>>52
oh, well you did a damn good impression of him
his whole "you must feel this way because I feel this way and if you disagree, it's because you dOn'T uNdErStAnD" schtick is annoying
I honestly wasted so much time debating him until I saw that he's been doing the same conversations for over a decade, with same phrases like "I cAn bE cOnSiDeReD aN eXPerT"
Expert masturbator maybe...
>i think wxhluyp's theory nicely explains the causal chain that causes agp
Eh, I don't have any trauma, was never bullied or ridiculed for my love for femininity, so it's not based in shame or anything
Why do you think that it does?
And wxhlyup thinks AGP doesn't exist, his words is that no agp is actually aroused by being a woman, which is straight up denial and autistic delusion on his part...He denies blanchard.
That's actually my main problem with him, I don't care about the origins, it's that he doesn't understand what agp is at all.
>erotic target location error? it's kinda weak
I haven't been following it too closely but there's a paper out recently that found sone ETLEs in other fetishes
>i haven't heard a sound criticism of him so far
like when he starts to talk about unconcious desires and feelings you can't feel, that's just making stuff up to justify your conclusions
You might as well say I have a female soul at that point
>they want to think of their fetish as casual and just a kink
I'm talking about the regulars on his forum complaining that there are too many sissies there who aren't MEF and don't understand it, hurting the discussion there

>>53
idk how he exactly defines trauma but theres definitely an inherent shame in being compared to something feminine
dont think he denies agp feeling arousal from the thought of imagining themselves as women except theres always a sense of underlying maleness and emasculation even when it's not depicted as such
he agrees with blanchard on the hsts agp classification but he renames agp to mef because of masochistic emasculation being a cause rather than ETLE
>ETLEs in other fetishes
which ones?
i think his theory is not compatible with a female essence or soul
but there are sexual imprints which could be hereditary or formed during childhood which have an interplay with the trauma
i think it's mainstream trans theories that believe in a trans essence inner girl and what not
only time he talks about elusive stuff is when he's talking about abstract masochism but some trannies do like sissy content and it's helpful in understanding how agp transitioners loose arousal from agp thoughts when late into transition because they loose the sense of underlying maleness
normally it's explained as loss of libido
there are lot of other psychological phenomenon where the underlying cause is shrouded by some other outer feelings

>>54
>theres definitely an inherent shame in being compared to something feminine
there's nothing inherently shameful about femininity, perhaps what you mean to say is that males can be shamed for being feminine, which is true, but it's not always the case in every situation
nor does the mere comparison to femininity cause trauma, you would have to be deeply insecure to be bothered by that
>don't think he denies agp...except there's always a sense of underlying maleness and emasculation even when it's not depicted as such
that's denial right there, agps imagine themselves as being women, not being men
he makes assumptions like those freely showing a deep misunderstanding of what agp actually is
>which ones?
Search up "Elaborating and Testing Erotic Target Identity Inversion Theory in Three Paraphilic Samples", they investigate attraction to animals, amputation, and fat people
>i think his theory is not compatible with a female essence or soul
What I'm saying is that like the female soul conclusion he is trying to make stuff up to justify his own conclusion
He believes MEF to be the solution to everything, so then he works backward to reinterpret anything as being rooted in masochistic emasculation
Of course if you judge everything to be masochistic, you affirm your own opinions, it's faulty circular logic
>only time he talks about elusive stuff...
it's him trying to justify the existence of something that's not there, another term for this is called "bullshitting"
>some trannies do like sissy content
Yeah, SOME. Not all. There can maybe be some examples of sissy content which are MEF in nature, but not all of us are sissies in the first place

>>55
men have an evolutionary need to be perceived as masculine and they're more imaginative so the emasculation can often be self inflicted
(side point: any society that takes up equality of genders most often ends emasculating men rather than actually empowering women to level the field)
i think when wxhluyp says 'underlying maleness' he's referring to an organism's subconcious awareness of what it is and to keep being what it is just like a living organism has an inherent drive to keep being alive
when an agp is thoroughly convinced of wanting to become a woman that is a very advanced stage of his self identification with the idea
i guess you want to know what part does attraction to women or a man's regular gynephilic tendency play in all this, that i don't know yet
one of the things wxhluyp says about modern sissies is that they're burdened with the idea of self identity as a result of 'tiktokification' of sissy sphere which has blurred the distinction between sexual desire and identity
here he asks us to learn from the past ie boomer sissies when mef was present in it's raw distilled form

>>56
>men have an evolutionary need to be perceived as masculine
is this stuff wxhlyup actually says to people? lol
He sounds like a "redpill alpha male" blogger who does this fetish theorizing in his freetime
"evolutionary need" is just a narrative that that evopsych/evobio bloggers give to explain shit they see in the wild, it is in no way true and is easily debunked by counter examples
1. the mere existence of feminine men 2. shy sensitive boys are obviously unmasculine naturally (rather than fem in most cases) 3. strong CDs and agps, who often NEED to crossdress or transition to relieve their gender dysphoria, etc

normal men on the other hand expend zero effort to be masculine of course, unlike the other groups mentioned where it's more of a painful performance

>any society that takes up equality of genders...emasculating men rather than empowering women...
I can agree with this, but counterpoint: these societies are more suitable for agps since there is less of a need to be masculine

>'underlying maleness' ... organism's subconcious awareness of what it is ... keep being what it is ... inherent drive to keep being alive
this sounds like an attempt to ape at a "soul" or "inner nature" without using "woo-woo" spiritual terms
the issue is that agps and the other aforementioned groups have a different sense of self than normal men, so that self might include being fem or becoming a woman
it also discounts to what degree these traits are learned, it's not all nature or nurture, organism are adaptive

>>72
because husstussies have no soul but we do

you should read men trapped in men's bodies it talks about this in one chapter it's really good

apparently gta 6 is going to be agp af

i like the fear and possibility of impregnated but don't want to deliver a baby
as in i feel having sex as a woman should have consequences for me