks, happy people don't have a lot to think about they can just enjoy being happy, why fix what isn't broken y'know, why risk overwriting behavioral patterns that are already working so well.

Now of course this isn't strictly a gender thing, there's "basic" men too and there's interesting women it's just that women who are interesting and attractive tend not to stay single for long because not only does their attractiveness make them desirable so does their deviance from the norm.

If you were a woman that quiet fury you have about women being attracted to you for superficial reasons rather than wanting to actually get to know you would be so incredibly enamoring, likewise if I were female I'm sure you'd be smitten with me, alas we are both straight men and this topic has become so very gay

Getting back to the age thing when women are young and attractive they can afford to be very basic and superficial (I'm generalizing, please don't crucify me women of INTPforum we all know each and every one of you is unique) but as time passes and beauty fades they find they have little to fall back on. Again this is not exclusive to women there's a friend of mine who peaked in high school and he's not doing very well anymore because his beauty left him and he doesn't know how to play the game. In general this is something that happens more to women as they have biological clocks whereas a man that did poorly in high school can do well later as a man who looks after himself only becomes more dignified with age.

Men -
1. Do not talk of misery in terms of how you felt. It should be in terms of how you acted. You should not seemed resigned when you say it. If you do, you should be able to portray some aggression. Such silly notions are so widespread that they can be regularly observed all ages. The TV shows exacerbate this issue even more. For fuck's sake if James Bond is to live like that, he definitely has some limbic system malfunctioning. Real life spies are not without emotions. They are not mentally well either. I choose to go against the norm and be heartfelt about what I felt. If I felt elated, I did. If I felt dejected, I felt dejected and vulnerable. If I tell this to my male best friends, what is so wrong in it in order to label me 'incapable of managing emotions' ?

2. It is okay to share your deepest vulnerabilities to a woman. But only to a woman. A male alliance should be made aware of your misery in a manner that does not portray you as a victim but a fighter. Yes, I have been forced to do this too due to obvious reasons - MEN REPRESS VIOLENTLY. There is ample scientific evidence proving this.

Yeah, I gave this whole speech in another thread that reality is uncompromisingly fair, as a man I'm not allowed to have emotions, I'm not allowed to express pain or misery or fear or dejection and I'm not even allowed to be angry about it and that's not unfair that's just reality. It is uncompromisingly fair.

Thank fuck for the internet amiright?

 

[Deleted member 1424]

Men do need to be better friends to eachother. It's a simple logistics problem. Women can't collectively fix the collective emotional baggage and the resulting self destruction.

It's probably too late in my country though.

 

[Black Rose]

I am not angry at all or at least anger does not dominate my thinking processes. The psychologist said I fold my anger inwards but that just is not the case. I think that every man who is masculine does fold inward and is a strength to them being men. What happens with me is that I have dissolved my anger. Men with depression usually express it through agitated anger, I don't. I've met masculine men before and they seem to have a strong core.

In contrast, females are more introverted men more extroverted. Females have ten times the fibers in corpus callosum than men. They have a greater sense of personal bodily interiority than men. Conversely, introverted men think more from the perspective of interiority. Men project women internalizes.

Coming from the internal perspective women and men come off opposite of violent but totally peaceful. Not strong but vulnerable. Now all four descriptors can be masculine or feminine, it depends. The more gentle the more female. Masculine is invulnerable. Those are the basics. Acceptions vary.

Men can be like women and women can be like men so it is hard to describe the way people are because the descriptors are in flux. But it seems w have an intuition about the way masculine and feminine are. I remember that one time on INTP discord a staff member described me as "her". Now I was surprised because I normally do not think of my gender when writing but this comment made me think about how I am viewed by others and how I view myself.

I had the thought that if there was a girl who had the same personality as me, would I consider her feminine. And the answer was yes. A girl like me would be feminine. We are attracted to the opposite gender who most are like us or we see those qualities in people almost like us. The point is that a round peg fits in a round hole. A square peg a square hole. Triangle pegs in triangle holes. The opposite gender has a complement to personality. The right female for me will not necessarily fit with other men's expectations.

The hyper-masculine will be attracted to hyper-feminine. But those can show up in the opposite genders as well. Women that think like men and men who think like women are both in a matter of degrees. For example, I think 55 percent like a female and 45 percent like a male. That is 5 percent more feminine than masculine. I may be attracted to a female 5 percent more masculine than feminine. But this is only a guess. I do not know all traits and respective counterparts to make a logical assessment. I need to interact with a woman to know intuitively if she fits with me.

