August 8, 2012

Are gays more infantile even as children?

There's a long article in the NYT Magazine about boys who dress like girls, which notes that 60-80% are future gays, some of the rest are future pre-or-post-op trannies, and some presumably small percent will wind up normal.

So they're mostly a subset of gays and others with screwed up sexualities. We can treat them as a "right tail" of the gay distribution, and infer that whatever is out at this tail is more prevalent among gays on average, compared to normal boys. That's the same way that we look at the percent of white people who can dunk a basketball, the corresponding percent among Chinese, and infer that whites are taller on average, even if most whites cannot dunk.

What then is the defining feature of these girl-boys profiled in the article? You should read it yourself because these traits do not show up in statistics about gays, so the profiles will give you a window into a group you could otherwise know little about.

Well, it definitely is not femininity (indeed, most do not consider themselves to be girls). For one thing, they have zero interest in babies, probably the single most important component of female nature. Their complete lack of interest in baby-rearing dolls, despite their fascination with fashion dolls, is just a special case of the general pattern that gays have no nurturing instinct.

Little girls aren't exactly getting ready to marry and raise their own children, but even from an early age they are fascinated by cute babies, spontaneously move to nurture them, and take jobs as babysitters. Grown men aren't as nurturing as women, but they still feel an urge to do their part in raising the young 'uns, or if childless, usually would like to have kids of their own. Little boys, though, find babies yucky and smelly and without other redeeming qualities. Thus, the gay callousness toward babies is one of their many Peter Pan traits, not a feminine trait (just the opposite).

Instead, what comes across in the profiles is that the girl-boys are unable to handle minimal stress, are desperate and needy, attention-whoring, temper tantrum-throwing, insecure about being ugly even at 4 years old, egocentric, narcissistic, demanding that others applaud their awesomeness without having earned it at all, because they're just such special snowflakes -- in a word, they're infantile, even more so than their male and female age-mates.

It's true that those traits are higher among females than males, but that's only because females are more neotenous, or resembling children. As the writer mentions, the behavior of girl-boys is if anything a parody of how girls dress and act. They are not "even more feminine" than girls, they are even more juvenile.

As children mature socially and emotionally, first during elementary school when they mostly interact with same-sex peers, and later during adolescence when they interact more with the opposite sex, they gradually lose their bratty, clingy, narcissistic, and attention-whoring ways. The simple reason is that no one other than your close blood relatives thinks you're a special snowflake, so they won't put up with any of your disruptive bullshit. So within your peer group, it's either shape up or ship out, something you never truly experience from your parents. Extreme diva behavior results only when the child is sheltered from the corrective influences of their peers.

The narcissism, etc., of gay adults is well known and provides yet another vivid example of their Peter Pan-ism. But at first my hunch was just that their development got arrested in childhood, perhaps around age 10, by whatever pathogen caused damage to the part of their brain that controls sexuality (the damage to the developmental regions being collateral damage).

However, it seems as though gays are super-infantile already as children -- not normal children who got stuck or regressed. Or maybe they began as normal infants, but then got infected as toddlers and became frozen there. On reflection, I guess their Peter Pan-isms are more typical of toddlers than of later elementary school kids. (If I recall correctly, there is no season-of-birth effect for gays, so that suggests the pathogen does not strike them as newborns.)

Why this subset of gays, the girl-boys, chooses to act out narcissistically by wearing girls' clothes, instead of some other way, I don't know. I guess they picked up on the fact that pretty little girls tend to get more attention than crude little boys, so they decided to ape the girls' appearance and mannerisms, although again not their mindset or overall behavior. They're hoping that their superficial resemblance to girls will get them the standing ovation that they just, like, totally know they deserve.

The article says that most of them will grow out of flamboyant girly clothing, so it's clearly not some deeply ingrained impulse that they just can't control. They chuck it overboard when they find some other way of whoring for attention, like joining the drama club or whatever during adolescence. Wearing pink dresses and eyeliner was merely a transient strategy for demanding that the world give them a great big hug, during a stage in the lifespan when males have few endearing qualities, so why not look like a girl?

I know I recently said that gays tend to wear little jewelry or other forms of body adornment, and yet here they are doing just that as children. What gives? My explanation rested on their social immaturity, that wearing jewelry and other adornments is a way to signal group membership, commitment to a mate, etc.

