I met a couple of soys recently, who I talked to for a few hours. The conversation drifted toward a discussion of transgenderism. The soys claimed that male and female were "socially constructed categories" and that the existence of genetic anomalies (hermaphrodites and the like) invalidates any objective biological categorisation. Furthermore, they said that it would be "hateful" to ban biological males from women's sports as "no one has the right to decide a trans person's identity for them".
Setting aside the fact that the sex denialist claim is obviously absurd (to the point that virtually no one actually believes it), I wondered why they were earnestly making it. What were the psychological mechanisms behind it?
I don't think it was status-seeking specifically in this instance, though it's entirely possible that they have programmed themselves to repeat this nonsense whenever this issue is discussed so that they never slip up when it matters (in front of a feminist co-worker for instance).
After observing them I came to the conclusion that the main factors were:
1. Comparison avoidance
The soys were, as the term would suggest, quite unmasculine in both appearance and mentality. While they are university educated and at least one of them has a "good job", on a primal level they are not respected or desired by women or by other men. Subconsciously they understand that they are failures as men but of course the conscious mind does not wish to accept this. Social constructivism serves as a psychological defence mechanism/cope for one's inferiority: "Strength is just a social construct! But even if it isn't, the value people ascribe to strength is definitely a social construct! Therefore it doesn't matter that I'm not much stronger than the average woman! And gender is a social construct too!" etc.
2. Conflict avoidance
Given their deficient masculinity (low testosterone, weak body, timid personality, emotional argumentation, nerdy/sedentary lifestyle including regular porn consumption, probably never been in a fight as an adult, borderline if not actually "incel", no genuine male friendships, no survival skills), they do not feel confident or even safe outside the bubble of androgynous hedonist individualist liberal culture. The thought of primal conflict terrifies them, even more so as they have so much invested in the system economically (with a huge fear of losing their cushy job and being relegated to the working class) and are part of the most legally and (officially) socially maligned group ("straight white males"). Social constructivism serves as a defence mechanism here too ("Why is racist "Western culture" any more valid or valuable than the indigenous and authentic voodooist culture of Haiti? We need to open our borders even wider!") as well as a conflict avoidance mechanism ("My beliefs aren't really objective my Muslim/African brother! This nation's historic culture is a heteropatriarchal white social construct designed to suppress your perspective! By the way, do you want to fuck my girlfriend?")
People do not adopt positions in a vacuum or from cold reason. To the greatest extent their values are shaped by their biology and their circumstances. Just by looking at a soy, an astute observer can predict his views on any social/political topic with a high degree of accuracy.
Relevant meme:
Setting aside the fact that the sex denialist claim is obviously absurd (to the point that virtually no one actually believes it), I wondered why they were earnestly making it. What were the psychological mechanisms behind it?
I don't think it was status-seeking specifically in this instance, though it's entirely possible that they have programmed themselves to repeat this nonsense whenever this issue is discussed so that they never slip up when it matters (in front of a feminist co-worker for instance).
After observing them I came to the conclusion that the main factors were:
1. Comparison avoidance
The soys were, as the term would suggest, quite unmasculine in both appearance and mentality. While they are university educated and at least one of them has a "good job", on a primal level they are not respected or desired by women or by other men. Subconsciously they understand that they are failures as men but of course the conscious mind does not wish to accept this. Social constructivism serves as a psychological defence mechanism/cope for one's inferiority: "Strength is just a social construct! But even if it isn't, the value people ascribe to strength is definitely a social construct! Therefore it doesn't matter that I'm not much stronger than the average woman! And gender is a social construct too!" etc.
2. Conflict avoidance
Given their deficient masculinity (low testosterone, weak body, timid personality, emotional argumentation, nerdy/sedentary lifestyle including regular porn consumption, probably never been in a fight as an adult, borderline if not actually "incel", no genuine male friendships, no survival skills), they do not feel confident or even safe outside the bubble of androgynous hedonist individualist liberal culture. The thought of primal conflict terrifies them, even more so as they have so much invested in the system economically (with a huge fear of losing their cushy job and being relegated to the working class) and are part of the most legally and (officially) socially maligned group ("straight white males"). Social constructivism serves as a defence mechanism here too ("Why is racist "Western culture" any more valid or valuable than the indigenous and authentic voodooist culture of Haiti? We need to open our borders even wider!") as well as a conflict avoidance mechanism ("My beliefs aren't really objective my Muslim/African brother! This nation's historic culture is a heteropatriarchal white social construct designed to suppress your perspective! By the way, do you want to fuck my girlfriend?")
People do not adopt positions in a vacuum or from cold reason. To the greatest extent their values are shaped by their biology and their circumstances. Just by looking at a soy, an astute observer can predict his views on any social/political topic with a high degree of accuracy.
Relevant meme:
Last edited:
