Excellent article. Right now Women and Gender Studies departments are in disarray, as colleges and universities need tuition money and seek to please students. The TERF label is hurled at any person who disagrees. One is not supposed to question porn, prostitution, surrogacy, or detransitioners.
I think she means that even acknowledging that there are detransitioners would get would get you run out of academia in the same way that being anything less than enthusiastic support for porn, prostitution and surrogacy would.
This is breathtakingly appalling. WTF is happening to men??? Are independent women that disturbing to their psyches that they become obsessed with these horrific fantasies??? We desperately need to have a revolution and restore the matriarchy to save humanity.
Everything was so much better when we just laughed at these people and they could satisfy their desire for humiliation by being ridiculed as rather pathetic fetishists.
When we bought the kumbaya BS lie of inclusion and acceptance of the unacceptable, we lit the fuse to the societal devastations, we are living in today.
I'm impressed you had the patience and fortitude to wade through this pornographic stuff in order to present it to a wider public. I can't stomach it.
This type of degradation is what makes people want to cut off funding to universities. Don't they have better topics to discuss?
Focusing on this sexual degradation is so puerile. Meanwhile in the real world real women and girls suffer at the hands of patriarchy in incredibly real and debilitating ways. ... and they just think this is about their own orgasms? What tripe.
Doesn't the (female) interviewer understand that this dude is dehumanizing women and equating a castrated man to womanhood? Or is this why she chose to "transition", because she thinks women are not humans ??? So disgusting, but so insightful of the intentions of this movement of fetichist men's sexual rights movement. I completely understand now why they absolutely hate radfems and strong women, its because in their fantasy world they believe women should be submissive dumb s3x objects. Makes me gag i'm fed up with this male pervert bullshit
One of the first women to be fired and silenced when the reactionary (against feminism) "queer studies" started to erode and replace Women's Studies was Pauline Bart. A male student in one of her classes accused her of making him uncomfortable by talking about the rape of women . He was a socialwork or nursing and went on with his career, while she, at a mature age, after a long dedicated career, her reputation sullied, was probably unemployable. A cheer for Pauline Bart's sacrifice.
Thank you so much Genevieve Gluck for this eye-opening, depressingly horrifying expose of misogyny beyond the pale at Princeton. It boggles the mind seeing the impunity with which these guys degrade, smear and violently misappropriate women's being. Princeton is where Edmund White taught for years. He's the author who's a big supporter of pedophilia under the guise of "Children's Liberation" e.i. lowering the age of consent much like the ruse used by Peter Tatchell and Harriet Hartman when they were pushing lowering the age of consent. Edmund White's garbage about Children's Liberation used be on his Wikipedia entry, but it's since been scrubbed.
The opposite is true: TERFs have always been a dissenting minority among radfems. Mainline radical feminism is vehemently trans-inclusive.
What makes radical feminism “radical” in the first place is its hostility toward “biological essentialism,” a perjorative term for sex realism. According to Shulamith Firestone in her 1970 book *The Dialectic of Sex (1970):
> ”[T]he end goal of feminist revolution must be, unlike that of the first feminist movement, not just the elimination of male privilege but of the sex distinction itself: genital differences between human beings would no longer matter culturally.”
Decades ago, women fought for inclusion in police and military roles previously reserved for those with the athletic advantages conferred by male puberty. Men thought this was crazy and were called misogynists. Now women wanna act like they didn’t bring this on themselves.
Nah, the radfems split off from the feminists who would later be known as queerfems. Firestone might have been the first queerfem, before Queer Theory was a thing.
By the mid-80's and Gayle Rubin's Thinking Sex, the queerfems were advocating for pedos and trans, and the radfems were diverging from them, rather fighting to kick the pedos out of the LGB movement and rejecting men from womanhood:
"When the transexual forces his way into the few private spaces women may enjoy and shouts down their objections, and bombards the women who will not accept him with threats and hate mail, he does as rapists have always done."
Absolutely appalling. This kind of stuff will hasten the death of Ivy League universities. Offensive to Christians, degrading to women, and generally pathetic and sick.
The vital testimony of desisters and detransitioners is not mentioned by anyone on our college campuses. Women and gender studies courses should invite or Zoom panels with detransitioners. This would certainly peak so many administrators, students and teachers.
She's way off-base, though: cluster B personality disorders are the cause of such behavior, not mere maleness. To the contrary, male sexual fantasies tend to involve precisely the opposite of the power relation you describe; sissification is just one of many examples of femdom’s cultural ascendance:
A nice article and navigates tone quite carefully. Well done.
