April 3, 2015

Why do butch dykes copy the hair-do's of twink fags rather than men?

A popular but misguided view of homosexuality is the "opposite sex role" theory -- that gays are feminized and lesbians are masculinized.

I've shown in earlier posts that this theory fails to explain the full behavioral syndrome of gays, who are infantilized rather than feminized, and who only appear feminine in some ways because females are more neotenous (childlike).

The defining female traits of nurturing babies, keeping house, settling down, being a wet blanket, being a worry-wart, giving time to small local charities, etc., are alien to the male homosexual, who in fact behaves like a bratty girl-hating 5 year-old with a turbo-charged sex drive.

Normal men respond to gays not as though they were feminine, but as though they were an annoying and creepily over-eager toddler trying to join the big kids, one who can only be bullied away because he's too socially retarded to take a hint.

What about lesbians being masculinized? I find them harder to study because they don't stand out quite as much. But the butch dyke types sure do. Over Christmas I was standing behind a pair of lesbian parents and their utterly undisciplined children at the airport. The more feminine one had normal-looking medium length hair, and I expected the masculine one to have a man's haircut. I could tell from behind that it was short and parted, so that much checked out.

When she turned around, though, she had one of those severe sideways-pointing hair-do's with the sides and back shaved. The technical name is "undercut," although I find "gay whoosh" more descriptive.

Here are a few examples of this distinctly gay haircut on real-life gays:




And here are only a handful of many, many examples of twink haircuts worn by butch dykes:








If butch lesbians were simply masculinized, why wouldn't they look more like normal men? Why do they copy so specifically the grooming and even clothing habits of gay men, who look and act kiddie? Nothing kiddie can be masculine or macho, including that "I'm such a little stinker" smirk on the dyke at the end.

Maybe they want to look recognizably male, but only a degenerate and abnormal kind of male, to give the middle finger to straight society. And what more familiar model of abnormal male do they have ready to imitate than the faggot?

How ironic that in emphasizing the rejection of hetero patriarchy, the butch dyke winds up looking like a goofy little kid rather than the strong warrior she imagines herself to be.

21 comments:

  1. You have it right - homosexuality is the result of trauma or experience which arrests or fixes human sexuality in the infant stage.

    ReplyDelete
  2. just to be clear, you're saying that lesbians *don't* have the same personality as gay men, they just adopted a little boy haircut by accident?

    ReplyDelete
  3. They can't look like normal men because straight women aren't their target, but of course neither are women who like girls. Some even dream of having sex with gay men, that's how lesbian they are... Really the whole society is so developmentally retarded and warped that it's amazing that any kind of normalcy can be maintained

    ReplyDelete
  4. advancedatheist4/4/15, 10:11 AM

    Somewhat OT, but you know of any research about the world view beliefs of gays and lesbians, and how these might differ from sexually normal people's?

    For example, I've wondered what gay men think about the meaning of life, given their apparently arrested cognitive development and their inability to experience the kinds of personal growth that straight men have to undergo who have to work at getting into sexual and marital relationships with women, and then rearing families with them.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Just seems like brash, in your face "signalling". Basically, I know I'm a weirdo and let's get back at straights by aggressively displaying our weirdness.

    Maybe it was a Gallup? survey that I linked to a little while ago that showed that lesbos are worse off relative to straight women than gay dudes are relative to straight guys. It seems likes women who go down that road are really screwed up. And it shows by how off putting their demeanor/style is. The majority of non pathological women at least try somewhat to be pleasing. But for the F ups, there's always stuffing your face, getting knocked up by a loser, and going on the dole. And when a wayward women has such issues with men that she starts doing chicks, we're really in trouble.

    I know that you focus on homo dudes being annoying (and they largely are especially after the advent of PC) but I think even they at least try to put more effort in being fun, stylish, and charming. Not that they succeed, more often than not. Whereas the dykes go full tilt on being disagreeable.

    I wonder if women are so lacking in charisma/exuberance that really their charm rests almost entirely on being cute. Dykes obviously fail on that count so they're just a drag. Meanwhile, gay guys are screwed up, but hey, they're still guys. There's a reason that a fair amount of gay male artists/performers have become popular. How truly well liked is Rosie O'Donnel or the Indigo Girls?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The hostility that gays/dykes have towards longer hair certainly does fit with their indifference towards carefully developing and maintaining things.

    Homos just chew stuff up and spit it out. There's no real regard for the long term stability of anything. People are supposed to advance beyond this selfish hedonism after adolescence but that doesn't happen with gays.

    ReplyDelete
  7. advancedatheist4/4/15, 11:42 AM

    >People are supposed to advance beyond this selfish hedonism after adolescence but that doesn't happen with gays

    Makes you wonder why the social justice warriors defend gays' right to sexual excess, and women's similar right to cock chasing through politically constructed access to contraceptives and abortion, but then they call the heterosexual Elliot Rodgers of the world "losers" who have no right to sexual fulfillment at all.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Makes you wonder why the social justice warriors defend gays' right to sexual excess,"

    Well, they usually glibly act as though these horrors barely exist. And well, aren't heteros and men screwed up also anyway? So who are we to judge or even monitor the behavior of such "oppressed" and "misunderstood" people?

