Debating Autogynephilia: Malignant Fetish or Benign Orientation? | with Phil Illy & Rudy
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 лип 2024
- Autogynephilia is all the rage! Is it a perversion to be suppressed, or a sexual orientation to be accommodated? Rudy and Phil Illy debate, whilst I moderate.
Follow Phil at / autogynephilic
Follow Rudy at / theneonrequiem
Support this channel:
www.paypal.me/benjaminboyce
cash.app/$benjaminaboyce
www.buymeacoffee.com/benjamin...
Find all interviews on spotify: spoti.fi/3px5WnK
/ benjaminboyce
Join me on alternative video sites:
odysee.com/@BenjaminABoyce
www.bitchute.com/channel/benj...
rumble.com/user/BenjaminABoyce
And on Twitter @BenjaminABoyce
If a gay man removes all of his clothing, he is still attracted to men. If an autogynephile removes all his clothing and adornments, is he still attracted to himself? If his attraction *requires* those things, to me, this doesn't sound like an orientation.
The autogynephile would still be attracted to himself in his fantasy. And if he had had "sex changing" operations he would also still be attracted to himself if he was naked.
@@nietkees6906 Being attracted to a fantasy or your permanently altered body doesn't sound like an orientation, either, though.
@unhurte8779 The question posed by the video is whether it is an orientation, and that's what I'm responding to. I didn't tell anyone what they can or can't do.
AGPs see a woman who’s a 10 in the mirror. They never see the man 3, even if he can see his own dick. His brain transforms it into a clit. Clothing just means he can do it in public to get maximum arousal from boundary violations.
as a trans woman, yes, i'm autogynephilic even when i take my clothes off.
“I don’t like to put a lot of thought into what I wear.” Are. You. Serious.😂😂😂
An important takeaway from this conversation is that AGPs know perfectly well that they are not women, and know they are interlopers into women's spaces. The idea that AGPs are in any way vulnerable or marginalised is a massive lie.
It’s a clear signifier of entitlement and perversion.
@tablescissors67 Yes! But don't get me started! The appropriation of gay identity and history under the label "queer" is so deeply offensive to me as a gay person, but I am expected to accept this as "progress". Every time I hear the phrase "LGBTQ community" I want to hit something with a stick. What links these people with homosexuals other than the vague sense that they are sexually abnormal?
Straight people calling themselves "queer" because they are flamboyant attention seekers is equivalent to white people calling themselves "n****r" because they like rap music and watermelon.
Phil claims to possess femininity.
But Phil does not enter women's spaces and doesn't claim to be a woman. The autogynephiles who do enter women's spaces do not know they are not women or at the very least claim not to know.
@@dambar7486you’d have to be incredibly naive to truly believe there’s a single AGP alive that doesn’t know they aren’t a woman.
Just don't say the wives "have to at least try out" sex role play. It is presented to us as as our obligation. We get hurt physically & psychologically. I have data from
54 trans widows. Our stories are not told in any kind of representative way, in which the collateral damage is recognized. This damages women, who are mothers.
Men are selfish ute. You know.
@Ute Benjamin should listen to your experience and compendium of Trans Widow’s testimony, if he really cares about understanding this phenomenon.
@@The-Finisher agreed and I’m sure many want and need to hear this.
Children of parents or siblings of ppl with agp or hsts transvestites would also be great to hear from.
It's Grooming Benjamin Grooming
Being attracted to oneself pretending to be a woman is not an orientation- it's a paraphilia, or a kink. Turning up publicly in your fetish gear and subjecting everybody to it, is gross and highly disrespectful to other people.
it is what its is .. its not a decision to be this way ...at some point you just need to say fkc it this is who i am.
Is it tho? Is it not a choice to either refrain from or indulge in things we feel compelied to do?
Well said.
@@tonyhoffman3309 ..well i guess you could also ask homosexuals not to be openly obvious about it in public ...they could keep it under the radar like everything else.
@@bepitanOh. Say that to pedophiles.
I think the alarm against agp by trans is because so many of them are agp and DO NOT want it known.
This is exactly why I want insanely creepy men like Phil, to get as much spotlight as possible. It baffles me that so much of the "gender critical" scene want to HELP trans-activists, in sweeping AGPs under the rug, because they're gross and icky (which they undoubtedly ARE, of course).
The few AGPs like Phil, who are willing to ADMIT their AGP-ism, should be given all the attention they want- They're extremely valuable, because (even tho they try to down-play it) they'll admit to the dirty little secret that mainstream trans activists will NEVER speak aloud...
...That mtf's are motivated by sexual gratification.
Guys like Phil are valuable because (1) if any non-AGP says "these guys are motivated by sexual gratification", the trans-sympathetic public (ie the MOST important demographic to reach) will just dismiss that as "hateful transphobia"... but having an AGP say it about HIMSELF, can't just be dismissed like that.
And (2) the other reason why self-admitted AGPs are so valuable, and should be given as much spotlight as possible, is BECAUSE they're incredibly creepy, and unlikable, and come across as completely self-obsessed narcissists, universally fixated on their fetish, and immersed in an all-consuming entitlement, that they MUST be allowed to indulge their fetish, 24/7, WHATEVER the societal cost.
All the reasons why BOTH trans activists, AND much of the "gender critical" scene DON'T want guys like Phil given attention, are exactly why I want him, and others like him, given as much attention as possible...
You don't persuade the public to take action against a disease, by HIDING the uglyest aspects of that disease from them...
And one wonders why....
You can see how AGPs are part of the dangerous slippery slope to justifying pedophilia as a “sexuality”. And that is completely happening, the modern TRA movement is absolutely being used to shoehorn sex & sexuality upon children and to look at them as sexual.
I think it's frightening for parents to imagine this about their kids. I don't think as many of them are AGP as some might think, I don't think AGP is that common. I do think the internet is going to change that though. And for the rest too, the other 'philias.
Perhaps the language change from transexual to transgender was to take the emphasis away from sex? It also opened up the possibility of the "transgender child".
No one would be stupid enough to let someone who's admitted to being a pedophile hang around little kids, even if said pedo isn't rock hard at that exact moment. Even if said pedophile genuinely just loves to innocently play with the kids 99% of the time. That 1% is still too much. Phil is trying to act like him not being turned on 24/7 by his sexual fixation suddenly makes it ok for him to openly display it, when it's not. I don't want the "non-offending" AGP to be normalized the same as I don't want "non-offending" pedos to be normalized.
Phil admitted to being more turned on by the clothes in the beginning, then he got desensitized to it to where it feels more mundane to him. That follows the evergrowing nature of fetish and paraphilia where the person constantly have to push further and further to get their hit. Seems a bit like when a porn addicted person mindlessly watches "vanilla" porn while feeling nothing anymore. Still doesn't make it ok for the person to openly watch porn among other people, despite the fact that he's not even turned on by it anymore.
Phil says he would feel uncomfortable in men's clothes, so he chooses to instead to push the uncomfort onto all the women around him by wearing women's clothes and being open about it being sexual for him. He still (at least in this video) seems to have no interest at all in finding the cause of his own discomfort to fix it, he's happy to just push it onto others instead. He's already picking his own comfort over the comfort of the vast majority of women, so why should women trust him to be a safe person?
Rudy was right when he said Phil seems unable to even imagine a man could wear anything feminine and not be an AGP, becuase he's so hyperfocused on his own sexual fixation. Or perhaps he is only pretending to think that to further his own case, who knows. I partly think buying into "gender" does that to you - suddenly you have to accept that every little action a person does is to express a feminine or masculine role/gender, when in reality most people aren't hyperfocused on the stereotypes of the sexes and they just exist in a neutral state. I think Benjamin has bought into gender too from what I've heard him say before, hence why he seems like he's mostly on Phil's side this episode.
Well put
10/10.
This really should be the top comment.
Obsessing over your identity in any form is a special kind of narcissism MOST of us don’t have the luxury of indulging in. Honestly, I’m starting to think these are just “privileged” people problems. If you were trying to build a shelter to live in, find food to eat and trying not to die from the elements this garbage would be the least of your priorities.
