Grace Lavery / Joseph Lavery & Daniel M. Lavery / Mallory Ortberg - "Straight with extra steps" couple trooning out to avoid "dwindling into mere heterosexuality"

Thoughts on AGP
1 (3).png
link | archive
I'm sure you could read the original papers through your university access, Joe. But there's also plenty of places to get them for free.

One issue you might encounter is that the field of psychology has moved past the psychoanalysis you're talking about like 75 years ago.
 
Joe, now: I don't know what autogynephilia even means other than it's an ad hominem attack used to silence me

Joe, 2019: Did I mention that I look incredible here in France? I have been dressing like the mignonne bitch of my autogynephilic dreams.
Joe, 2019: "Lying in bed...bein all AGP and shit."
agp-png.1064931
 
Joe's writing reminds me of very contorted attempts to frame issues in a way that you think is going to be digestible for an audience you don't understand. It's sort of this meme

27f.png

but with an added helping of feigned confusion when it doesn't work. ("I thought you liked Jesus? I'm just trying to understand.")

For instance, you can see him trying to tie sexism into union rhetoric here, where "women" are analogous to "workers."

Screenshot 2023-10-03 030650 - Copy.png

If you'll recall his "you can only define firefighters through a circular definition" argument, you see how often he comes back to this idea that woman is an adopted career path. He is drafting behind choice feminism and Marxist proletariat rhetoric, but he never understands why his analogies fucking suck.

"No other dominated group claims a natural basis for its domination" is an attempt to say that noticing sex differences is analogous to something like 19th-century race science. Of course, grafting sexism onto slavery and labor discourse doesn't work at all because being a woman has a meaning independent of man (the same as being "African" is a value-neutral statement, or being "a firefighter" does not depend on distinguishing yourself from anti-firefighters). "Women have this much muscle and lung capacity" exists independently of "and men typically have more." The comparison is only relevant when stacking up facts alongside each other.

The contextual, relational meanings that slide around only exist when we're talking about the current relation state between workers-bosses; men-women; whites-blacks. Certain facts might be marshaled to justify perpetuating or destroying those current relation states (the fact of workers making X money is coded as "they are lazy" or "they are being cheated"), but the fact still remains that one is working for money and the other is paying money. We would still be left with "Africans don't sunburn easily" if they were the only people left on earth, quite apart from whether whites were constantly getting into fights with them about who could sunburn faster and whether that made white domination acceptable. And women would still be able to carry children and only run so fast if men were their dominated himbo sex slaves.

tl;dr ur retardid
 
Oh dear god… another opportunity for him to trot out the “assumed (…) to adopt submissive sexual positions” definition of woman. I suspect stating this publicly gives him special feelings in his underpants but no, “woman” and “bottom” are not synonymous. It would be good for Mr. Lavery to try to imagine the human sexes outside of the context of patriarchy — a little thought experiment. The natural world could provide some inspiration. Just as being a human who works is not inherently an oppressed state (but arguably is one under capitalism) being a female human is an oppressed state under patriarchy but not one under every possible system of societal organization.

Feminists have always opposed the oppression of women under patriarchy, Broseph. That oppression exploits human sexual difference but doesn’t inevitably arise from it. Hope that helps.

There’s a reason it’s “patriarchy” — father-rule — versus something like “andrarchy” or man-rule. The word points to the control of reproductive capacity but also to the hierarchy among men and the exploitation of weaker or younger men by older (but not too old) and more powerful men.
 
Last edited:
Joe Lavery, 2023:
"I myself have never been able to find out precisely what autogynephilia is: I only know that people call me an autogynephile whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat.

He left off three words for some reason.

Rebecca West, 1913:
“I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is: I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat, or a prostitute.”
 
For instance, you can see him trying to tie sexism into union rhetoric here, where "women" are analogous to "workers."

Screenshot 2023-10-03 030650 - Copy.png

If you'll recall his "you can only define firefighters through a circular definition" argument, you see how often he comes back to this idea that woman is an adopted career path. He is drafting behind choice feminism and Marxist proletariat rhetoric, but he never understands why his analogies fucking suck.

