Sure, 16 year old girls look awesome, but she opens up her mouth and she sounds like a 10 year old. Total turnoff. Even those two topless 17 year olds were a turnoff and one of them had awesome huge tits. But they sounded like brain-dead idiot teenyboppers and that was the biggest turnoff. I don’t like “girlishness.”
I like “womanlyness.” To the extent that a female is womanly, she turns me on. To the extent that she is girlish in a silly or stupid way, she turns me off. I don’t date morons. Plus it feels creepy to fuck a woman who acts girlish. I had an 18 year old girlfriend a while back. She was head over heels in love with me. To the extent that she acted like an adult, she turned me on, but when she acted girlish, it was a turnoff.
I don’t have anything against men who are oriented towards girls instead of women, though that’s not me. 16% of men are hebephiles and 3% of men are pedophiles, and if you want to expand the definition of hebephile to where the Shitheads want it, it goes up to 26% or even 100% of all men! Those men are going to be attracted to girlishness and youth. The more a woman looks neotenic or childlike (think Asian women), the more turned on they get.
It’s been said that all men are turned on by neotenism, and perhaps they are feature-wise. But the norm for men is to be teliophilic, not pedophilic or hebephilic.
81% of men are teleiophilic. That means they are maximally attracted to females from 15 up. That includes 15-17 year old girls and women in general. These men are attracted to the features of maturity of “womanishness” in a female. This is the polar opposite of “pedophilia” or whatever the Shitheads are screaming about today. Being attracted to womanishness and turned off by girlishness is the norm for all males. But note that this attraction to maturity includes 15-17 year old girls because in the sexual minds of men, 15-17 year old girls are just women and men are attracted to them because they are womanish, not girlish. Hence this is an incredibly normal attraction.
We can diagnose people with sexual orientations not so much based on the “objects” they are attracted to but more on the “essences” to which they are attracted. Attracted to girlishness? Fine, that’s 19% of all men, but it’s also “pedo-ish” if you will. But note that 19% of all men are “pedo-ish,” so to me, it’s almost normal. How can you that 20% of all men have a horrific and dangerous sexual deviation or paraphilia so awful that they need to be locked up forever? You can’t.
Once you start getting into features that are displayed by large percentages of the population, we really start balking at calling them mental disorders. I don’t think we would call any feature or set of features that 20% of men display a disorder. That’s too many.
“Normal” in psychiatry or psychopathology is more of a numbers name than anything else. In a society where all men beat their wives, sadly, wife-beating is “normal.”
But then we get into the notion of whether bad things can be normal. I would argue that a lot of bad behavior is normal. Is stealing abnormal? Hitting people? Throwing tantrums? Succumbing to depression from time to time? Grieving after a death? Hell, I would almost argue that rape, jealously, and murder are “normal.” We humans sure do it a lot, don’t we? We do it all the time, we’ve been doing it in vast numbers forever, so how could it be abnormal? It’s shitty, but it’s common as Hell and it’s never going away. These things are an essential aspect of our behavior as a species.
But it is a very interesting question whether normal behavior can actually be bad or even horrendous in the sense that normal simply means “common.”
So, readers, which is it, are a lot of bad behaviors actually “normal” in that our species sure does it a lot? So that means “normal” could encompass both good and bad behaviors.
I’m very torn philosophically as far as this goes. Perhaps we should just chuck the idea of “normal” altogether. Normies wrecked it ages ago anyway so what good is it?
I guess girlishness is attractive in terms of features, though I’m not even sure there. I’ve seen 18 year old girls on Tinder who looked underage. I’m sure they were 18 but the fact that they looked underage was a huge turnoff for me. I want a woman, not a girl!
Now I have nothing against a woman acted child-like in the sense of getting in touch with her Inner Girl. Now watch the Shitheads panic because I said that.
There’s a girl in every woman and a woman in every girl. The Shitheads already went batshit insane when I said that.
Her Inner Girl is her Inner Child if you will. A lot of adult women have killed off their Inner Child, and that is a huge turnoff. The Inner Child particularly comes out to play during sex or sexual times or when you are madly in love.
PUA/Game pro-tip: When a woman starts laughing hysterically and acting child-like or girlish, you can absolutely fuck her, guaranteed. Jump on her, Goddamn it! Don’t worry, she’ll go for it.
Because sex somehow is connected with child-like or girlish behavior in the female. Sex is also funny. I can’t help but notice how many people think sex is funny. Think back to the women you’ve slept with and notice how often they started laughing when you were having sex. There was a Joy of Sex book that came out back in the 1970’s back when people were sane, before Mass Shithead Disorder infected 90% of the population. I remember that book said that when it comes down to it, sex is pretty damn funny.
I’ve been with women and we were madly in love with each other and she was acting like a kid. I started acting like a kid too and saying, “Mommy can you fix me some bweckfast?” I’ve done that with other girlfriends too and they think it’s funny. I get to play the little boy and they get to play the mother. One laughed every time I did that and said, “Ok, little boy.” I usually did it in the morning because I wanted “Mommy” to fix me breakfast and I wanted to play “little boy.”
All women want to be mothers. If they don’t have a kid, they have a dog that subs for a kid. The maternal instinct cannot be extinguished. I had a girlfriend age 49 who had never had kids and even said she hated kids. But at some point in her life, she had babysat or looked after this little six year old boy, and she simply would not stop talking about him.
It wasn’t pedo-ish or weird in that sense, but she would not stop talking about that damned little boy! I finally figured out that she had mothered him in a sense, and in a way, that was the child she never had. She got to play mother with him and he got to play son. She talked about him all the time because in a way, that boy she took care of was the child she never had. It seemed to important to her. Her relationship with her French poodle dog was absolutely nuts. He was basically her kid. He even slept in her bed. That’s not uncommon. A lot of single women sleep with their dogs. The dog is their kid in a sense. Or a substitute for a man? Which is it? Both?