Embracing identity can actually have an effect on the ability to eat, be housed effectively, etc. I am currently studying the Mexican Revolution, and identity played a huge role. People couldn’t eat, didn’t have decent shelter, and identity was a giant factor in all of that because the whyte colonialists from Europe did swoop in, take all of the resources, didn’t share, told the indigenous and mestizo people that they didn’t deserve food and shelter because they didn’t “look right” and god didn’t choose them, and because of starvation the people had no choice but to rise up and revolt. Along with that revolution came a new embracing of indigenous Mexican identity, and that’s the world Frida Kahlo, for instance, emerged into as an artist and as the living embodiment and celebrant of traditional Mexican identity. So the argument that identity isn’t something people who are starving care about is just incorrect. Sorry.
People of one or another ethnic-religious background can definitely be ethnocentric and identity-obsessed as well - this can seem like a crutch, when they don't have anything more interesting going on.
We all thought covid would straighten them all out, or at least quiet the conversation. But, that didn't happen.
💯
problems in first world
I would like to make it clear no one has told this man hes not allowed to wear dresses, he is allowed to wear dresses. Im allowed to say its gross when a man wears dresses while promoting his book about how that turns him on. He wants to be a creep and not have any criticism for it.
Would you feel the same about an hsts like blaire white?
His willingness to engage with criticism negates your claim that he doesn’t want to be criticized
@@BenjaminABoyceHe’s not engaging with criticism if he’s only talking to men.
@@wormwoodcocktail- That's utter nonsense. He's being criticized throughout this entire debate.
@@RachelRichards Has he talked to any women, though? Who actually push back on his behaviour? Or just centrists who coddle him?
The only possible reason for practicing your paraphillia in public is attention. Keep it in your own home.
Wow it's almost like that didn't work before, won't work now and never will work because these people can't contain themselves and degeneracy breeds degeneracy. Remember when gays just wanted to be married? Now they just want to mess with your kids genitals.
The answer is to shame and humiliate these people
That and the sexual gratification that comes with pushing boundaries of being caught/seen.
This ^
What happens in private always goes public. Unless you use a culture that makes them stay inside and is actively hostile.
The whole point of certain paraphilias is being seen.
I thought it was a debate? Why is it 2 vs. 1? Next time I’d be happy to team up with Rudy, if you want a fair 2 v 2
Would looove to hear you and Rudy have a discussion or debate someone!
The whole time I was watching, I was wishing you were in this conversation to correct all the bullshit comparisons they were making. The misogyny was insane, so basically women just need to get over it and be kind! I agree with what you said the other day, we need to bring shame back and stop telling girls/women to just be kind when they feel uncomfortable or unsafe.
Same here, I would love to come on and side with Rudy if hes being teamed on.
Rudy saying Phil's look is giving Buffalo Bill vibes is dead-on. I feel like Phil has been emboldened in how he presents himself now more and more since he was given a platform. I have listened to him quite a bit and now I am creeped out by him
GOODBYE TERFSES
I’M COOMING OVER YOU
@-BenjaminABoyce Is this actually you Benjamin? Or a fake account?
@@LusciousTwinkle Comments on a video made by the account that posted said video have the account name highlighted. If you see a similar-looking account without highlighting, it's trying to bait people into clicking the account to direct them to a scam and you should report for "Unwanted commercial content or spam".
Same
Same. Him comparing his paraphilia and age/species paraphilias to sexual orientations like homosexuality set all of my alarm bells off. Giving serious MAP or MAP apologist vibes.
Transvesticism isn't an orientation; it's a "philia". I have no problem with Phil's dress or where he wears it. I do have an issue with his push to have AGP or any philia labeled as a sexual orientation because that gains protected status in almost every jurisdiction in the US. We open the door for other philias to be considered orientations thus protected. Should pedophilia also gain protection as a sexual orientation? I think this dangerous.
RUDY! Good on you for doing this.
women don't confront because of the danger these men pose
I'm glad men don't kneel before women. They make their own destiny and you are not a part of it. :)
This discussion considers how female strangers will feel about an AGP, but I would have liked to see some consideration of the impact on people close to the AGP. Is Phil's mother also supposed to "deal with her emotions"?
Exactly. Phil and most AGPs ignore the often devastating impact their behavior and "orientation" has on their immediate family and especially their wives or kids if they come out late in life. The complete self focus and self infatuation does have the potential to be very harmful to others. It's disingenuous to say otherwise.
My husband is AGP and it disgusts me... It keeps ramping up and is becoming competitive on his part... Always wanting to push to the "next level"... IM OUT...!!💯 10 years wasted...🙄
“It’s giving very much Buffalo Bill”. I’m dead ☠️
He’s right. Phil looks like Cameron Frye and Buffalo Bill got stuck in the Cronenberg telepods and stole Sloan’s prom dress
It reminds me of the military general who led a double life. He broke into females homes, put on women’s clothing, waited on them to get home and then killed them.
@@scherryvalentine9673 Col. Russell Williams? He’s far from the only one. A long time Boyce interviewed Jamie Shupe, the first non binary American, and an ex-military guy. He described wandering around his property in women’s clothing and cheating on his wife. Karen Davis made a bunch of videos re-iterating the abuse Shupe admitted to… and Boyce took down the video, everyone called Karen mean, and Shupe’s handmaid made a video saying she totally loves her husband and she’s not mad about the infidelity.
All these men are the same and this isn’t the first time Boyce ran interference.
I’m disappointed in Boyce. He was so measured a few years ago. He had a lot of courage at the time, when he started his show off of that coo that went down at the college in Olympia.
That General's behavior progressed into that because addiction demands more and bigger thrills as long as it is practiced. Abuse accelerates, and there is a lot of abuse and control of others going on with these sexual kink addictions. We are doing no one a favor to pretend they are on a healthy path when they become addicted to these aberrant behaviors.
I think AGPs need to realize that most people have no issue with sexualized cross dressing. Doing it in PUBLIC or crossing boundaries into women’s spaces to feel aroused is predatory. It’s not cool. It’s harming the perception of actual trans people and it’s wrong.
There’s no such thing as “actual trans people”. Only men who hate women and girls who think being raped by their uncle in every orifice makes them a man.
That's why I feel like throughout the whole discussion, the problematic paraphilia wasn't AGP itself but exhibitionism.
@@wormwoodcocktail "girls who think being raped by their uncle in every orifice" So much class. Trans people hate and disrespect women but YOU allow yourself to write such graphic description of some women's traumatic experience. Quite exemplary hypocritical POS, aren't you? Thank you, you couldn't have shown your true colours in a better way.
I'd love to see Phil discuss this with a woman!
I’d vote for Brittany Roux, A Slightly Twisted Female. That would be an interesting conversation!
@@HellCatt0770yes I love her, I think she’d be great to discuss/debate this with him!
He did, with multiple women (including his SO), previous to this episode.
He has, including the detransitioned woman and many other women at the Genspect meet that "feminists" seem to wanna treat like little children with no ability to think.
@@tablescissorshmm I’ll have to check those out
I'm a woman and I wouldn't be seen dead in any of the shite Phil wears! 😂
I'm an autogynephilic transsexual. Neither would I.
I would at Carnaval.
Right? Those arms length blue gloves are clownish.
Wow, really? People have different clothing preferences? Or are you saying women are a monolith. Typical conservative clown.
Creep being creepy doesn’t want you to bring up your morals & ethics in a conversation about why others are upset about their creepy behavior. Imagine that.
I hate that guy's appearance so much I can't even listen to him speak. It makes me viscerally disgusted.
Is/ought - the fundamental understanding of everything requires knowing the difference.
Best would be if moustache man got the IS out of the way so could focus on the more important OUGHT, but he couldn't which made him look nothing but judgemental.
Describing "what is" is a much different, dispassionate/boring conversation. No one is arguing that y'all don't exist. We can debate terminology, but I'm personally against the continuous expansion and normalization of perversions. The interesting argument is what is the line of acceptable public behavior related to a creepy fetish? What historically has been out of bounds and why? Why is this OK now? Why does Phil get a pass over his more aggressive, less respectful AGP peers?
@@OrwellsHousecat We are all judging Phil - pretty much everyone on this thread finds him super creepy and we're not really interested in him trying to wrap his creep behavior up in some academic nonsense. It's like men going on and on and on about how they can be a woman and yet - they're a bloke and always will be
@@ayeright320 lots of people can come across as creepy (eg autistics who aren't using same social cues as you eg socially anxious people eg unusual people) so that alone is not a suitable foundation for ostracisation/demonisation - there may be better arguments but using 'ewww creepy' just comes off as mean girls and undermines any reasonable concerns you might have. He's playing the victim card, just like feminists did, so unless you adopt an alternative paradigm, you undermine all of the dominant paradigms (liberalism; feminism; minority-ism; victimism).