I collect gay written porn, for decades now; it’s illuminating how gay rights have changed what gay men fantasize about sexually and romantically, it’s a fascinating sort of pilgrim’s progress. Few gay men today would fantasize about living in a flophouse or boarding house, or meeting hobos or hitchhikers.
When you collect these things you come across unusual and extreme literature. Because gays have a negative stereotype of being “sissies” this literature tends to appear around gay porn-lit when it doesn’t involve what we would call gay men. Sissification literature seems to be to be post-Victorian; some existed in underground publications like “The Pearl” from around 1880. I haven’t seen anything like it in what heterosexual literature porn I’ve read - I have a fairly complete collection of “The Traveller’s Companion” series, published by Girodas in Paris spanning much of the 20th century, which got around restrictions in the UK and US. I never encountered it in those writings except tangentially in translations of De Sade “Justine” and “Juliette”.
I think Sissification I’ve read is really not in the least about femininity, it’s exclusively about degrading masculinity.
There are many evolving feminine stereotypes in play in our culture - The Girl-Next-Door, Damsel in Distress, Femme Fatale, Nurturer, Geek, Tomboy, Beauty Queen, Working Class Heroine, Lipstick Lesbian, Seductress, Innocent, Hooker, Career Woman, Trophy Wife, Nun, Dominatrix, Rebel, Drama Queen, Sports Woman, Gossip, Free Spirit, Bullldyke, Spinster, Socialite, Manic Pixie Dream Girl, Maternal Martyr, Mean Girl, Prude, and Girl Boss - you know the terminology. If you look at sissification, none of these fit at all, except one - Hooker.
None of the literature has fantasies about being Norma Rae, Babs Paley, Marge Simson, Miranda Priestley, Lois Lane or Joan Rivers. It revolves entirely around what I think of as hooker fantasy because the male character is always sold, or lent, or somehow exchanged to someone else sexually by a person who is the dominatrix or pimp or madam, and in the sale they must be sexually subservient to a heterosexual man.
To be utterly clear, the game is a heterosexual man being forced to be a sexual toy for a heterosexual man, for the most part, mediated by a heterosexual woman.
Tom is not made by his wife Sharon to go help Alice down the street with her garden, or forced to drive her sister’s kids to school. The exchange is never non-sexual. Likewise Tom is never forced to be a gay male prostitute, and work his ass on Santa Monica Boulevard or in a hustler bar, by Sharon, for Steve the nice gay guy down the street.
The interplay is almost always a man forced by a woman (never a man) to impersonate a female prostitute to a heterosexual man.
This will get raised eyebrows but I don’t find it particularly misogynistic or degrading to women because no woman generally is treated in a degrading way, only men. It’s about being humiliated for not measuring up to being a man, appearing masculine, or having masculine volition. Sissification is a man’s world.
You can get stuck on the fact that the man is imitating a woman but that being misogynistic is only true if you believe that men imitating a woman in any way is misogynistic (it’s not) or imitating a poor stereotype of women is misogynistic (also not). It’s hard to choose your fetish, it tends to choose you I think. Embodying a negative stereotype is not perpetuating it particularly. Nobody in these scenarios projects in any way any stereotype about actual women at all, except perhaps Dominatrix.
What is misogynistic is a particular male universe which denies women the right of free assembly without men - in sports, in bathrooms, in Afghanistan, in Lesbian venues, as though women mustn’t exist independently. Trans men and regressive cultures inhabit that universe. Likewise reducing women in thought to a crass metonymy is free speech, but speech not worth a reward of place in Princeton, or major magazines, or performance stage. This is true of any other reference to any class of people by terms which they would never want used.
While I enjoy many facets of gay sex, I don’t want to be referred to in public as a cocksucker.
I don’t want to read writing here particularly or in the New York Times referring to women in similar terms in any serious writing of any kind. I dislike the disingenuousness intensely. The fact that there are people who hate women and take any and all public opportunities to express their hatred and prejudice is not news. Seriously claiming to be a woman while doing so is evidence of a profound, disabling delusion, and affirming and enabling that delusion leads to more harm to the person and those around them.
This leads me back to the beginning which was the word, and the word was pornography.