As small children, the girl-boys aren't trying to do any of that, and they aren't even trying to use jewelry, etc., for the purposes that little girls do -- namely, to establish or invite others into a social bond. Girls adorn one another to make friends, but girl-boys are instead using their girl friends to get assistance in looking dazzling, the better to whore for attention.

Girls also adorn themselves to start attracting boys; it's a sign of their intentions to be approached by boys, ultimately leading to a steady relationship. But girl-boys are not dressing up to get a feel for attracting mates -- after all, when they come out as gay, they won't be wearing long hair, eyeliner, dresses, etc., to pick up their fellow queers.

So, unlike the generally social bonding reasons that girls adorn themselves, girl-boys dress in drag for strictly egocentric and narcissistic motives -- the faggot as a toddler in caricature. Once that appearance no longer suits their needs, beginning in adolescence, they drop it like a hot potato, while teenage girls continue to try to make themselves look pretty for the boys. (Granted, more so in some eras than in others.)

I wonder why no one else has tried to mine this gay Peter Pan idea for all its worth. Others have noticed things here and there, but not pushed the idea as far as it allows. Obviously liberals are too biased and sanctimonious to even entertain the idea. Unfortunately, though, most conservatives are just not very curious people. For getting through daily life, that's probably a good thing -- don't wander over where we weren't meant to go. So they fall back on amusing but clearly wrong explanations about gays being exaggeratedly feminine. But when you really stop and think about it, a prancing little sissy is more like a toddler than a chick.

22 comments:

  1. I think the "gays as feminine" thing is something that gays themselves propagated.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think you're absolutely right about gays acting feminine so that they get right attention. Good thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think that nowadays, if anything, you see the more attention-hungry women adopting certain gay mannerisms. I'm thinking of the "Heeeeyeeey!" but there's probably some others.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Off-topic, but here's an interesting article which argues that there has been a rise in race rioting, under the guise of "flash mobs".

    Now, race rioting is def. something more associated with rising-crime times.

    http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/08/02/media-covers-up-violence-of-flash-mobs/#.UCC_cznmBNs.facebook

    btw, is it possible to "private message" on blogger, so as to not to derail threads in the future?

    ReplyDelete
  5. "you see the more attention-hungry women adopting certain gay mannerisms."

    Such as hamming it up for the camera like some campy faggot drama queen. The kabuki faces everyone makes in their pictures these days...

    "race rioting is def. something more associated with rising-crime times."

    Right, the peak of race rioting was the late 1910s and early '20s.

    The media may not cover the flash mob stuff, but even that isn't a drop in the bucket compared to the also under-reported, low-intensity racial group violence of the 1980s. Especially between Italians and blacks in the NY metro area, shown or hinted at in the 1989 Spike Lee movie Do the Right Thing.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Don't worry about derailing. Tese comment threads rarely turn into lengthy discussions in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Their infatile ways explains the temper tantrums of the LGBTQPQA lobby whenever they don't get their way.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This post is probably twenty years or so too early for its own good.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Do you reckon lesbians might be accelerated in the same way that you theory suggests gays are neotenized?

    If you think about it, the correlates of lesbianism are unattractiveness (which you would expect from less neotenous female faces), kind of a stiff humourless and staidness (which would be the opposite of the emotional behaviour of gays) - i.e. excessive maturity, physical aggressiveness (which distinguishes adults from children).

    Dressing masculine amongst lesbians might be a sign of excessive maturity - trying to avoid the spotlight too much?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Also possibly of interest may be the way Bonobo chimpanzees show increased same sex sexual behaviour AND are also neotenised relative to the common chimpanzee...

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Also possibly of interest may be the way Bonobo chimpanzees show increased same sex sexual behaviour AND are also neotenised relative to the common chimpanzee..."

    Not so sure that neoteny has much to do with that, though. The bonobos live in extremely isolated conditions, which have shaped their social behavior.

    Southeast Asians have the most neotenic features as far humans are concerned, and they don't seem more promiscuous. Well, if you discount the Thai prostitution culture.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Not so sure that neoteny has much to do with that, though. The bonobos live in extremely isolated conditions, which have shaped their social behavior.

    Southeast Asians have the most neotenic features as far humans are concerned, and they don't seem more promiscuous. Well, if you discount the Thai prostitution culture.