I don’t think Phil “infringed” on females rights or consent or whatever, that’s a stretch. It’s more about why did a conference about safeguarding of gender confused children and detransitioners, promote the book of an agp about living within the fetish instead of overcoming it. Would you buy a book on how to get sober by someone who still drinks?
This was what GC and most others were critical of.
They didn't 'promote' it, though? He attended the event (was not jnvited). He was pictured holding his book and someone said, 'check this out' on Twitter. Not great. Also not promo. Just like me saying this does not mean I support Phil's overall 'AGP as a sexual orientation' contention (I don't).
Basically, AGPs wearing 'women's' outfits publically is the same as rubber or latex fetishists wearing rubber or latex 24/7. They can say its a 'normal, comfortable' outfit for them as much as they like, but we know, and they know, it's about how it arouses them.
When a guy writes an “edgy” book and then acts out publicly to create a controversy around the subject matter of said book I’d say it’s more of a GRIFT than an orientation !
This guy gets it. No, Phil, we’re not buying your book where you defend medicalizing kids, you creep.
There is nothing 'edgy' about this man's book.
@@toni6053maybe “over the edge” is better? I don’t intend to waste any time reading it.
Whatever happened to the concept of the "dirty old man" a phrase we all used to use and was widely understood to be a creepy bloke acting sexually inappropriately in public. Thats all Phil is trying to wrap it up in academic jargon. He cant stop people recognising what hes about and telling him we dont want to be involved- like women did when they spotted him at Genspect. Young people get warned about sleezy men like this when theyre growing up and then go on to warn next generation.
Phil is not claiming to be a woman, not demanding pronouns of women, and not goingget not women's private spaces or sports. Yet plenty of other trans identified people were there who ARE doing all those things. They very well all may have the same condition Phil is describing (agp) yet they were not critical of them.
@@tonyhoffman3309Well if they had been in the photo they probably would have been. Anyone arguing for sexually inappropriately men to be around women, children and vulnerable young people really has to wonder what they are doing with their lives
The term "dirty old man" became politically incorrect when one was elected as our current President.
@@ayeright320 It was a gender seminar... full of trans, detrans and etc. where are these droves of vulnerable women and children? Do they take primary schools to listen to gender seminars? There are plenty of photo's from this seminar. Did you jump on a hate train for everyone else too?
He lives in Portland. have you been to portland?
@@MayadanavaGod no its an absolute sh%thole - why would anyone go there? There were women attacked there this week but these gender fascists.
Loved Rudy's facial expressions 😊 teamRudy all the way in this!
Rudy is low-iQ arrogant and annoying.
Bless him for doing this!
Thing is Rudy's pre-concieved ideas about Phil completely undermined his attack on Phil because in Phil's case, the cap doesn't (appear to) fit in terms of what the outrage mob would say about him and "his fetish". I feel like this conversation was very much about trying to shame Phil for things he hadn't done by people he hadn't done anything to. See my above post for why this subject engenders such strong views from some.
Rudy's only argument is that people don't like the outfit, and that by declaring a paraphillia you have removed certian behaviours. If Phil had been quite about paraphilia would the same mob be here?
I am going to say yes. Rudy doesn't seem to know the difference between my emotions got hurt and a moral stance. There are 100's of paraphilia's and most of them no one cares about. So the argument is I don't like you in a dress.
To say Prince wasn't using his clothes ina sexual kink way... ok. Sure Prince didn't sell kink as a brand....
@@Mayadanava32 positions in a one night stand...
Just one thought, Prince was a fairly messed up individual, as, in my opinion, the large majority of celebrities are. He was certainly highly sex focused, and while many may be fine with that, I find it unnerving, and somewhat of a red flag.
Quite comical really, three men trying to have a serious debate on how women feel around blokes with sexual perversions, fetishes & general sexual deviance. Rudy had a good go at it whilst that Phil appears to have tin ear. Just because women opt for self preservation rather than speaking their mind to his face doesn't actually mean acceptance.
The point is that as long as a man is wearing pants (or a skirt) no one knows what’s going on behind it.
Rudy is so right that women would not approach Phil if they feel uncomfortable. I think what i don't like is that it is not about the clothing itself , it is the fact that it is specifically for women that makes me uncomfortable. Men wearing kaftans that can look exactly like dresses , and men wearing unisex clothing however brightly coloured or 'feminine ' do not bother me , but it feels different when the clothing is specifically made for women, because it is not then about the clothing it is about the fact that it is a fetishization of women.
Competition
A lot of clothes (eg dungarees eg suits) where typically male but wmn started wearing them, sometimes to make a statement
They always choose to wear what men consider’sexy’
@@OrwellsHousecat😂😂😂 as if
@@OrwellsHousecat r u deaf, still not for perversion or arousal
I’m sorry but it is true that women in general will immediately read someone dressed like Phil as a pervert. maybe it’s because you’re all men, but to pretend that’s not the case is just…wrong.
I'm glad that men don't give a damn about women's feefees about what men want to do in their own lives. :)
Not a fashion conversation, it is an appropriate attire conversation. Also, bringing it to peoples attention that, oh yeah, this is also sexually arousing for me , is problematic.
I feel uncomfortable with men in dresses. It's instinctual. Feels weird and I'd avoid.
Remember when Eddie Izard was just “a bloke in a dress”?
Portland does have worse problems, true, but that allows people like this to go deeper into their creepiness in public. We need to bring common decency and higher standards of public behavior.
Christian victorian morals! I am all for it. I really do like ruffles and bodices. Corsets! 3 piece suits! And manners I want all the manners.
I was born in India with Naga Baba's and agori's and Hidras. I think we need the decency police!
My question for Phil would be how would he fulfill his sexual orientation if he was on an island with men and women with no material things around?Having sex with a woman while thinking of himself as one? Or just masturbating to the fantasy of himself being a woman?
Does he enjoy the idea of other people seeing him as female? Or simply imagining himself as one? It gets into fetish territory if he requires a third party to validate him, IMO. This is what most trans-woman/AGPs seem to be like and what is inherently wrong to force other people into.
I don’t think he’s being harmful by wearing a dress, I think people need to judge him by his actions. I appreciate that he doesn’t ask other people to think of him as a female. There’s no way to regulate what gender clothes people wear. But I do think he’s wrong that it is just like a regular orientation. Orientation is inherently about what sexual traits you are attracted to in other real life people, not figments of your imagination.
I was with him at first. Turns out hes just as inappropriate, sexualizing of women and wanting attention and validation as much as any other of the nutrans lot.
I was in a relationship with an agp trans woman for close to 2 years and yes , they get off on parading themselves as women and being affirmed and called “woman “ gets their dicks hard !
In other interviews it seems that Phil thinks he has a female “soul” - discovered while taking a psychedelic.
@@tarolantern9729😂
What if AGP is just an incel cope? They realize they’ll never have a girlfriend unless they become one for themselves? Are they a threat to anyone besides themselves?
Benjamin, your introduction of this debate was biased towards Phil, and trivializing of the actual issue. It’s not about “performing femininity”, and it’s not just women who are grossed out by Genspect. It’s this man acting out his fetish in public- and if you doubt that dressing up is a fetish, never fear- he wrote an entire book (or AI wrote it, as it seems to be the case) CONFIRMING that the clothes are integral to his fetish.
First there was Buffalo Bill. Now we see Buffalo Phil.
"I think you are speaking too much truth here Rudy so Im going to tell you that you are basically confused...to try to manipulate you into letting me have my way..." ANY survivor of narc abuse can spot this IMMEDIATELY....
For me it's the bit around 50min where he starts to explain to Rudy what Ben means. There's something intensely patronising and schoolteachery about it, something that says 'we're trying to help you understand this, because you're not quite up to the level we've reached, but it's ok, we'll keep on doing it until you acquiesce'... Feels like that point belongs under your comment.
As the cameras start one can see phil draws back, puts on sunglasses and closes off emotionally. He is pulling in his power, biding time as he chooses how to manipulate the situation. Ive listened to phil and know he has valid points. He also displays traits of a manipulator/narcissist.
@@hestercorner-smith7499 All I can see is a guy who has been the target of first a cancel campaign trying to explain that you can't universalise anything rudy is saying. Rudy is using all emotive language.
Rudy;s sole argument is that if you have a kink it should limit what you can do. Wear a dress as long as there is no sexuality to it... we are humans our personallity is a driving factor for everything.
