site banner
PaperclipPerfector  11mo ago (text post)   3515 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for June 4, 2023

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don't understand the seemingly recent popularity of "tomboy gfs" (bonus meme).

There's a lot of meta-ironic shitposting on 4chan and sometimes reddit about how tomboys are the best because, as far as I can understand the arguments, they're bros that have a pussy. I can kind of see how a bro-gf might have appealed to 14 year old me who thought feelings and femininity were totally gay, dude, and who just wanted to play Halo with my bros while we farted and laughed and punched each other. But I can't imagine any well-adjusted man over age 25 feeling this way unless they're particularly feminine themselves (in which case they would be attracted to "tomboys" for a different set of reasons).

I've been attracted to feminine girls my entire life (yes, even as a 14 year old retard) and have, for as long as I can remember, found their femininity mysterious and alluring. Is there an element to tomboy popularity that I'm missing? Is there an emotionally mature segment of men who are still into tomboys? Or is it all just a forced meme?

Edit: Since this post has caused some confusion, let me clarify -- I'm asking about a narrow definition of tomboy as described in the meme and in threads about "tomboys", not "any woman who isn't 100% feminine in every way." For those who don't want to click on the meme, the "tomboy gf" has the following non-traditional qualities:

  • Thinks makeup is stupid

  • Likes porn

  • Likes video games

  • Rough speech like "I'm gonna kick your ass/suck my dick/fag"

  • Gets mistaken for a boy (presumably due to hairstyle and clothing)

  • Puts you in headlocks/wrestles with yoy

I’m the opposite, I don’t understand why anyone would find feminine behaviour attractive. Why wouldn’t you much rather have a partner that’s strong, stoic, driven, ambitious, practical, able to provide for both themselves or for you, takes the lead, etc? Versus one that’s submissive, meek, relies on you for emotional and physical reassurance, is more anxious and stressed out, doesn’t have grand ambitions beyond their family, is more interested in people than concepts, and forces the relationship into artificially divided roles based on gender?

Now sure I’m not a straight guy so it’s hard for me to empathise, but I honestly can’t understand why men fall in love with feminine women when I hear them complain so much about how they can’t understand their partner, how they don’t share interests, how they’re [insert stereotype of women here], how they don’t initiate sex, etc. Why not go for an equal life partner who shares your drive, focus and interests, and is just as sexually motivated as you instead?

Yes.

For men who are attracted to femininity, wouldn’t submissiveness, being family-oriented, making the man feel strong by needing his protection, gender roles etc. be the point, not shortcomings?

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats