Vice, known lately for covering super serious news, published a 2,000-word probe this week by Meredith Talusan, a writer who doesn’t identify as either a man or a woman. The central existential question: “Why can’t my famous nonconforming friends get laid?”…
Neither has undergone hormone treatment, so they have “visible body hair that marks them as more obviously trans.” Both have a five-o’clock shadow, high heels and lipstick, and “they” as a pronoun.
It turns out, Talusan says, that while the LGBT community is increasingly accepting of people with such specific and niche professed identities… no one really wants to bed them…
From Talusan’s perspective, the fact that no one wants to sleep with Tobia and Vaid-Menon is a sign of injustice. “Jacob and Alok don’t need more claps or raised hands, more YASSSS’s or SLAY’s,” the article concludes. “What they need is to be found deeply, undeniably f*ckable.”
r-strategists expect free resources and free sex. Redistributive economic models only partially satisfies their urges. Redistributive sex will eventually catch on as the slide into r-selection continues.
I have long expected the fatties and the uggos to band together and demand the Hugh Jackmans and Daniel Craigs of the world be forced to keep a bang-ledger, and allot a certain number of pitybangs to the less attractive, to even things out. At the least I expected denial of sex to be legislated similarly to rape today. After all, it is unfair that just because some people were born pretty that they should have all the fun. We need government to rectify that unfairness, because the r-selected world should never be unfair anywhere.
I expected that one day if Rosie O’Donnell demanded sex from you on the street, and you said no, you would be hauled off to jail.
What even I did not see was that hairy, bearded Italian guys, with surgically manufactured vaginas and hairy armpits, would demand they be legally allotted pitybangs too.
This is a measure of how r we have gone. Even Huxley and Orwell never envisioned this. If they had proposed it in Brave New World, or 1984, it would have been so extreme people would have ridiculed the books. Now we have actually seen the first step toward it. Right now our view of it is the same as our view of transgender parents fifteen years ago, and we saw how that went.
I can only assume the Apocalypse will be similarly extreme, relative to historical precedents.
There is no end to the horrors of the r-selected world.
Spread r/K Theory, or you may end up having to bang fat hairy trans-chicks
[…] Bearded Trans Chicks Think It Unfair They Aren’t Being Banged Too […]
and allot a certain number of pitybangs to the less attractive, to even things out.
It’s not even because they want to be assured a mate. We had a working system for that. It was a mix of slut-shaming and a denial of male resource provisioning to non-married single females.
ie. Patriarchy
what they want is what Cain wanted. To feel they are the best without actually having to be the best. It’s jealousy.
Based on what you’ve written, I think that the desire to force men to confess desire for these train wrecks is not based on sexual desire, rather it is a desire to establish dominance and control in a way that is specifically when they are undesirable. That is, if any of these freaks were actually desirable as they are, if all the disgusting things they did were actually attractive, i predict that they would do the opposite because only when they are undesireable and can force sex can they be assured of their own power to dominate others against anothers will.
I assume your observations are hyperbolic.
From a different perspective, this is but another brick in the wall of our social degradation in the area of sex. Marriage (by definition, monogamy) is defined by boundaries. Every aspect of life is similarly about boundaries & exclusion. The pathology of our time is attempted erosion of all such boundaries, which is equal to an all-out assault on life itself.
Life will prevail.
Miles McInnes sums it up perfectly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkwgiK4vWJg
Have you ever wondered why feminists insist that “rape is an act of violence, not sex”, when it most definitely and obviously is an act of sex?
Because feminism is sexual Marxism, the belief that women need, and are therefore entitled to, surplus resources produced by men. The inverse implication, that men need, and are therefore entitled to, sex with women, is avoided by insisting that sex is actually not sex, but violence.
Oh God, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
This reminds me of Aristophanes play “the assembly women” where a man most sleep with all the ugly women before being able to lie with a prettier one.
Uncabob mentioned a while back the ‘incels’ want AA for sex, and the left are trying to justify it with ‘lookism’, which, while real, and I do personally benefit, is just plain Darwinian social hierarchies and not actually to do with sex. In book The Man Who Would Be Queen, I linked a free copy online, there are really 2 types of tranny – autogynephilia, the ultimate narcissist, purely sexual, and homo men who want to predate on K hetero men, essentially cucking those men into protecting them. That’s why they want to look uber-feminine, to cuckold the normal men, in effect.