I play women where possible because if I’m going to be staring at an ass for 150 hours, it might as well be a pretty one. never even enters 3rd person except to check out the cool armors that hide almost every bit of skin anyway
Yes my skyrim mods folder is filled with style and immersion mods geared for female characters, why do you ask?
And also all the time I spend carefully crafting the face to sort of look vaguely like me but as a girl and all the attention to hair and makeup and making sure my nails look nice with the weapon I’m holding and constantly imagining myself in her place are all completely normal cis things to do.
I too had a very cis and normal approach to modded Skyrim. Do not consider any context about me with this statement.
deleted by creator
If someone actually says still cis tho, they’re usually cooked
In what sense of motivation?
Introverted, or extroverted?
Your own I/E, or hers, or the attention from others?
For the power over others, or to be the objective others chase?
To exploit that dynamic, or to be validated by its potential and existence?wut
Seriously, what are you trying to say? I have an interpretation of what you’re trying to get at, but it’s not a flattering one. It sounds like some Jordan Peterson faux intellectual BS about trying to disect the psychosexual meaning of wanting to be a woman.
If I do understand correctly, then know that there is no logic behind wanting to be another gender. It’s not to satisfy some desire to be in a specific power dynamic; it just is because it is, no conscious choice or free will involved. Trans women want to be pretty women because they want to be women, and like basically everybody they also want to be attractive. It’s not deeper than that.
If you really mean something else please enlighten me.
Not trying to say anything politically charged at all. I don’t care about that at all. Everyone is engaged in some level of motivations. It is okay if people do not want to talk about it.
I’ve been reading a lot of philosophy stuff and am just curious for the sake of curiosity.
Take for example, sex. Maslow’s Hierarchy is admissible in most courts of law in the west. In that assessment, sex is a fundamental human need. That fact is also a form of objectification. By extension, all sexual activity is objectively taking care of one’s fundamental human needs. So if all sex is objectified, how one chooses to sate that need could fall into many outlets. There is certainly a lot of choice to be made in that space. For instance, self actuation is an option. What is not a choice is whatever you find arousing, or interesting. I am no judge there. I do not care at all. I know what niches I find arousing and no one has a right to question or try to change that either. That is not what I am talking about.
Further, in sexual relations with others, there are narcissists and there are altruists. The narcissist is self centered and focused on claiming another; they are motivated by self gratification and domination. The altruist is motivated by giving and curiosity. They want to explore and find their partner’s optimal experience. Within these two paradigms, I skimmed over two other branches for each. The narcissist may only be out to sate their own needs while not caring about power dynamics; motivated by introverted greed. On the other hand, they could be motivated by extroverted domination and not care about their needs as much.
Likewise, the “altruist” may be more of an explorer of many different paths. It may be centered in self; how can I perform at my best to better my partner’s experience. It may be mutual; let’s adventure together. It may be external; what would you like to explore.
There are always layers upon layers in such subjects. My initial questions had no malice behind them at all.
I came across a story where a trans person wanted to cosplay as every girl in every instance. The motivation struck me as a super odd form of narcissism, but perhaps it has some kernel of truth, like some people out in the world feel a desire to do the same. It does not bother me in the slightest either way. I am simply curious about the spectrum of people and differences that exist. Nothing more, nothing less.
When I say Jordan Peterson faux intellectual BS, this is exactly what I was talking about. You make huge leaps in logic, stringing together disconnected ideas from different areas of study to justify your goofy views. Like, there is no point in breaking down all your beliefs and why they are wrong because they’re barely coherent to begin with.
Also, talking about trans women being envious of other women as being narcissistic, motivated by greed and “extroverted domination” is tied to outdated ideas that have done real harm to trans people. Sexologists who believed similar things have created and reinforced stigma, impacted policy that controls our lives. You don’t get to choose that history; you don’t get to choose for those ideas to not impact people; that’s not how it ever worked. Your ideas are politically charged, and you cannot choose otherwise.
You do not understand philosophy well, or its meaning. None of what you said is true. It just shows that you do not understand what I said at all. It is okay. My family is exactly the same. I still care about them the same as I care about you.
You don’t seem to understand philosophy well yourself. Maybe English is your second language? If you actually do understand philosophy, you aren’t doing a good job of proving it through writing.
I’m just trying not to argue and be toxic because this place is terrible about such things. It is a major down side and prejudice that is hard to deal with when a person like myself is physically disabled and stuck in long term social isolation where this is my only source of external real human social contact. Unlike with diversity, there is no way to push back against that prejudice. It is rooted in the culture of the internet where people lack the same social peer pressure that regulates their behavior in the real world.
What I said in all instances was done out of simple curiosity using simple abstractions. My purpose is only to have an interesting positive conversation with digital neighbors. I have not prepared rhetoric. I have no desire to engage in negativity. I am no expert. Nothing I say is fit for or intended as scientific publication. I have no agenda. I am simply looking to expand my own understanding of people that have a solid grasp on who and what they are because it increases my potential for kindness, empathy, and understanding. The moment I spot tribalism and dogma, I stop engaging as these are not capable of logic or philosophical abstraction. The first sign of these comes from those that steal my narrative voice. Anyone that speaks for another in their stead lacks fundamental logic. Placing me in some tribal camp is dogmatic. I said nothing to make such an association. If I had quoted or cited someone, sure, but I did no such thing. I have never even heard of the person I am now in some imaginary tribalistic association with purely for the sake of having a curious conversation.
In other words, I am being attacked for information, error, and skepticism. These are unalienable human rights. The right to all information, the right to error, the right to skepticism, and the right to protest in all nonviolent forms are fundamental human rights in all democratic systems. When these are attacked, it is tyranny of authoritarianism. That is nothing more than tribalism and leads to barbarism.
It is ultimately a bad faith response to a conversation. This place lacks the depth to engage in advanced topics at a casual conversational level. That is stifling to my personal growth. Further, the avalanching negativity and bad faith tribalism are a very harmful prejudice because most people seem to assume the internet is an exception and place to vent their true selves. Face to face, no one would respond like this, or rather I would never associate with people that respond in bad faith. I have no real alternative. Therein lies the real prejudice. Stealing any form of human interaction in the public commons infers a person experiencing involuntary social isolation is not human, it strips meaning from life, it withholds basal human needs, and it motivates self harm.
Both the authoritarian left and authoritarian right are murder tribes that kill people on the margins. The marginalized people are different, but always consist of the innocent. I am one of those marginalized people too. I disengage to protect myself as best I can from tribalistic monsters. Dichotomous logic is incapable of real understanding which requires abstract logic skills. This is social media, not academy. It was just a conversation. Depth and engagement met with murder tribe response noted. One more feather on the punch my own ticket tally added. Mission accomplished.
Hahaha, whaaaat? Why would I want too look at a male ass all day, I’m sooo hetero.
Tap for 🤔
As trans and mostly lesbian, I want to be and date her equally, lol.
Right? Two things can be true.
This entire sub is just. Me. 😭
Very relatable, I had that experience a lot when I was younger and I was so confused why I thought that but it’s very clear to me now why I did.