    "and women's similar right to cock chasing through politically constructed access to contraceptives and abortion,"

    Giver greater "freedom" and "rights" (i.e. removing the natural consequences and accountability for behavior) to women fits into the greater and greater levels of status striving that the West has suffered from since the 70's. How is a chick supposed to focus on her education, her career, her style, and finding Mr. Right if she "settles" at a young age for a mundane guy, has children, and is chiefly concerned with raising those children and keeping house by herself?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Lesbos earn a little more than straight women, as they're more career focused, gay guys less than straight guys as career progression is less (less willing to move up into responsible / dominant roles?) - http://phys.org/news/2015-03-lesbians-heterosexual-women-gay-men.html. Apparently more obvious gays earn less money, which makes sense if the obviously gay gays have gayer personality traits and that leads them to lower earnings.

    Re: the haircuts, I think maybe once adult men and women are out, maybe you go to looking kinda childish by default, as there's not much hairstyle space out there that normal adult men and women don't already have sewn up.

    Kids didn't have hair like that in the 1990s or 1980s, or even 1970s. Maybe that's a haircut helicopter parents from 1950s (or earlier) to 1960s give a kid. I don't know how much kids decide what hairstyle they get.

    Feryl: The hostility that gays/dykes have towards longer hair certainly does fit with their indifference towards carefully developing and maintaining things.

    Wonder what gays are like towards long hipstery beards or spending a long time maintaining their moustaches?

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Lesbos earn a little more than straight women, as they're more career focused, gay guys less than straight guys as career progression is less"

    Won't surprise readers here:

    http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-myth-of-wealthy-gays-and-blue.html

    "Apparently more obvious gays earn less money"

    That probably reflects the variation in infantilization among gays. Some aren't so flamingly obvious and can earn big (Clooney), while your garden-variety twink with a perpetual surprised baby face is going to flit from one crappy retail job to another.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Basically, I know I'm a weirdo and let's get back at straights by aggressively displaying our weirdness."

    But why flip the middle finger by so closely mimicking twinks? Why not just a shaved head, mohawk, or other weird hairdo. I really think that, in their sheltered view, they think they look masculine and macho, and *that's* what they're trying to signal. "Didn't think a chick could look so masculine, didya huh?"

    More like, I never imagined a girl could look like such a fairy.

    "just to be clear, you're saying that lesbians *don't* have the same personality as gay men, they just adopted a little boy haircut by accident?"

    That what I gather. They don't think and act like fags, but in personal appearance they're clearly imitating them.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "but you know of any research about the world view beliefs of gays and lesbians, and how these might differ from sexually normal people's?"

    Nothing comes to mind immediately, but I'm sure someone's studied that. You could see for yourself using the General Social Survey, although you might run into small sample sizes. Those specific theme questions usually only get asked once, so you're stuck with a small number of gays who were surveyed in that particular year.

    You could do better with the repeated opinion questions -- view on abortion, believe in God, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Dykes obviously fail on that count so they're just a drag. Meanwhile, gay guys are screwed up, but hey, they're still guys. There's a reason that a fair amount of gay male artists/performers have become popular. How truly well liked is Rosie O'Donnel or the Indigo Girls?"

    Gays are more likely to be entertainers than lesbians are, but they're infinitely more disturbing, creepy, and weird in real life. Dyke disturbances are usually limited to sporting a butch hairdo and affecting a deep voice. Fags on the other hand are a constant disturbance everywhere they go -- the unaffected and therefore sicker voice (overly breathy, buzzing, lisping, ejaculating motormouth intonation), the shifty eyes constantly darting around, kicking their heels when they walk, and just generally being an attention-whoring pervert with their body language.

    Dykes also aren't as likely as fags to be pedophiles, child molesters, serial killers, and so on.

    If we had to eliminate one sex of homos, it would be the fags without a doubt -- notwithstanding the loss of some catchy synth-pop tunes from the '80s.

    ReplyDelete
  14. You might as well ask why do attractive and otherwise feminine heterosexual females get tattooed. It's vile; it's ugly.

    But....it's in style, and I can think of alllll kinds of ugly styles that human beings, female and male, hetero and homo, have adopted over time.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "You might as well ask why do attractive and otherwise feminine heterosexual females get tattooed."

    yet heterosexual women don't get the whoosh haircut, so it seems more like what he said, lesbians mistakenly think its masculine.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Something I've noticed recently is all the lesbians with hair dyed unnatural colors. Usually pink, but often purple.

    ReplyDelete
  17. they might be bisexuals, who are more attention-getting and "wild child" than lesbians are.

    ReplyDelete
  18. advancedatheist4/5/15, 9:46 AM

    So why the apparently centrally coordinated effort to attack our ability to form good judgments about different groups of people by calling these assessments prejudice, bigotry, stereotypes, racism, homophobia, profiling, etc?

    For example, a couple weeks ago the New York Times Sunday Magazine ran an article about a neuroscientist's quest to solve the "mystery" of why white people dislike and distrust Gypsies. Funny how this guy doesn't consider it a "mystery" that Gypsies have made their livelihood for generations through petty thefts and parasitism in white people's communities.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "So why the apparently centrally coordinated effort to attack our ability to form good judgments about different groups of people by calling these assessments prejudice, bigotry, stereotypes, racism, homophobia, profiling, etc? "

    Because the people in power don't have the ability to form stereotypes, because their brains are different, so stereotyping seems incomprehensible and threatening to them. they are calling the shots, so they are trying to create a world more convenient for themselves.

    generally, conservatives are more stereotyping, liberals more abstract(more likely to try to figure something out in their heads rather than trusting emotions and instincts), though I expect its far from absolute.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I also expect there are some sociopaths who are pushing abstract-thinking just so they can do whatever selfish thing they want to.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I think that last picture is actually of Drew Carey.

    ReplyDelete

You MUST enter a nickname with the "Name/URL" option if you're not signed in. We can't follow who is saying what if everyone is "Anonymous."