>>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