A shoe fetishist doesn't have to go bear foot without consent.
3 MEN talking about something that only effects women.
Bingo.
And Boyce shilling for Phill in the comments. Gross.
Phil's entire 'understanding' of his perversion is simply a set of logical arguments he has come up with to excuse his behaviour. So of course he doesn't care what other people think, or what societal norms are and the social contract of boundaries. Rudy you were brilliant, Benjamin you need to have a think!
Exactly.
Ben this was by far your most unbalanced conversation.
I was disgusted by how much cheerleading he was doing for Phil. Not unbalanced at all!
I was trying to help Rudy understand Phil’s position.
But I'm with Rudy, this guy is bathing himself in self-stimulation, and the rest of us are supposed to just carry on like it's perfectly normal
Phil and Ben are engaging in sophistry here b/c if Phil is only aroused by the X-dressing part of his paraphilia some of the time do women only get to withdraw consent after the erection becomes too obvious to ignore? We all know what this is about and we see how Ben and Phil are conflating issues here. AGP is not a sexual orientation it is about heterosexual men w/ a paraphilia, an erotic fixation, who instead of keeping it private choose to display it in public and force women and everyone else to consent to it.
Heterosexuals and homosexuals are oriented to another human w/ whom they are in a mutually consensual relationship. AGP males are narcissistically oriented toward themselves as what they desire to be and are aroused by that in the company of others who did not consent to be part of their publicly staged paraphilia play.
And the ridiculous notion that women have to be dressed like beekeepers in public as they are in some Islamic countries b/c men can't control themselves is outrageous, that's men's problem. And to suggest women get turned on by how they dress be that as more so-called feminine or masculine is to have no understanding of women.
I loved the 'It's giving... Buffalo Bill' comment! Yes. We're all supposed to pretend otherwise, and that's part of the power play fetish.
Really? Are you really listening to Phil?
@@wildwings08 yes. And I don't believe the words, I believe his actions
Ikr, even when we DON'T consent to being NPCs in an AGP's cosplay. 😑🙅🏾♀️
I love what Jonathon Pageau said about "fringe". He points out there's been a certain amount of tolerance society has for it. In some cases in it's right time and place when we even celebrate it. Once a year we have Halloween and express ourselves in ways that are fun or scary. In the Jewish religion there's a holiday called Purim where people let loose and have absurd plays and even get the green light to over drink. Cathedrals have gargoyles up on the steeple that have the purpose of scaring bad spirits away. However, we do not invite those gargoyles into the sanctuary! We can allow for a certain amount of fringe when we have strong boundaries and standards. In this day and age... we find the fringe demanding to be within those societal boundaries and it's not easy to know where the hard line must be drawn. The "inner self" with its wants and desires has become very powerful in today's world.
And apparently, privacy isn't a thing any more.
@@K10House In the old days the way Phil is dressed right now, would be considered comedy. Anyone who was an actual cross dresser turned on by it or not, would do it behind closed doors.
This is ridiculous, he's a pervert/ mentally ill, or has totally lost the run of himself and he's being platformed??? Go Rudy!
no. it is very easy to know where to draw that line - predators just feel they are entitled to cross that line whenever they want
This is all about queer theory being mainstreamed. Queer theory is all about dismantling boundaries and categories.
Yeah nah, it's not a sexual orientation. He's just latching onto that in order to cover the fact he seriously creeped out a lot of women and wants just keep doing whatever he wants regardless of what other people go through. He's taking "scientific" literature of the most questionable origin and design to justify his own actions where he freaked out women, many of who were known ahead of time traumatized because of the nature of the convention. He doesn't want anyone to focus on the fact what he did was exhibitionism of his fetish to people who weren't going to be aware of it while fully admitting it he did it on purpose. *HE* knew the demographic of women who would be there, what kind of histories were in play, and since he was not a listed speaker they had no idea he would be there especially dressed up like that. Everyone's seen the dress. It's a low cut bright velvet dress. It is insane that anyone's defending that as appropriate in this context.
Comparing it to being gay is homophobic. Same/opposite sex attraction and activity is something that just occurs in the animal kingdom. Heterosexual male animals that mimic female behavior in the animal kingdom is explicitly to mate with females in other animals. They're still heterosexual because that's the orientation, but in all other animals it's predatory. He's signaling that he's got a higher risk of being predatory by his same science. He wants to take "science" to justify it as an orientation, which is sketchy entirely, but if we point out that his behavior is a STRONG signal of a sexual predator by that same "science" he just denies it. Might not be hard right this moment but it's rational to believe he's fantasizing about it later. He talks about women's clothing no longer arousing him but that seriously just makes it sound like he's having issues with escalation, it's not a comforting thought that you indulged in your fetish and then you now need to escalate behavior to be aroused.
Being attracted to femininity is not the same as being willing to fuck anybody as long as they're feminine. If you put a feminine man and a butch woman in front of Ben I'm pretty sure he's not going to be sexually attracted to femininity once he knows the man is under the makeup. So yeah, wear a dress, advertise that you are more likely to be predatory and you're definitely a narcissist. Everyone else needs to stop gaslighting the women who recognize this probability. Comparing yoga pants in the grocery store is pretty terrible, because it's still not practicing a fetish. Are you AFRAID of the women in yoga pants? Do you think yoga pants indicate a proclivity towards sexual crimes? Men wearing women's clothing is a red flag for the probability of danger.
And Prince? Wore men's clothing, not women's clothing. He wore men's clothing, designed for him as a man and his man's body that were just a lot more flamboyant than obvious. He wasn't randomly shopping in the women's section for the most sexually provocative thing that didn't fit, he was wearing men's clothes designed for him as a man.
By Phil's logic every woman who dresses in dungarees, sweats, and sports jerseys is actually just an AAP and does not realize it.
Feminists wanted to wear jeans because men do. And Feminists are upset they were not born a man. So they act manly and wear manly clothing. Because deep down they want to be men. Feminism is based on resentment after all.
As to Sports Jerseys that's more of a community binding element and sign of who's team you are on. A Friend Enemy Distinction. Just more playful.
As to sweats I think it's just comfort.
His logic represents the IQ of a mosquito.
Ooh how could I miss then? I wear men‘s clothes almost constantly ( i e not feminine clothes, rather unisex or designed for males), just bc they are comfy and I DON‘T show any curves off, not female ones, not imagined male ones , in them, so it‘s quite the opposite I‘d say;)
But AAPs exist, that‘s not my point.
Sure they do. However are we to believe that this is a "sexual orientation" the majority of women and girls have, and that wearing these clothes is because it makes women feel confident and strong like a man, while wearing dresses makes women feel submissive and demure?
I wonder where Autogynephilia fits on the Narcissist spectrum.
Near the top.
@@cultof1jewls813 HA!
somewhere below Rudy's
@MaterialSquid how so? Please explain?
Most trans “women” have NPD and are autoghynephilic so ..
As an grandmother it appears to me that Phil is receiving loads of gratification, sexual or otherwise, for his attention grabbing fashion choices. There is a huge amount of payoff for him. I do suggest he stay in Oregon. The big world would not be kind to him.
It bothers me that I live within 20 miles of that man.
The idea of being attracted to yourself as the opposite sex will narcissistic and creepy.
It’s just like furries. If you’re turned on by the idea of you being in a fur suite, you should not have that on in public. It’s not the item, it’s the intention plus the knowledge provided. We wouldn’t know that this was a form of sexual gratification for you if you did not express that to everyone. That is why it is unacceptable in public. You’re including everyone in on your kink vs. it just being fashion.
Ben, arguing you getting turned on by a woman in public with yoga pants on that just happens to pass by is a false equivalence. A more accurate comparison would be you knowing that yoga pants on women is a turn on for you, so you sign up for yoga classes with the INTENTION of seeing women in yoga pants, as it is sexually gratifying to you.
It’s not a simple life pleasure; it’s a sexual pleasure. It’s a societal violation.
Makes much more sense to call AGP a sexual inclination, rather than a sexual orientation.
Yes, a paraphilic inclination that is narcissitically oriented toward self, not a mutually consensual relationship w/ another human being whether heterosexual or homosexual.
Phil: "and then you want to embody it, it doesn't mean you hate the category of thing that your embodying "
Women are the "thing" he is referencing. This attempt to legitimize a porn induced fetish as a legitimate sexual orientation, and the idea that it is unreasonable for people to be expected to keep their fetish out of public life is a position I wouldn't have expected here.
This needs to be talked about because it affects boys and men's lives more than it can ever effect any number of women . I don't like it but i know this exists AND there actually is research in the area . Go and try to shame the 10,000 women that suck very young boys into their spider web for money You know that is happening or you put your head in the sand over because it girls,women doing it using their OVERT sexuality.
This is so true, I am finding myself involved with these fetishes unwanted, but my romantic and sexual feelings about others are very much so separate from this. This is largely porn induced. If I hadn't been exposed to that shit I would have sexual fantasies aligned with that of the romantic/sexual fantasies I organically have about others. I knew I was bisexual before I had any sexual fantasies, and my legitimate interests are in some very healthy things (dependable women, strong fun exciting men, masculinity in both men and women) these are orientation, then there is fetish (furry, feminization, BDSM, etc) those things are both directly disconnected from my legitimate orientation, how I live my life (a happily masculine, openly bisexual, well regarded within my community man). These things can go one of two ways, obsession (Phil) and avoidance/ending/loss of the fetish. Being self aware enough to know that this is occuring within yourself allows you to be in control.
@@non_ideological_transexual7414
Adult man who pretends to be a woman blames women for men choosing to spend money on e-thots and prostitutes. Claims to be non-ideological.
Can you please just dilate with a cactus already
@@kennysboat4432Smart, self-reflective post
Yeah the “it” and “thing” he’s speaking of is…a woman. I expect nothing less than that kind of misogyny from Benjamin Boyce.
Separation anxiety leads to fetishization of the mother. Some fetishize breasts, some legs (in nylon stockings), some skirts, some feet..... When the fear of separation is intensified, there is a narcissistic reflection of this fetishization on oneself. In puberty, the sexualization of shame occurs, and in order to cope, men create this pseudo-personality, which has a dual role of reducing anxiety (which is essentially separation) and feeding the brain with dopamine through autosexuality. The problem is that it's a rabbit hole, and that's why people have the need to turn this wrong perception into a sexual orientation or even a religion such as a trans cult. In a simple sense, this term could be interpreted as an Oedipus complex without castration fear. Thus, narcissistic men have the problem of viewing women both as a mother and as an "object" of sexual desire, and then, due to an increased fear of separation, they cannot bear this duality of the female figure, which in the case of an "ordinary" heterosexual does not go beyond the fact that he is attracted to breasts, buttocks, feet or what not. And the biggest problem is that Western culture is so materialistic that it glorifies sexuality so much that it is difficult for a person with agp maladaptiveness to even understand the mother-sexual object paradox, because the mother part does not have a deeper spiritual-psychological context. Agp as a sexual orientation is ontologically wrong. I overcame my agp, honestly and without hesitation to admit that I had this problem, but in order for someone to be treated for it, which is not easy, he must first admit that he is sick. Or he doesn't have to, so he tries to make quasi-theories so that other people can confirm him. The same thing is with the tran cult, because the root of the problem is the same.
This makes so much sense..
This may be the root for some for sure. It seems to have a lot of other comorbid mental health, or trauma based issues, as well as seems very common in some with developmental differences like autisim
@@tonyhoffman3309
hyper sensitivity and the spectrum of autism is certainly more susceptible, but I explain the mechanism.
Thanks for explaining. I've been wondering about this fascination of men dressing like women and it becoming their god. My ex is one of them.
That was fascinating and seems very accurate: I had not read that specific theory before. Thank you for sharing it.
AGP is not a sexual orientation.
Exactly!!
Exactly and what makes it a paraphilia is that it is generally maladaptive. Being attracted to being something you can never be is never healthy. There are simply degrees to how unhealthy it is.
@@paulondawula1011 Homosexuality and AGP are both Maladaptive as it neither leads to procreation.
Thanks for expounding on why indulging it is harmful to the person who has this unfortunate condition. Labeling it a sexual orientation results in not treating the underlying conditions which cause it, and instead feeding the beast that is, as we can see, insatiable and devours the host.
@@tonyhoffman3309 excellent point!! Indulging in people’s sexual fetish and labeling it as a sexual preference is exactly the gateway to this mess we’re in.
Dress however you want, love whoever will have you etc has met a wall here in the fact that seeing a man in a frock clearly causes some raised eyebrows.
I have watched this unfold on X and can see why people are pissed off.
We have eyes and yes, we can see who is sexually motivated by what they wear
It’s like the ‘how do you know the good transwoman from the bad man scenario
How do you know who is the pantomime dame and who is mentally getting off
Something is off here and regardless of the mental gymnastics from Phil and Benjamin, I think most people know it
Exactly. The trans movement’s objectives are (partially) to shame women and children from detecting predators. That’s what feminists mean when they say “pronouns are rohypnol”. Even for straight men, there is an obvious agenda of undermining consent. The desire to do away with “gay panic laws” means the right to sexually assault straight men with impunity, and to criminalize self-defence. People can just tell when things are weird and sexual. Trans ideology has told us those feelings are bigoted.
“In sexology” 🥴 these fake, self
Important fields kill me
Thank you for this conversation, these ideas are stretching and challenging. I would like to be able to say 'dress how you please' but I realise that i am uncomfortable with that . I don't want to see men in fetish gear, and it is difficult for liberals to admit to not being as liberal as they would like to be. I also dislike seeing young teenage girls in skimpy clothes - usually because I think they look cold, and because I know that the focus from men towards them is on what they look like not who they are - that saddens me.
I think Rudy makes some very good points about it not being just about being a danger to women, it is also about making women feel uncomfortable. I do not like to see men in corsets and mini skirts , and definitely the Lolita vibe Rudy describes is disturbing.
Phil makes me uncomfortable because he understands the reaction that his clothing will provoke - that it will make women uncomfortable , but he still does it anyway. At times i would say ok, that is fair enough, he has a right not to accept the conventional dress codes, but there are contexts where it is inappropriate Even the most liberal of people have limits of what is comfortable , but we don't usually know what they are until we are directly faced with them.
For example the teacher in Canada with the massive fake tits was thought to be unacceptable by most people, because it was so obviously sexual and insulting - but what size of fake breast is ok for men to wear? because the same people who would think it is ok for a man to wear an average size of fake tits would object to the massive fake tits .
Regarding the skimpy clothes that girls wear and the often matronly clothes that women wear, is based a lot on what is available and affordable in department stores for working class ppl.
Young girls clothing sections full of half t-shirts with shorty top pants. Padded bras for 7yr olds. Etc. Many girls and parents shop in the boys wear dept for their daughters. (And for themselves)
what a entitled attention seeker ugh
mega ⚠️
And maybe it’s just a gimmick to sell his book?
I think women, in general, & by majority, shy away from public sexual displays from men. Rudy accurately describes Phil's dress as a public display of his sexuality. So, our immediate response to Phil's dress would be discomfort & it would take getting to know him a bit to understand his reasoning for the dress & not feel threat. Most of us aren't going to go to those lengths unless we need to for some reason. Reasonable women will be polite, but we'll likely instinctually avoid him. The reaction he is getting online is women verbalizing the discomfort they feel, and no, Phil doesn't have to change because of those feelings but he'd probably sell more books if he took it into consideration.
Its not just that its a display.IT TURNS HIM ON. THATS what we shy away from.
"Heterosexuality directed at yourself"? How is sexual attraction to yourself not a fetish? How is not just self-absorbed male creepiness?
He is a man, ffs. Sexual attraction to himself, a man, is not, cannot be a variant of heterosexuality. So yep, Rudy, he's gaslighting you.
It is.
HSTS,AGP,and GAMPS, all have a strong element of homosexual denial, sexist limiting and rigid views of both men and women, and autistic or misogynistic concept of sexuality.
The term auto heterosexual is inaccurate as is autogynaphilia as the "female" is not based on love or attraction to actual women but to their male conception of femininty placed over a male body.
@@red-ringedoctopus6336 thank you for getting this. AGP being characterized as in anyway "heterosexual" is the problem because it is based on attraction not towards actual women, but on their conception of what a women is.
So my question is why is a gay man speaking for women?
Because Phil won’t talk to any woman who isn’t a therapist, and thus guranteed to go easy on him.
