la_vie_noire | (no subject)

Dude. I was so evading talking about this, but.

Well, slash is kind of the female equivalent of the straight male interest in transsexuals. That is, the opposite of what culture would predict. So it probably reflects a more direct subcortical effect. Also, there's already data out there about romance novels we can use, which probably overlaps with relationships in fan fic, but we do have a few questions that aren't specific to slash. Maybe we'll have more in the next round.

..........

Not enough dots.

"Transsexuals" who of course are not people, but something that is created and exists solely for the sexual fantasy of straight cis-men. And you see, straight men "interest" in trans women is something.... "subcortical," and very weird. (Dude, I mean, if you wanted to compare it with cis dudes who fetishize trans women -which is kinda different from straight men who are attracted to trans women because the words "straight men" means... they are attracted to women- you are doing it wrong.)

And I love the "data about romance novel."

Get your "science" straight, or out of this Earth. Please.

ETA: I don't know, but it's really something that a lot of cis ladies are going there screaming, "HOW DARE YOU TO COMPARE IT TO MEN DIGGING TRANSSEXUALS. IT'S LESBIAN PORN THE RIGHT COMPARISON." I... uh.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Yeah. It's probably some special talent. Maybe it's genetic. Or subcortical. Or something new. A mutation/evolutive trait.

I can barely believe scientists think depression might be an evolutionary chosen trait. I'm pretty sure they're confusing people who can realize they're depressed because they're already deep thinkers with depression = deep thinkers.

What would such idiocy be associated with? Human societies need an Omega just like wolves? If so, why haven't the stupid run off and formed their own communes and stopped trying to convince the rest of us to become one with them?

Maybe we should make a survey.

Yeah, I'm going to be honest, I don't think "evo-psych" is a respectably science. Much less something you can AFFIRM something like this.

I know a lot of scientists who aren't from this area sometimes say stupid shit and talk about evolutionary psychology like it were something... true. But these shit it's mostly based on anecdotes, "cultural" data as its best. Heck, a lot of studies already showed how higher mental capabilities aren't something to be linked with genes besides the ones who give the human species a brain. Dude, I don't want to affirm anything, there is a lot to study, but "mental capabilities adapting to become genetic since the homo sapiens-sapiens became an species" would be the equivalent to affirming that there is a higher incidence of cancer today because our body is evolving to kill itself.