The word pornography has Greek roots, originating from the words “pornē” (πόρνη) meaning prostitute, and “graphos” (γραφή) meaning write or depict. Depictions of sex acts or pandering (also connected in Greek etymology) are not really what I imagine Princeton, or other institutions are in the business of. Giving stage to sexual fantasies, and promoting sex fantasies under the guise of serious thought is disingenuous and degrading for a key reason nobody seems ultimately to grasp.
In gay porn, the fantasies which evolved almost never involved the public - often just being left alone to enjoy male sex. The world of Sissification is quite the opposite - malevolent - because the pornographic scenarios of the act of “sissification” also seek to involve public shock and revulsion.
I can think of no more perfect scenario than playing this out in public “conceptually” to get off on shock and revulsion around the topic, pulling in all of us for the author or artist to get off.
That’s another reason why I dislike these things intensely, and as a matter of course should require consent to be drawn in. But then, you can’t force a consenting audience, and the protest these artists and writers get off on must be genuine.
That’s the gag. You’re part of a sex fetish, unaware.
Well spoken. The demand for outrage to feed their fetish is deeply narcissistic. I have come to understand trans-identified males this way. “You must be x so I can be y.” It’s not enough for them to choose their own way of being in the world, they require others to embody specific roles to support these choices.
The thing is, I have the right to my own self-determination. No one has a right to choose for me. And I will not surrender this to those who need me to be a certain way to enable their performative kink. No matter how glib their argument.
I mean, if it wasn't sissy porn with these fine specimens it would likely be something within the same order of magnitude of fucked-up, but still. Bluurgh!
There are definitely more AGPs being created because of this.
Excellent article. Right now Women and Gender Studies departments are in disarray, as colleges and universities need tuition money and seek to please students. The TERF label is hurled at any person who disagrees. One is not supposed to question porn, prostitution, surrogacy, or detransitioners.
I don't get detransitioners being included in your list. They are anathema in my understanding to the transactivists.
I think she means that even acknowledging that there are detransitioners would get would get you run out of academia in the same way that being anything less than enthusiastic support for porn, prostitution and surrogacy would.
This is breathtakingly appalling. WTF is happening to men??? Are independent women that disturbing to their psyches that they become obsessed with these horrific fantasies??? We desperately need to have a revolution and restore the matriarchy to save humanity.
Porn addiction. That’s what’s happening. They view more and more weird and violent porn until they lose their fucking minds.
Yes, the porn rabbit hole can lead a man to disturbing fetishes.
Or worse.
Everything was so much better when we just laughed at these people and they could satisfy their desire for humiliation by being ridiculed as rather pathetic fetishists.
Bingo!!
When we bought the kumbaya BS lie of inclusion and acceptance of the unacceptable, we lit the fuse to the societal devastations, we are living in today.
I'm impressed you had the patience and fortitude to wade through this pornographic stuff in order to present it to a wider public. I can't stomach it.
This type of degradation is what makes people want to cut off funding to universities. Don't they have better topics to discuss?
Focusing on this sexual degradation is so puerile. Meanwhile in the real world real women and girls suffer at the hands of patriarchy in incredibly real and debilitating ways. ... and they just think this is about their own orgasms? What tripe.
???????????
Why is this propaganda on PITT???
Moderators?
Please Moderate this post.
Use the Report function. Three dots next to the comment you want to report. I agree, this flood of antisemitic comments is disgusting.
Doesn't the (female) interviewer understand that this dude is dehumanizing women and equating a castrated man to womanhood? Or is this why she chose to "transition", because she thinks women are not humans ??? So disgusting, but so insightful of the intentions of this movement of fetichist men's sexual rights movement. I completely understand now why they absolutely hate radfems and strong women, its because in their fantasy world they believe women should be submissive dumb s3x objects. Makes me gag i'm fed up with this male pervert bullshit
WTF? Any society that takes this drivel seriously is sick at the very roots.
One of the first women to be fired and silenced when the reactionary (against feminism) "queer studies" started to erode and replace Women's Studies was Pauline Bart. A male student in one of her classes accused her of making him uncomfortable by talking about the rape of women . He was a socialwork or nursing and went on with his career, while she, at a mature age, after a long dedicated career, her reputation sullied, was probably unemployable. A cheer for Pauline Bart's sacrifice.
Thank you so much Genevieve Gluck for this eye-opening, depressingly horrifying expose of misogyny beyond the pale at Princeton. It boggles the mind seeing the impunity with which these guys degrade, smear and violently misappropriate women's being. Princeton is where Edmund White taught for years. He's the author who's a big supporter of pedophilia under the guise of "Children's Liberation" e.i. lowering the age of consent much like the ruse used by Peter Tatchell and Harriet Hartman when they were pushing lowering the age of consent. Edmund White's garbage about Children's Liberation used be on his Wikipedia entry, but it's since been scrubbed.
I think feminists are starting to come around to the conservative view of homosexuality and gender roles.
Because without it you get this.
The radical feminists were there long before the conservatives arrived, but Yes.
I don't think there were radical feminists in the old testament.
There weren't conservatives either.
The opposite is true: TERFs have always been a dissenting minority among radfems. Mainline radical feminism is vehemently trans-inclusive.
What makes radical feminism “radical” in the first place is its hostility toward “biological essentialism,” a perjorative term for sex realism. According to Shulamith Firestone in her 1970 book *The Dialectic of Sex (1970):
> ”[T]he end goal of feminist revolution must be, unlike that of the first feminist movement, not just the elimination of male privilege but of the sex distinction itself: genital differences between human beings would no longer matter culturally.”
Decades ago, women fought for inclusion in police and military roles previously reserved for those with the athletic advantages conferred by male puberty. Men thought this was crazy and were called misogynists. Now women wanna act like they didn’t bring this on themselves.
Nah, the radfems split off from the feminists who would later be known as queerfems. Firestone might have been the first queerfem, before Queer Theory was a thing.
By the mid-80's and Gayle Rubin's Thinking Sex, the queerfems were advocating for pedos and trans, and the radfems were diverging from them, rather fighting to kick the pedos out of the LGB movement and rejecting men from womanhood:
https://4w.pub/lesbians-vs-pedophiles/
"When the transexual forces his way into the few private spaces women may enjoy and shouts down their objections, and bombards the women who will not accept him with threats and hate mail, he does as rapists have always done."
--Germain Greer
Absolutely appalling. This kind of stuff will hasten the death of Ivy League universities. Offensive to Christians, degrading to women, and generally pathetic and sick.
The vital testimony of desisters and detransitioners is not mentioned by anyone on our college campuses. Women and gender studies courses should invite or Zoom panels with detransitioners. This would certainly peak so many administrators, students and teachers.
TLDR.
This person is certifiable.
Gender Studies is a false dichotomy.
BAN GENDER STUDIES
🤮
Gluck has a really powerful analysis of male yearnings to satisfy their sexual urges by wielding their power to force others to suffer
She's way off-base, though: cluster B personality disorders are the cause of such behavior, not mere maleness. To the contrary, male sexual fantasies tend to involve precisely the opposite of the power relation you describe; sissification is just one of many examples of femdom’s cultural ascendance:
https://fleshbot.com/9001581/a-world-under-her-command-why-femdom-is-trending-on-reddit/
A nice article and navigates tone quite carefully. Well done.
I collect gay written porn, for decades now; it’s illuminating how gay rights have changed what gay men fantasize about sexually and romantically, it’s a fascinating sort of pilgrim’s progress. Few gay men today would fantasize about living in a flophouse or boarding house, or meeting hobos or hitchhikers.
When you collect these things you come across unusual and extreme literature. Because gays have a negative stereotype of being “sissies” this literature tends to appear around gay porn-lit when it doesn’t involve what we would call gay men. Sissification literature seems to be to be post-Victorian; some existed in underground publications like “The Pearl” from around 1880. I haven’t seen anything like it in what heterosexual literature porn I’ve read - I have a fairly complete collection of “The Traveller’s Companion” series, published by Girodas in Paris spanning much of the 20th century, which got around restrictions in the UK and US. I never encountered it in those writings except tangentially in translations of De Sade “Justine” and “Juliette”.
I think Sissification I’ve read is really not in the least about femininity, it’s exclusively about degrading masculinity.
There are many evolving feminine stereotypes in play in our culture - The Girl-Next-Door, Damsel in Distress, Femme Fatale, Nurturer, Geek, Tomboy, Beauty Queen, Working Class Heroine, Lipstick Lesbian, Seductress, Innocent, Hooker, Career Woman, Trophy Wife, Nun, Dominatrix, Rebel, Drama Queen, Sports Woman, Gossip, Free Spirit, Bullldyke, Spinster, Socialite, Manic Pixie Dream Girl, Maternal Martyr, Mean Girl, Prude, and Girl Boss - you know the terminology. If you look at sissification, none of these fit at all, except one - Hooker.