I tried to just listen and did for awhile. Just creepy vibes from the guy in the dress. I’ve got sons his age and it just made me feel pity for him. It doesn’t change the fact that I would stop in my tracks if he or anyone like him was in a public women’s space when I was. My understanding is that mental health has pulled back on really treating this disorder and a few others the past few years. No one wants accused of and charged with conversion therapy. Lots of factors here but I do think porn is a huge culprit.
Porn is a HUGE factor amongst the vast majority of current manifestations of both agp and hsts type trans. So is sexual trauma, child sexual abuse, mental illness, personality and developmental disorders, which continue to go unacknowledged and untreated or badly "treated" with pharmasurgical drag, and social engineering.
You'll get used to it. Just think about all the past 50years of change
You can perhaps understand then, why many in the gay community (not “queer”) are concerned that “trans” is a type of MEDICAL conversion therapy that is making a lot of people money (including the government) in a giant social experiment that’s going to leave a lot of people very damaged. As we have seen with detransitioners, particularly on this channel.
You mean the great regression?
AMEN. I am getting out now. This is like listening to the lunatics in the insane asylum....which I think it is.
Rudy’s face when Phil says that being into another species is a sexual orientation! Poor guy couldn’t believe what he was hearing.
Well thats ALL he had, funny face and petty insults! Rudy came across as the unstable one.
why does benjamin not get this isn't like him being attracted to females and around females... this is at minimum like wearing a bdsm collar or fetish gear or vibrator in public. it doesn't matter that he thinks it's oriented "towards himself" he's oriented towards an object (clothes/gender stereotype items) and thinks because he is self obsessed and thinks of the objects on himself that makes it special. it's like if someone who is into masochism thought they could be masochistic in public as long as its enacted towards themselves. whats worse is at least the masochist doesn't necessarily have a layer of their fetish that includes getting off on the reactions of others (gender euphoria), phils does. to bring it back around to benjamins misunderstanding this would be like if a dominatrix wore her gear and torturing tools in public and specifically around men so she could see their disgust and anxiety about her (obviously ball crushing) tools and then pretended like it wasn't voyeuristic and was just an "orientation" and needed to be accomodated as an "identity" that revolved around her own perception/euphoria of herself as a dominatrix.
Well said.
Honestly starting to think Boyce is AGP considering how hard he shills for them.
Seems to me the crux of the discussion was:
a)when can and can’t someone wear something that they feel sexy/sexual in or when others feel they are feeling that way.
b) at what point is it acceptable or not acceptable if someone is sexually aroused to some degree in public and other people are unwilling participants in that.
Not sure any of it got ironed out. I think people just hear the term AGP and it’s too emotive to allow a reasoned debate.
To be honest on screen the two guys debating looked as it they were wearing similar outfits, v neck tops one with sleeves the other without, one more pastel than the other, equally camp.
@@wormwoodcocktail I dont think thats it. Phil has a weird way of making you feel like you are wrong for not supporting him. Hes very manipulative and I think Ben has become a victim of that and not realised it. He will get it soon I assure you. Hes not stupid.
@@LusciousTwinkle Hopefully. But like, every man I know IRL *hates* AGPs. Whenever I see men defend them / trans rights I just assume their closeted. It’s pessimistic. Here’s to hoping you’re right and I’m wrong.
A peacock’s plumage isn’t a gender expression. Cutting it off doesn’t make him a peahen and gluing it onto a peahen doesn’t make her a peacock.
He’s borrowing “Debbie” Hayton’s language re. peafowl
Boyce is giving GAMP, the way he is so unwilling to hear Rudy, and how blindly he seems to defend Philly. Also, next time turn off your mic, Boyce, so we aren’t hearing your sighs.
@Reachout-BenjaminABoyce omg a Boyce Bot?? 😂 damn, that’s how you know you made it
he simped so hard for Phil. it’s so weird
@@ASlightlyTwistedFemale , Benjamin has forgotten that the AGPs, for years invaded women`s spaces like prisons, shelter, locker rooms. spas and sports, are the ones who are at fault that the distrust in any man who might dress more feminime is on the rise in the first place. They are the ones who started the avalanche and innocent non-comforming men have to pay the price.
@@littlebird2573 Rudy didn't respond to any promts, he insulted and made moral claims and then claimed gass lighting and that he can speak for all women. He didn't engage in any meaning conversation he repeated the same talking point for 90 minutes. He had no good faith. He was a rude, emotional and on the attack.
He is a bigot and tedious.
And yet this whole comment section is glorifying rudy for being angry on the internet.
I dont like the look of a man in a dress and I justify it with emotion rants. It is not a good argument.
It's funny how men who dress in women's clothing always choose the most stereotypical women's clothing. It's funny how Phil chooses dresses in his wardrobe rotation and then claims they don't have anything to do with his AGP. Edited to add: Phil's wardrobe here looks like a costume.
They choose the most exaggerated cartoonish version of whatever female stereotype they're into most. I don't think it's an accident that they always seem to choose degrading/ridiculous outfits when "dressing like women"--mocking us seems to be part of the sexual gratification.
I wouldn't want him around my daughter
Is attention-seeking a sexual orientation? This is obviously the reason why he dresses like a woman in public. Why he does it in private is not the issue...
Alot of wmn.....
Not to mention, it’s only a CERTAIN type of women’s clothing…he wears clothes that expose his body in a sexual way. He’s not wearing a pantsuit or just a simple baggy sweater and jeans.
Maybe he just dresses like a woman to sell more books?
The same can be said of how individual women dress though - some dress modestly, and some hyper sexualized. When men dress as women, they most often dress the latter.@@tablescissors
Thank you for this conversation.
Just jumping in the comments to say great seeing you wearing that ring. Stellar couple. Humanity needs more people like you building a quality life together. Cheers!
Live and let live. It is always actions not intentions which matter. How is Phil hurting anyone? What does it matter what he wears? It is what is in a person's heart that matters. I appreciate the tone of the discussion. It was interesting and informative.
Would you be okay with someone dressing up as a baby and being bottle fed in public and shitting their nappys in public especially after they openly admit there's a strong sexual compnant to that? Would you be okay with them signing up to day care. Most people who have a fetishism or just plain old boring sex have the decency and common sence to keep it in the bedroom and with other consenting adults, they know innately that it's wrong and inappropriate to parade it in front of other people and most people who have a inch of decency don't want to do that anyway. Phil is trying to bend everything he can with the language to include this in the realm of sexual orientation because he knows it would be difficult to argue that people should keep their orientation to themselves and never for example hold hands with or kiss their partners in public but this is totally different and he knows it. Bring back bullying and public shaming if shameful behaviours not everything is okay, not everything is not harmful.
Rudy feeling the need to apologise at the end was deeply saddening. Boyce and Phil's enforcement of word soup and #bekind was complete in making a man feel shit about defending his sexual orientation and women from a paraphilic, sociopathic buffalo bill. A horrible watch.
Agreed
I think Benjamin’s point is that unless a man explains why he’s crossdressing in public no one would know. Phil should not be singled out as getting off on other people’s experience of his crossdressing because he’s terminally online as an AGP.
Integration of one's cross sex ideation into healthy acceptance of the reality of one's sex, and gender non conformity, is very different than what Phil is doing. By not recognizing the difference between paraphillia and sexual orientation, he is denying that paraphillia are aquired, not inborn. This also ignores any acknowledgement of the underlying causes, and much better treatment options than indulging the paraphillia which takes over ones life and nearly always destroys the person effected.
How do you think the line is blurred? Sexual orientation is inborn, paraphilias are aquired.
How are paraphilias acquired? Are there any elements of individuals who have them that mean they're predisposed to them? This is a genuine, non goady question, I think it's really important to know how we know this...
@@meretriciousinsolent I would guess the most likely explanation for the current explosion of this paraphilia is porn.
@@nannyssillysoapco I'd like to know a lot more about Phil's childhood.
@tonyhoffman3309 The etiology of homosexuality is not clear. The "born this way" argument is based on the immutability of orientation that homosexuals experience. Not on any true scientific studies on the etiology of homosexuality. From the literature that I've read, and from the anecdotal experiences I've had in gay dating, I think etiology is multifactorial. Both nature and nurture.
I like Rudy, but his consent arguement is dogshite. Sexual orientation doesn't require consent from others to exist - it just does. He's referring to the engagement of fetishism. That's just sloppy communication.
Hes saying practicing your fetish or sexual orientation requires the consent of others. I am a medical professional, I am bisexual, does that mean I can practice being bisexual in the company of my patients? Absolutely not! That is a violation of their privacy, consent, respect, and my responsibility. That applies in every situation!