    They do have lots of "ladyboys" though. Although not sure if their ladyboys+gays (if you're treating them as separate things) fraction is larger than in the West.

    agnostic (I think) is arguing that the same sex behaviour and personality profiles of gays are caused by a neotenous development, while gay promiscuity is this combined with their normal (or higher) adult male levels of testosterone.

    agnostic, btw, apparently there is a literature linking homosexuality with neoteny (or other forms of paedomorphosis) that comes up when you search for bonobos, homosexuality and neoteny... you might be interested (although obviously, it is likely to soft peddle the non-PC aspects).

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think when all this is sorted out and the cause is discovered, we'll see that most young girly-boys (like the one in the article to which you referred), and most transexualism (ie. those who have anatomically typical male organs, are genetically XY but feel like a girl and either dress as one or go through sex re-assigment surgery)and even your garden variety male homosexual who is just a bit fem or a lot fem will be the result of the same cause. The different manisfestations will, I feel, be shown to result from things such as the age at which the child/fetus experienced the trigger/the cause, and perhaps the virulence of the attack.

    The gay community has grown increasingly angry about any link discussed outside_their_circle between being gay and being transexual, but if you talk enough to gay men about their early childhood, it's very, very rare to have one insist he didn't WANT to dress in his mother's clothes for a time, that he didn't WANT to experiment with make-up, that he didn't WANT to act more girly than he actually did. Most tell stories of realizing at a very early age that they should curb or put a stop to those desires and so do.

    All studies show that the number one preditor of a future homosexual orientation is gender atypical behavior and while this doesn't show that all or most men who wind up gay engaged in gender aytpical behavior, if you talk to them enough, you'll find it's rare to find a guy who says, "No, I was just as disinterested, just as turned off to what we consider female interests and play and activities as were my little male friends. I was every bit as interested in the rough and tumble that other boys were at different stages."

    Some little boys who are effeminate or infantile, as you put it, simply have personality that won't accede to societal pressures, subtle or not, or, I suspect, live in homes in which mom and dad are especailly liberal about their little boys' dress and activities.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "Do you reckon lesbians might be accelerated in the same way that you theory suggests gays are neotenized?"

    I don't have a strong sense of whether they're accelerated or normal in maturation, but they're definitely not like gays.

    Lesbians show and interest and knack for leading teams, for instance. That's at least adolescent, like a quarterback on the football team, and also adult.

    The only thing a gay wants to lead is a pride parade. When they wind up in leadership roles, it's always in some industry where being a childish diva doesn't affect business, like fashion houses.

    It would be hard to get reliable info, but I'd wager that queers are more under-represented among executives than are women. That's another case of infantilization, not feminization.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "apparently there is a literature linking homosexuality with neoteny (or other forms of paedomorphosis) that comes up when you search for bonobos"

    Hmmm, may have to look into this...

    "The gay community has grown increasingly angry about any link discussed outside_their_circle between being gay and being transexual"

    Yeah, thank god that The Silence of the Lambs became an instant classic, or else younger people today would have no reminder of that link.

    Oh, and another thing about lesbians not having the same etiology as gays -- they don't wind up as annoying as gays. There's no such thing as "dyke-bashing" because they aren't irritating, juvenile whiners.

    And the way they talk, dress, and carry themselves is either not very noticeable, or a bit butch -- but not infantile.

    Their sexual behavior is called "lesbian bed death" -- not youthful at all, more like middle-aged. So yes, maybe it is more like accelerated maturity for lesbians -- they zip right through the phase when they're horny as billy goats, and settle right into asexual married life.

    Bisexual girls are the ones who are more masculinized, for example by having such high sex drives.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I think lesbians are simply more like most non-alpha straight males-they don't show off and aren't seeking to be the center of attention in the room.

    Lots of gay males are more like the most alluring of women--they like to show off and be the center of attention.

    ReplyDelete



  17. "I think lesbians are simply more like most non-alpha straight males-they don't show off and aren't seeking to be the center of attention in the room."

    The concept of "alpha male" is defunct, at least as the PUA community defines it. I'm not sure what you're getting at here...

    My experience with lesbians shows that many of them may be genuinely masculinized, as opposed to infantile. Physically, many lesbians have masculine facial characteristics. As opposed to gay men, who don't generally have more feminine faces.