 

[BurnedOut]

By your own admission you're not androgynous, you're a pretty boy, your problem isn't that the broad shouldered and strong jawed women that you like are hard to find, again by your own admission it's not the physical it's the mental, you want a woman that thinks like a man.

What ? I am androgynous which is why I am writing this.

you're a pretty boy, your problem isn't that the broad shouldered and strong jawed women that you like are hard to find, again by your own admission it's not the physical it's the mental, you want a woman that thinks like a man.

What about andros ? We are absolutely splintered,

Getting back to the age thing when women are young and attractive they can afford to be very basic and superficial (I'm generalizing, please don't crucify me women of INTPforum we all know each and every one of you is unique) but as time passes and beauty fades they find they have little to fall back on. Again this is not exclusive to women there's a friend of mine who peaked in high school and he's not doing very well anymore because his beauty left him and he doesn't know how to play the game. In general this is something that happens more to women as they have biological clocks whereas a man that did poorly in high school can do well later as a man who looks after himself only becomes more dignified with age.

You perhaps may be crucified. There is one thing you mistakenly/deliberately skipped and that thing is that women and men have social relations which they consolidate over time. There is a LOT to fall back on for men and women both, determined by how entrenched their lives are in the society.

In general this is something that happens more to women as they have biological clocks whereas a man that did poorly in high school can do well later as a man who looks after himself only becomes more dignified with age.

How can he feel dignified with age if his high school life is fractured ? High school constitutes an important phase in life for men and women. If his high school life has pathetic, he is going to have an uncool streak of insecurity.

Yeah, I gave this whole speech in another thread that reality is uncompromisingly fair, as a man I'm not allowed to have emotions, I'm not allowed to express pain or misery or fear or dejection and I'm not even allowed to be angry about it and that's not unfair that's just reality. It is uncompromisingly fair.

Until there is uneven distribution of resources, there is going to be unfairness. The reality is consisted by us and if we are feeling compromised, the reality is that we are feeling compromised. I see no point in assigning reality a godly characteristic. It is not representative of anything. It is just another word for status quo. If status quo can be challenged, the reality is challenged and since it is based on mutable units, it is representative of nothing transcendental qua uncompromising/compromising.

Thank fuck for the internet amiright?

The internet is a representative of the society too. This is just another mode of communication. The rules of human society apply here too. Without the internet, people are still going to have another modes of expression. The internet being something of innovation ? Yes, true. Is it out of reach of human avarice ? NO.

 

[washti]

Cog and his normiestan uzbekistan. Status quo apologista. Reality and mind in perfect unisono. Who is doing dishes at work the best, like noone else? Do you know that men are so disabled that women must give them orders? Lets fit in into the feminism realm. Lets have useful retorics. Could you find me perhaps a meteorite of sarcasm? Isn't it there somewhere? Thank you. Please we are adults now. Sarcasm means you are pitifully regressed. Lets have a lecture instead.
Accept what and where you were born. That's reality you know. Work from there obediently youngster. I will tell you what you are. A pretty boy.

 

[Cognisant]

 

[PiedPiper]

Cog and his normiestan uzbekistan. Status quo apologista. Reality and mind in perfect unisono. Who is doing dishes at work the best, like noone else? Do you know that men are so disabled that women must give them orders? Lets fit in into the feminism realm. Lets have useful retorics. Could you find me perhaps a meteorite of sarcasm? Isn't it there somewhere? Thank you. Please we are adults now. Sarcasm means you are pitifully regressed. Lets have a lecture instead.
Accept what and where you were born. That's reality you know. Work from there obediently youngster. I will tell you what you are. A pretty boy.

It's only rational to decipher it in 50/50 terms, why take it all so serious, though? As the cliché goes, none of us are making it out alive. By what unanimity do you rationalize the thought "sarcasm is for children?" What can you base this on other than opinion, likely a narrow self-opinion at that? If I'm even correct, if I'm not in fact siding with your very notion at it's core without conscious realization.
See, what we don't often realize is the impact simple phrases have in determining temporary and even permanent self-perceptual intellect.
If I'm even minutely on the same page of reality as you were when you typed it on your "modern" machine. Which, to my best knowledge, am likely not. And to my higher thinking, I am surely not. What is the outcome?