@@kennysboat4432 I believe you've misunderstood what I meant. Sexual orientation is a constant aspect of whom you are, such as your eye and hair colour. That requires no consent from anyone, it simply is. What does is whether you chose to engage in sexual acts around others. Engaging with sex is seperate to having a sexual orientation.
My thing is, if AGP really is a sexual orientation, just one where the person is sexually satisfied by something turned inward instead of outward, why does he need to do it outside his home? I mean, the vast majority of us aren't wearing sexy clothes when we get dressed for the day if we don't leave the house and no one else is there, because there's no one to see it and be attracted by it. We want to attract others, whether same sex or opposite sex or both and they are outside our home, so we find situations where we can get dressed up and go out to meet people. But an AGP can just do that at home. They don't need to involved the rest of us if it's an orientation, because they've already found their 'spouse,' themselves.
But if it is a fetish, one that involves being SEEN by others as sexual in certain presentations, then it makes sense they have to go out looking like a stripper even though they aren't even going to an event where a woman actually seeking a male partner would dress like that.
Since its been established that this is a paraphilia, at what point is it unhealthy? How should we address this within psychology and society? When should we intervene? How should it be treated? If one is unhappy with it, or is hurting others/self how should we help those people? How should it be prevented?
Most of what Phil says regarding his respect for sex segregated spaces, and not denying his sex, and gnc attire for both sexes is reasonable. Where there is disagreement is his assertion that any man or woman who expresses themselves in a culturally gnc manner, has some degree of agp/aap, and not just people who recognize their sex encompases aspects of the other and so express that. It's also the denial of it as a paraphillia, which is symptomatically related to other underlying mental health issues, means there is no consideration given to how feeding into this sexuality may not lead to the best outcomes for ppl that have this type of sexuality, as it does not address the often serious mental illnesses, trauma, personality and developmental disorders which underpin it, so they continue to go untreated and unhealed.
'To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail'
Oh, but I’m a “two spirit” says the White people.
BS.
As Benjamin says, 'how can we tell the difference between a fashion choice ( man in dress) and a guy who is getting off in front of us without our consent and often is predatory in intent. We can't. So keep out of women only spaces primarily for our safety, but also for our privacy and dignity. Aside of that, I love to explore the human experience and so interested in the conversation with hopefully as open mind as possible
But the discussion was not about entering women's spaces. Both agree that AGPs should not enther those.
@@nietkees6906Within the conversation is the question of acceptance of AGPs. The question of consent is being discussed. Nearly all women I discuss with are not comfortable with men in dresses who are AGP in their private spaces. Phil is not interested in those spaces but other AGPs most definitely are.They enjoy making women uncomfortable. Most AGP's do appropriate womanhood.
@sarahbartlett4945 both agp and hsts appropriate, womenhood. Some women are more accepting of hsts in women's spaces, because they don't see them as a threat, and some men are ok with it because they are attracted to transvestite males (GAMPS) as hsts make it possible for them to deny their own homosexuality, and attraction to feminized men. The majority don't seem to see the homophobia and sexism (both misogyny and misandry) which manifests in cross sex ideation and expression.
@@tonyhoffman3309 thanks for this clear explaination. It touches on the origins as well
@@sarahbartlett4945 read tonys comment above
I like Rudy but I'm not sure he was maybe the best person to have this discussion. Heather Heying would have been a far better bet and also maybe we'd hear more about Phil's interesting ideas than just about his mode of dress. Can't help wondering about Benjamin's process choosing Phil's 'opponent'!! :P
Heather Heying wouldve been so interesting!!
I’m so sad this guy is getting a platform. Benjamin definitely took a side here & that makes me question his motives.
Oh look another woman that believes in censorship, how odd. " Let women speak" hypocritical sexist women 🤡
@@non_ideological_transexual7414
Sir, you seem a little angry. A little macho.
@@wormwoodcocktail Thanks for the laugh 🤡. I just don't like hypocrites
@@non_ideological_transexual7414
Oh? You mean like calling yourself non-ideological while running interference for your fetish?
If an adult male has a 'baby' fetish wearing baby clothing eg diaper..would that be appropriate to wear in public? Where is the acceptable standard in public?
That would be creepy assss.
According to Phil’s logic, why not?
Why is it that there is literally nothing else feminine about Phil whosoever, and yet that's supposedly how he wishes to present himself? And why do you, Benjamin, keep conflating para-phylias with orientation?
Define the difference please.
@@BenjaminABoyceorientation : Sexual orientation is an enduring pattern of whether a person has romantic attraction or sexual attraction to persons of the opposite sex or gender, the same sex or gender, or to both sexes or more than one gender.
@@BenjaminABoyceparaphilia : are persistent and recurrent sexual interests, urges, fantasies, or behaviors of marked intensity involving objects, activities, or even situations that are atypical in nature.
@@BenjaminABoyceatypical, pervasive and usually obsessive ..see ? I informed ya
@@BenjaminABoyceParaphilias are disordered sexual behaviors. Sexual orientations are which SEX you are ORIENTED TOWARDS sexually, romantically. People with paraphilia can be straight or gay. They are always disordered people: people with significant developmental or personality issues. Gay people have unusual sexual orientations (same sex) but are not otherwise disordered people and don’t have other developmental/personality issues. You are doing here what trans people did with definitions of “woman” and “man” and “gender”: allowing men with their own emotional agendas to change the definitions completely, according to their desires and whims.
I am a gender-conforming gay man and I am not consenting to Rudy's gay voice.
On another note, Ben you are an incredible interviewer. So good at remaining unbiased while playing devils advocate in any direction required.
Omg so happy to see Rudy and hear you speak! Xox from nz ❤️🔥
As a gay man, I'm so disappointed with Rudy. We gays know exactly what it means to have attractions that the majority of people don't feel. He doesn't get that effeminate gay men lived for ages the same kind of stigma that he is now targeting to AGPs.
Are we supposed to congratulate a man for "knowing he's a man?" The bar is on the ground.
I very much appreciate Phil for not entering female spaces, not identifying as female, and not using female pronouns.
He doesn’t need to though. He doesn’t think he is a woman he has an objectifying sexual compulsion to satisfy his erotic fixation with the idea of himself as a woman. Big mistake to think that distress based ‘transition’ is not ok but sexually motivated ‘transition’ is fine. It’s like thinking that adults who believe that they are children are worse than paedophiles.
What a legend Rudy is 🔥
These men aren't well-matched for a debate. Rudy is unfamiliar with social science and humanities approaches, methods and terms (can't for example differentiate descriptive and prescriptive) whereas Phil is. They can only talk past each other.
Would have been better to debate Heather Heying
Rudy didn't want to. He was invited to but just wanted to be judgemental and aggressive.
Benjamin needs to take a step back from all the weird internetz crap. He’s lost all perspective and his credibility is rapidly declining for me.
It’s my job. If more people tuned into my other content, I’d be able to get by covering that other stuff
So great to have two people arguing and it not to be shut down so we can hear both sides - well done Benjamin for being such a great moderator and seeing the bigger picture at all times❤
I was disappointed in the lack of solid arguments on Rudy's end. I applaud Phil for being willing to once again open himself up for moral and personal attacks for the sake of trying to have a difficult conversation
From what I saw Ruby was being extremely empirical in his observations and statements while Phil just cowered gaslit and failed to counter anything Ruby said.
again?
no im first its a glitch
Why??????!!!!!
Why should the whole society participate in someone's sexual fantasy? What happened to the consent?
There is a reason why bedrooms have a door, keep it shut. Society is shouting that acting out on sexual fetishes in public is not tolerated. Phil is a classic narcissist, this is all about power and control. He's his own god, just look at the difference in camera angles between the three of them. Benjamin was on board with an AGP's comfort level and that that's more important regardless if the vast majority of women have an instinctual fear for their safety and the safety of their children around those who are acting out sexual fetishes in public. I've felt this fear many times. This was a two against one 'conversation'. Benjamin, the moment that you agreed with Phil and said AGP is an orientation, I unsubscribed, you are an imminent danger to all women. Thank you Rudy!
Strangely I think I have noticed a pattern regarding the sides of trans debate.
Broadly speaking.
(Mother's+lesbians+gay men) VS ( AGPs, straight men, young leftist women)
I think on some level you are absolutely right but unfortunately society has lost any desire to protect women. So invoking protect "women" is unlikely to lead to a response.
saying women need "protection" maybe an insult to women. And if we can teach AGPs about their sexual condition they will be unlikely to inadvertently harm women.