None of the literature has fantasies about being Norma Rae, Babs Paley, Marge Simson, Miranda Priestley, Lois Lane or Joan Rivers. It revolves entirely around what I think of as hooker fantasy because the male character is always sold, or lent, or somehow exchanged to someone else sexually by a person who is the dominatrix or pimp or madam, and in the sale they must be sexually subservient to a heterosexual man.
To be utterly clear, the game is a heterosexual man being forced to be a sexual toy for a heterosexual man, for the most part, mediated by a heterosexual woman.
Tom is not made by his wife Sharon to go help Alice down the street with her garden, or forced to drive her sister’s kids to school. The exchange is never non-sexual. Likewise Tom is never forced to be a gay male prostitute, and work his ass on Santa Monica Boulevard or in a hustler bar, by Sharon, for Steve the nice gay guy down the street.
The interplay is almost always a man forced by a woman (never a man) to impersonate a female prostitute to a heterosexual man.
This will get raised eyebrows but I don’t find it particularly misogynistic or degrading to women because no woman generally is treated in a degrading way, only men. It’s about being humiliated for not measuring up to being a man, appearing masculine, or having masculine volition. Sissification is a man’s world.
You can get stuck on the fact that the man is imitating a woman but that being misogynistic is only true if you believe that men imitating a woman in any way is misogynistic (it’s not) or imitating a poor stereotype of women is misogynistic (also not). It’s hard to choose your fetish, it tends to choose you I think. Embodying a negative stereotype is not perpetuating it particularly. Nobody in these scenarios projects in any way any stereotype about actual women at all, except perhaps Dominatrix.
What is misogynistic is a particular male universe which denies women the right of free assembly without men - in sports, in bathrooms, in Afghanistan, in Lesbian venues, as though women mustn’t exist independently. Trans men and regressive cultures inhabit that universe. Likewise reducing women in thought to a crass metonymy is free speech, but speech not worth a reward of place in Princeton, or major magazines, or performance stage. This is true of any other reference to any class of people by terms which they would never want used.
While I enjoy many facets of gay sex, I don’t want to be referred to in public as a cocksucker.
I don’t want to read writing here particularly or in the New York Times referring to women in similar terms in any serious writing of any kind. I dislike the disingenuousness intensely. The fact that there are people who hate women and take any and all public opportunities to express their hatred and prejudice is not news. Seriously claiming to be a woman while doing so is evidence of a profound, disabling delusion, and affirming and enabling that delusion leads to more harm to the person and those around them.
This leads me back to the beginning which was the word, and the word was pornography.
The word pornography has Greek roots, originating from the words “pornē” (πόρνη) meaning prostitute, and “graphos” (γραφή) meaning write or depict. Depictions of sex acts or pandering (also connected in Greek etymology) are not really what I imagine Princeton, or other institutions are in the business of. Giving stage to sexual fantasies, and promoting sex fantasies under the guise of serious thought is disingenuous and degrading for a key reason nobody seems ultimately to grasp.
In gay porn, the fantasies which evolved almost never involved the public - often just being left alone to enjoy male sex. The world of Sissification is quite the opposite - malevolent - because the pornographic scenarios of the act of “sissification” also seek to involve public shock and revulsion.
I can think of no more perfect scenario than playing this out in public “conceptually” to get off on shock and revulsion around the topic, pulling in all of us for the author or artist to get off.
That’s another reason why I dislike these things intensely, and as a matter of course should require consent to be drawn in. But then, you can’t force a consenting audience, and the protest these artists and writers get off on must be genuine.
That’s the gag. You’re part of a sex fetish, unaware.
Well spoken. The demand for outrage to feed their fetish is deeply narcissistic. I have come to understand trans-identified males this way. “You must be x so I can be y.” It’s not enough for them to choose their own way of being in the world, they require others to embody specific roles to support these choices.
The thing is, I have the right to my own self-determination. No one has a right to choose for me. And I will not surrender this to those who need me to be a certain way to enable their performative kink. No matter how glib their argument.
You said it perfectly. In the charade, your role is the shocked observer.
That’s the catastrophic failure with Butler. If gender is a performance, and the audience refuses to participate, the show is over.
💯
Aaaaggh. Gackk. Ugh!
I mean, if it wasn't sissy porn with these fine specimens it would likely be something within the same order of magnitude of fucked-up, but still. Bluurgh!
There are definitely more AGPs being created because of this.