 

[kora]

View attachment 5485

I think that was a parody of you. quite a funny one as well

(see washti, I do still receive you a bit)

 

[kora]

Actually the whole OP to me sounds like a dude who, after self-analyzing himself is in fact worried about traits he observes within himself as being "feminine". Traits which are actually completely and trivially common in both genders such as "sensitivity" , "wanting emotional connections" and "wanting to be hit on/desired."

Ironically not androgynous at all imo, but perhaps betrays some worry about conforming to some abstract masculine norm.

Maybe translating the insecurity and perceived strangeness into something akin to "originality" "complexity" (which OP may very well be of course in some sense, regardless of any of this)

It kind of sounds like you are basically saying this, to me :

"I may not be as masculine as other guys, I am not like other people. Most women are not masculine enough, and most guys are too masculine"

Do you mean that you have hit the sweet spot of perfection OP ?


(You can ignore this remark, I am teasing a bit)

Once again an INTPf thread has turned into characterizing women as "other", more tendencies to be normies, more tendencies to be annoying/superficial etc. It's because of evolution, don't you know.

If one of you guys were female maybe you would be attracted to each other, but it's more likely you would in fact realize many women are basic superficial boors, but an equal amount of men are also superficial boors, frequently with the added bonus of being self enamored and assertive about it with you, the female in question.

Not you men of INTP forum of course, we all know that you are special and unique

My only advice to anyone here (and to myself first and foremost) is to be careful and to try to avoid prejudice, if it is at all possible.

good luck !

 

[Cognisant]

No it's not possible, sure you can walk on eggshells but no how hard you try to be fair to all sides some self righteous person is going to come along to pick something you said out of context to use it against you.

Not you men of INTP forum of course, we all know that you are special and unique

This is the perfect example, I'm screwed either way because I'm not a woman and therefore I'm not allowed to have an opinion because as a man anything I say is inherently wrong. Even when I lampshade that very phenomenon so a woman can't call me out without proving me right I'll get some white knight rushing in to get his cheap shot.
It's not fair but hey c'est la vie.

I think that was a parody of you

Of course it was and refused to dignify it with my comprehension.

Spoiler

 

[kora]

There is no authority great enough to stop you from having an opinion. I am simply saying that in my opinion, your opinion is biased, not because you are a man, but because you are a fallible human being subject to cognitive bias. As I am also in many instances.

(but not in this one of course )

See, this is exactly the double standard that De Beauvoir pointed out as being ridiculous. She would say something, and her male interlocutor would say "ah, but you only say this because you are a woman."

Correctly, she pointed out that saying that is a waste of time.

Now, when I said :

" Not you men of INTP forum of course, we all know that you are special and unique"

I was only saying exactly the same thing that you said (another parody?) Just another tease, half serious, half truthful, some intention of pointing out absurdity anyway, for certain.

Am I to conclude that I am screwed either way because I am female and am not allowed to have an opinion on the matter either? Are the genders really so different that we are unable to communicate. That if I say something it is because I am female and you are male and therefore we live in different worlds ?

I don't believe that's true. I think one of us is right, and the other wrong, maybe in varying degrees that remain to be determined.

But as soon as you say that I am only saying that you are wrong because you are a man and I am a woman, well that's just a way of cutting all discussion short. Not that we have to continue it of course, maybe it would just be infuriating for both of us. I have a very high tolerance in infuriating discussion though, I must warn you

 

[Cognisant]

There is no authority great enough to stop you from having an opinion.

Those words make me unreasonably happy.

Now, when I said :

" Not you men of INTP forum of course, we all know that you are special and unique"

I was only saying exactly the same thing that you said (another parody?) Just another tease, half serious, half truthful, some intention of pointing out absurdity anyway, for certain.

I thought you were a dude pulling the "oh you're just a misogynist" card, to which my response was "right good sir shall we step outside and have fisticuffs" now I see that is not the case and it is rather funny.

Yes I see, turnabout is fair play and all.

Am I to conclude that I am screwed either way because I am female and am not allowed to have an opinion on the matter either? Are the genders really so different that we are unable to communicate. That if I say something it is because I am female and you are male and therefore we live in different worlds ?

We are not all the same but that doesn't mean we are fundamentally incapable of understanding one another.