In our quest for equality and morally neutral society we may just have to accept Phil wearing clothes we may not agree with, or find flattering. And that is that!
Else we can go back to imposing our version of morality on individuals thereby limiting personal freedom...
Which could come back to haunt us because there are people who consider homosexuality morally wrong and mentally ill perverts, and who think morally women ought to cover up and stay home.
Sounds exactly like "I don't mind gays as long as they keep it in the bedroom." Same shit different year!
@@carlo.m5233
1) The LGB sub-population with the highest rate of support for transsexuals is lesbian women. Additionally, straight men are the *least* likely to support transsexuals.
2) I think the balance that should be reached is acknowledging differences between men & women while stressing the need for individual freedom of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
3) I agree too that teaching AGPs about their sexuality will make them more aware of their actions. However, it doesn't cure gender dysphoria but only contextualizes it in a useful, evidence-based manner.
4) 100% agreed. I have to live in a society with misandrist radfems, and misandrist radfems have to live in a society with autogynephilic transvestites and transsexuals. Heterogeneity is what makes our civilization thrive. Sometimes people with irreconcilable differences have to learn to tolerate each other.
I am on-board with your negative freedom view of this issue. The people who jump straight to social conservatism as a solution to them feeling uncomfortable make me very afraid for the future.
What if AGP is just an incel cope? They realize they’ll never have a girlfriend unless they become one for themselves?
@@jovazquez6102Gay people do “keep it in the bedroom.” If they were like Phil- then they would be having sex with members of the same sex in public. BEING gay in public isn’t a problem. Performing what are sex acts to you, in public, is.
Was there anything resolved? Probably not.
Was this a necessary conversation?
For sure!
Thank you to Benjamin and his guests for taking the time to discuss, debate, and keep it as civil as possible regardless of their personal stance.
Getting so sick of this stuff.
AGP and sado masochism are interlinked. AGPs have females as the subordinate gender category, hence sissy porn. When he turns up to a potentially hostile audience of GC women and men, it’s because he is getting off on the power play, the S and M experience. The women and men at the conference weren’t there to give him a thrill. You need to get Genevieve Gluck on to explain what he is getting out of this.
That's exactly right. That's why they often tend to explain their fetish by explaining how their sexuality is typically female, and the proof is that they want to be submissive and be looked at and used as an object. An entirely culturally seeded understanding of female sexuality. Just pure unadulterated misogyny.
Sometimes you have to live with the fact that others have ruined things for you. Someone may be comfortable in a pointed white hood, but they can’t wear it because other people have ruined it for them.
A woman could have been sexually abused by a man in a mustache, but another man with a mustache should not have to shave his mustache to make her comfortable. She's responsible for her own triggers and healing.
But that man should not be in women's changing rooms prisons and shelters. That's the problem these men are demanding access to female only spaces
Can anybody explain to me what issue did that man have with AGP men and consent? How exactly are they behaving in non-consensual way? Is that any different than heterosexual man having sexual thoughts about random women they see on the street? Because as a woman, I don't think I ever gave a consent to such thoughts either. Am I supposed to be offended that he wears clothes designed for women? Because I am not.
Sorry but I find it especially distasteful when a member of a sexual minority tries to feel morally superior to a member of a different sexual minority, when it comes to a fetish that doesn't break anyone's consent. He acted as if having a paraphilia automatically meant behaving in a non-consensual way which is an abysmally ignorant opinion. Did he just compare transvestism to bestiality? That's outrageous.
And no, paraphilia is not sexual orientation and I wouldn't necessarily see AGP as a malignant fetish either. All depends on how honest are the ones who have it with their potential partners.
I definitely agree with you
Yes men can be attracted to a random women they meet on the street we can't stop that it's human nature, you could argue that the women has not consented to him being attracted to her or getting arousal at her but its still so so different to what Phil is doing. For it to remotely fit it would be like a man admitting they get turned on like Ben by women in yoga pants, it not being something they can help its just how it is, to know that and actively seek out that simulation such as sign up to yoga classes with women and on top of that to openly admit they may get super turned on to the women around him, that's a big reason why he's there in the first place and all the women being expected to just accept it as normal because technically hes not violating their consent. Please, every single women there would have the right to feel violated, unsafe and uncomfortable around this creep. The difference is his choice to dress how he does have a strong sexual component to it and he's forcing other people to engage in that without any consent all the time, its like someone sitting there watching porn next to you because they like it which is essentially forcing you to be a part of that when you dont want to. Would you be fine and dandy with a bloke dressing like a baby in public, acting like a baby, and getting bottle fed by his wife in public especially if he admitted there was a strong sexual compnant to that so long as he admitted he knows he's not a baby? He's not forcing anyone else to bottle feed him so it's all okay. I would hope not. He has recognised its sexual so he should do the decent thing and keep it in private as much as he can like normal people do all the time otherwise he is violating everyone's consent. There are some things that we as a society need to say is not okay for the comfort and safety of others otherwise we are going to get to a point where people can wank of in public and we all have to just sit there and pretend it's normal.
Didn’t know what I thought about AGP’s going into this but just on the merit of this conversation my conclusions are:
Rudi- you do not speak for me as a middle aged supposed Terf. I can speak and judge others for myself thank you very much.
Also, I don’t find Phil threatening in any way.
Phil, you came across as reasonable, calm and having your motivations and arguments far more logically ordered than Rudi, who kept ‘adjusting’ his points.
I still don’t really understand AGP but I think the threat comes from any AGP who also happens to be narcissistic/ psychopathic.
Lets make this very very clear. AGPs do not necessarily love women...or emulate actual women. They have an idea...a fantasy of what a women is to them...usually very sexualised and objectifying. If Phil really loved and respected women then he wouldnt tweet half the things he does and he would NEVER have turned up, as an AGP, in his fetish wear to that conference where there were many women. Never. He would be conscious that he was forcing them to partake in his fetish and would realise how upsetting and offensive that would be to them.
Exactly. I got some quotes that remind me of what you just said.
*Edit:*
*1.* “For these men, the woman within is entirely the Maybelline version, not the Mother Teresa version, not the Liv Ullman version, and not even the Tracey Ullman version. There is no innate grasp of female friendship, of the female insistence on relatedness, of the female tradition of support and accommodation for one's partner and giving precedence to the relationship overall. If there were that kind of understanding, rather than shopping for accessories and watching tapes on how to walk in heels, these guys would be unable to ask their wives to go through this cross-dressing life with them-- and everyone, husbands and wives, knows it. They know that if any of the women insisted on wearing three- piece suits or baseball uniforms in public, and asked their husbands to accept hairy legs, hairy underarms, and jockstraps as part of their sex life, the husbands would not be rushing off to join spousal support groups while cheerfully spending the family's money on bespoke shirts and expensive glue-on facial hair. The marriages would be over.”
*2.* “ ‘I think of myself as a heterosexual male. However, I fantasize about being a woman. In this fantasy, I am bisexual and very sexually active. I also like to imagine performing other female activities: buying clothes, grooming myself, dating men and women, keeping house, having a period, having a baby, and getting married. Some of my favorite sexual fantasies include: being the submissive partner to a masculine lesbian, being swept off my feet by a gentleman, being a glamour model, being a housewife, and being a whore. I also find the idea of being raped as a woman very exciting. When I am sexually aroused, I get turned on by female things, not just sex as a woman. I think about what I would have been like as a little girl: my bedroom, school uniform, toys, being called “daddy’s best girl,” and having my first period. Even as I write this, I have an erection, thinking about getting dolls for Christmas, buying my first bra, having a boyfriend and letting him touch me inside my knickers. I could even get turned on by thoughts of having a Pap smear test or taking the pill. The idea of being a girl, of being treated like a girl, and of doing girls things is what I crave.’
This informant’s final fantasy images, which eroticize Pap smears and oral contraceptive use, offer yet another illustration that virtually any aspect of women’s experience can act as the basis of an autogynephilic fantasy.”
@@Umbra555You sure hate when women correctly size you up, eh, Mr. AGP. Oh, and I haven’t forgotten to list one of your peers: Roderick Deakin White. Alan Hawe.
That Rudy fella is not the sharpest tool in the shed. I don't know what the deal is with this other Phil guy, but he made more sense. Congrats Ben for another intriguing discussion!