"No other dominated group claims a natural basis for its domination" is an attempt to say that noticing sex differences is analogous to something like 19th-century race science. Of course, grafting sexism onto slavery and labor discourse doesn't work at all because being a woman has a meaning independent of man (the same as being "African" is a value-neutral statement, or being "a firefighter" does not depend on distinguishing yourself from anti-firefighters). "Women have this much muscle and lung capacity" exists independently of "and men typically have more." The comparison is only relevant when stacking up facts alongside each other.
If there is no natural basis then he's saying that people can identify into and out of oppression. The question then is why would someone identify into oppression and for the answer to that we can only ask Joe or some other troon who is going to tell us that their identity is natural for them. (This also raises questions of if it is oppression if you willingly choose it.)

The other possibility is that social roles are not something you can identify into or out of, which solves the problem I raised but has to rather explicitly be rejected by Joe and other troons.

He's trying to "pirouette away" from within a narrow hole he willingly dug and climbed into. He could save everyone time by simply quoting from Carroll:
'When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
 
I haven’t kept up with this thread thanks to Joe’s new full time job on Twitter being a dull, hysterical troon engaging in academic masturbatory slap fights. It’s too boring. If only they had not managed to alienate all the interesting social circles in NYC so quickly.

But I must know, did Mallory finally get her frankenarmdick!?!? It was, well at least over two years ago, she announced she was going to be obtain her phallic birthright in a few months. I waited, but then she just got some more tattoos about her daddy and I drifted.

I figure she must be grabbing the air pump and giving Joe’s girlfriend a good rogering for Joe’s masturbatory pleasure on Saturday nights by now.
 
His bit with "I don't even know what autogynephilia is" after spending years calling himself an autogynephile is a sad distant echo of the entire left's relationship to the terms "woke" or "social justice warrior" or "critical race theory."

For years: "I'm such an SJW! I love bringing critical race theory into my classroom." People start noticing what those terms mean and then suddenly it's an about face: "I don't even know what an SJW is, woke is a slur from the alt right, no one would ever teach kids critical race theory!"
 
I haven’t kept up with this thread thanks to Joe’s new full time job on Twitter being a dull, hysterical troon engaging in academic masturbatory slap fights. It’s too boring. If only they had not managed to alienate all the interesting social circles in NYC so quickly.

But I must know, did Mallory finally get her frankenarmdick!?!? It was, well at least over two years ago, she announced she was going to be obtain her phallic birthright in a few months. I waited, but then she just got some more tattoos about her daddy and I drifted.

I figure she must be grabbing the air pump and giving Joe’s girlfriend a good rogering for Joe’s masturbatory pleasure on Saturday nights by now.
At the time, something about the way she wrote about it made me think she was going for a metoidioplasty. She or Joe made some awful joke about having enough meat or something.
 
But I must know, did Mallory finally get her frankenarmdick!?!? It was, well at least over two years ago, she announced she was going to be obtain her phallic birthright in a few months. I waited, but then she just got some more tattoos about her daddy and I drifted.
Would be a great arc, but she seems to have chickened out. I can't imagine her doing it and just not writing about it.
 
At the time, something about the way she wrote about it made me think she was going for a metoidioplasty. She or Joe made some awful joke about having enough meat or something.
I didn’t even know what metioplasty was. Ick. Seems anti-masculine to either have a giant clit/bizarre micro-penis.

One of my first online horrors was seeing clips from a porn film the WWF wrestler Chyna did, which showcased what T and steroids did to female genitalia…and that was just the result of hormones. I can’t fathom trying to further increase the grotesque effect with surgery.
Would be a great arc, but she seems to have chickened out. I can't imagine her doing it and just not writing about it.
I can’t imagine Joe not bragging about it. He seemed to really get off on destroying every vestige of Mallory’s feminine qualities and any perceived normality. He got a deep perverse thrill out of destroying the wholesome Christian girl and her family.

I think playing Dr Frankenstein is the only physical interest he has in Mallory. (Her chic lit fame and connections were obviously the other big draw). The only actual sex going on in that house now is between Joe and the Michigan girlfriend. Mallory is an appendage fetish object for Joe, he’s lost interest in it but still has to keep it around for appearance sake.
 
Back