 

[Black Rose]

Are the genders really so different that we are unable to communicate. That if I say something it is because I am female and you are male and therefore we live in different worlds ?

not at all
but you said men here are seeing women as 'other' so a disconnect is assured

that was not my intent and I don't see why it must be interpreted this way

I communicate fine but I think differences in male and female do exist

because I am physically male I cannot imagine what it is like to be physically female

so I try to imagine what it is like to be psychological female

women are portrayed as 'other' because a difference does exist psychologically

I am not female, I want to know what it is like: is that so bad

I have been interpreted that way before, as a "hir", felt nice.

I said there are no good descriptors for male and female traits and you must go on intuition to know core differences. male can be seen as 'other' also but both genders have interpretations of 'other'. again I am looking at physical and psychological differences. I am sure some women wonder what having a penis is like as much as some men wonder what having a vagina is like. Psychologically differences do exist. Differences as great as penises differ from vaginas. What is that I wonder? What do people see me as?

The Anima and Animus are the models for all female and male trait representations in our psyche. Everything we know about male and female is placed in them. All representations combined into one archetype. And they are given a core by being fused together. they become autonomous just as the people you know are agents of free will. You interact with the Anima/Animus as you would a real person you know. So male and female are both inside us but it is our orientation towards those representations that determine being one or the other.

I've met my Anima several times. She represents everything I know about females. She would not be there if I had not opened up the way I did once. I try to be like her so I can be seen as more relatable to the feminine. I do believe the feminine and masculine exist. That is not to say I view either as 'other'. The 'other' view happens from the representations a person develops from there life exposer to the world of feminine and masculine. Its a world view. I'm not inclined to all female or male aspects but I see most of them from the people around me.

 

[kora]

Really what I was taking issue with, was this characetrization in Cog's post of large swarths of populations (particularly females apparently, in his own words) as basic bitches. A kind of abstract and reductive dehumanizing stereotype/meme that is poorly defined and doesn't really describe anyone in particular. We are no longer talking about women or men here as the individuals that they are, but instead applying a kind of simplistic cartoon to someone that we might see in Starbucks as we walk past, thinking that we are superior. This was the "othering" that I was talking about AK, not so much anything you said in your post ! Reading you I didn't really see anything reductive or simplifying in your post, it sounded more like you were trying to capture a feeling of being female, a kind of phenomenology (sorry for big pompous word) of gender. I have absolutely no issue with this.

I meant a specific type of "othering" that is kind of dehumanizing, this is what I mean by stereotyping. I hope this post makes it clearer ?

 

[kora]

Dangerous to build socio-psychological theories using memes/stereotypes as our concepts. Othering. Dehumanizing. False.

And then, the fuckin cherry on top : Explaining the meme with unprovable untestable evolutionary biological theories.

Shoddy reasoning from start to finish imo.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

Personally I believe that the number of basic male bitches far out number basic female bitches. Compared to androgynic people though, the lot of us are probably basic bitches.

I doubt any of us are therapists but it seems like you struggle with anxiety and/or depression of some kind and I wouldn't doubt it's because of how alienated you feel. Compared to the average cis male, the number of people willing to accept you as you are is much more narrow. If I were like you I would envy someone who has not had to put any effort into delving into the nuance of their personalities. Where most people find joy in self-discovery for the sake of self discovery, you may do so out of necessity, so you can translate it to people around you in a way that will make them accept you.

Growing up one of my parental figures would always point out women's features to me and ask me what I think and if I agreed with his 'evaluations.' Even at the age of 9 I thought this was weird, as I do now. Within the first 2 weeks of college my friends gave me a female nickname, even though it contained the same number of syllables as my actual name. They also said I was a total mom. To me this simply meant that people were comfortable with me. Though they didn't know, it was my sensitivity that made me mindful of people and their well being. I never outwardly expressed sensitivity, being in a mixed Latino and Asian friend group, showing 'weakness' as a man is awkward. I'm sure as the years have gone by that this sensitivity is abundantly clear.

I don't know, I guess the best thing to do is strategic suppression. Present yourself as an only moderately eccentric person, and once people have committed to engage with you at a certain level, ease them into accepting more of your idiosyncrasies. It's all part of your charm. Anyone who you make a connection with and leaves simply isn't worth keeping.

 

[Cognisant]

Really what I was taking issue with, was this characetrization in Cog's post of large swarths of populations (particularly females apparently, in his own words) as basic bitches.