    This explains why they don't "show off"(i.e. attention whore) - because most lesbians have a level of adult maturity and grew out of the behavior.

    "Lots of gay males are more like the most alluring of women--they like to show off and be the center of attention"

    Well, even when women do that its unhealthy and infantile. Agnostic made a post on 'attention whores' way back... put it in his search engine.

    That being said, "the most alluring women" naturally are the center of attention because they deserve to be. Gays see this, and, in their confused minds, think that dressing up like a woman will give them the deference that they want.

    -Curtis





    ReplyDelete
  18. "Bisexual girls are the ones who are more masculinized, for example by having such high sex drives"

    Interesting. Identifying as "bisexual" could be seen as sexually provocative behavior. Basically, like "i'm so damn horny, I'll screw women also" So "bisexuality" is just something that over-sexed girls do to make guys like them better, like wearing revealing clothing.

    "Their sexual behavior is called "lesbian bed death" -- not youthful at all, more like middle-aged. So yes, maybe it is more like accelerated maturity for lesbians -- they zip right through the phase when they're horny as billy goats, and settle right into asexual married life."

    Hmm. Well, one popular explanation could be that lesbians tend to be unattractive women who've given up on attracting a decent man. Becoming a lesbian could just be a way to walk off from the sexual market with dignity.

    -Curtis

    ReplyDelete
  19. "Some little boys who are effeminate or infantile, as you put it, simply have personality that won't accede to societal pressures,"

    This nails it on the head. Gays are more likely to be weird in general.

    Yes, gays are more likely to engage in "gender atypical behavior", yet they are more likely to engage in all kinds of weird and aberrant things.

    For instance, in Silence of the Lambs, Buffalo Bill wasn't just gender atypical. His cross-dressing was only one of a long list of mentally deranged behaviors.

    Which is why Silence of the Lambs was so effective. It showed that cross-dressers aren't just feminine. They're crazy in all kinds of ways.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Oh, and another thing about lesbians not having the same etiology as gays -- they don't wind up as annoying as gays. There's no such thing as "dyke-bashing" because they aren't irritating, juvenile whiners.

    And the way they talk, dress, and carry themselves is either not very noticeable, or a bit butch -- but not infantile.

    Their sexual behavior is called "lesbian bed death" -- not youthful at all, more like middle-aged. So yes, maybe it is more like accelerated maturity for lesbians -- they zip right through the phase when they're horny as billy goats, and settle right into asexual married life.


    I tend to see stereotype of lesbians was "humourless", "angry" and man hating? Sensible slacks, bowl hair cuts, that kind of thing.

    A la Steve Sailers "Why lesbians aren't gay" - http://www.isteve.com/lesvsgay.htm ("Distinctive trait (gays) Gay (lesbian) Resentful" and "Straight men often find lesbians erotic in fantasy, but tiresome in reality. They find gays repugnant in concept but often likable in person.").

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTKTh2MRm-w

    A bit like a cantankerous middle aged man or woman before their time, without any of the joy that kids or young people have in life.

    The stereotypes on lesbian personality seem more weak than for gays though.

    The only thing a gay wants to lead is a pride parade. When they wind up in leadership roles, it's always in some industry where being a childish diva doesn't affect business, like fashion houses.

    Yeah, I don't know if I have a clear sense of that.

    I'd expect them to show low on dominance related behaviour (kids tend to be fairly docile and obedient in the face of serious resistance, even if initially remonstrative).

    I've got the impression Sailer thinks that gays are heavily overrepresented among politicans and in power (although also low on leadership drive), in part due to the gay nepotism (e.g. “No. The Gay Jews!”), but I have no idea whether this is actually true. Perhaps that just makes it clearer than politics is not about leadership, rather than posing and narcissism.

    Their gay lobby also seems relatively well organised and to be reasonably effective as a group, which would seem tough if you didn't have much leadership timber or in-group feeling. Maybe that's just because the liberal straights make it so easy for them.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "Perhaps that just makes it clearer than politics is not about leadership, rather than posing and narcissism."

    I disagree with this. Not saying that many politicians aren't assholes, but you clearly do need some real leadership ability.

    As for gays in leadership roles - its possible, but if so, they're being used as puppets by others.

    -Curtis

    ReplyDelete
  22. What do you think of this paper on the "reversal of misfortunes" with regard to U.S vs European crime rates?

    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."