Guest post: Easier and safer to flatter and lie

Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on Nothing added to nothing is nothing.

He’s fooled himself into thinking a few superficial trappings can fool a survival mechanism (telling a conspecific’s sex) that’s hundreds of millions of years old. We are wired to clock someone’s sex from scores and scores of yards away, even in dim light where all we can make out is a sillhouette and a gait. No doubt many of the other people he thinks he’s fooling are just being nice and humouring him, or hoping to avoid an angry, aggressive “IT’S MA’AM!” response. Even if his makeup was, according to his hair stylist, “on point and flawless,” it might only mean he’d applied it comparatively well, not that it was succeeding in erasing his maleness. Is the stylist going to risk pissing off the guy sitting right there in the chair? Easier and safer to flatter and lie. Stephonknee Wolscht didn’t fool anyone into believing he was a five year old girl; anyone who “accepted” him as such was just playing along, but doing him no favours.

I wonder if this guy’s failure to pass will spur him on to more radical, surgical interventions to “feminize” his facial bone structure and his body shape? For most men, it would take this kind of cheating to “pass,” and even then, the surgical interventions, like the superficial wardrobe, make-up, and comportment gambits, tend to exaggerated and stereotypical.

6 Responses to “Guest post: Easier and safer to flatter and lie”