I said the term “basic bitch” is illustrative of the phenomenon I was discussing and that in my opinion/experience it is less common among men, your interpretation is stretching what I said to the breaking point and in quite an unfair way. I explained why it is more likely to occur with women but at no point did I say it was common among women, much less “large swarths of populations”, I mainly lamented that women who are interesting AND single are uncommon because they are of course particularly desirable.

A kind of abstract and reductive dehumanizing stereotype/meme that is poorly defined and doesn't really describe anyone in particular. We are no longer talking about women or men here as the individuals that they are, but instead applying a kind of simplistic cartoon to someone that we might see in Starbucks as we walk past, thinking that we are superior.

Unwarranted attack on my character, I stressed several times that this is not a phenomenon exclusive to women and that I was generalizing, as must do when discussing people as opposed to individuals and yes generalizations are inherently dehumanizing as any kind of generalization necessarily glosses over the particulars of the individual but for the sake of discussion it is an necessary evil and one that I assume my reader has the intelligence to not take too literally.

Dangerous to build socio-psychological theories using memes/stereotypes as our concepts. Othering. Dehumanizing. False.

And then, the fuckin cherry on top : Explaining the meme with unprovable untestable evolutionary biological theories.

Shoddy reasoning from start to finish imo.

Then propose a better theory, attacking me only reveals your bias, might it be that rather than countering my theory with a better theory you are instead invested in proving me wrong because I hit upon an unfortunate truth?

Personally I believe that the number of basic male bitches far out number basic female bitches. Compared to androgynic people though, the lot of us are probably basic bitches.

I have noticed that gay people have a higher than normal likelihood of being interesting but it can also go the other way, people subject to common pressures can adapt in common ways, i.e. neckbeards with their fedoras, katanas and trench coats.

 

[BurnedOut]

Actually the whole OP to me sounds like a dude who, after self-analyzing himself is in fact worried about traits he observes within himself as being "feminine".

Actually, that is incorrect. I question the whole business of masculinity and feminity. I mentioned some stuff towards the end of the post stating how cultural constraints cause these rigid boundaries.

Traits which are actually completely and trivially common in both genders such as "sensitivity" , "wanting emotional connections" and "wanting to be hit on/desired."

Trivially common? I want emotional connections, that's normal. I got it. I want to be hit on? I got that too. Therefore, again, the post is hermeneutics, to be extremely precise. I made an observation, I shared it. Why was I roiled ? That is a hard question to answer. I do not know either why some questions like these bother me. I don't care if I am left our or something, I am so used it since childhood.

Ironically not androgynous at all imo, but perhaps betrays some worry about conforming to some abstract masculine norm.

Conforming to masculine norms is simple. I regularly conform it for the sake of socializing but I am not able to ultimately keep up with it because I question its metaphysics in the first place. It is about being forced to accept a norm than feeling incapable of conforming to it.

Do you mean that you have hit the sweet spot of perfection OP ?

(You can ignore this remark, I am teasing a bit)

I won't because you are right

Honestly, such matters boil my psyche for a day or two and then I am hunting for some other intellectual matter to whine about. Perhaps that is why I am an INTP.

 

[BurnedOut]

I doubt any of us are therapists but it seems like you struggle with anxiety and/or depression of some kind and I wouldn't doubt it's because of how alienated you feel. Compared to the average cis male, the number of people willing to accept you as you are is much more narrow. If I were like you I would envy someone who has not had to put any effort into delving into the nuance of their personalities. Where most people find joy in self-discovery for the sake of self discovery, you may do so out of necessity, so you can translate it to people around you in a way that will make them accept you.

I don't know why I think of such matters in the first place.

5 years ago, I threw a tantrum at my mom when I was trying to explain to her that atheism is more rational. The one other time, my friend and I fought passionately over the reaction time taken to click the mouse button and the quality of that mouse and how it can influence the score on an online test. Recently, I recently was very angry at the clerics of the middle-east for their support.

I suffer from depression in mild forms. I have anxiety but that is due to my sensory overstimulation. Other than that, I am just a weirdo.

Talking about getting accepted, you will not believe the amount of 'acceptance' I have gotten and the number of times I blew it for the sake of asserting my individualism only to realize that I discarded other perspectives wherein I could have retained my individualism and still be with them.

To be honest despite all this psychic crap, I do consider myself lucky to be like this. I have repeatedly observed that this depth of mine brings much more joy to me too !