Revisiting the “asexuality” activist who does such a sterling job of demonstrating indifference to sexuality.
Her pinned post on twitX:
In other words you don’t dress like that for no reason, or because it’s merely decorative. You dress like that to show off how sexy you are. Being sexy is not the same as being sexual, but if you’re not sexual, why bother to show off how sexy you are?
Maybe to be what’s vulgarly known as a prick-tease? If so, when did that become part of Pride?
Answers on a postcard.
Comments
5 responses to “Asexual Pride”
She’s a lingerie model. Like a lot of prostitutes who hate sex with their clients, she dresses and acts sexy to drum up business even though she’s not feeling it.
And, I think, to prove asexuals aren’t just ugly people who secretly want sex but are too ugly to get it.
Alternatively, she dresses like that because lustful attention is attention nonetheless. It feels good to be found attractive, even by people whose private parts aren’t particularly interesting to you. The difference is that most of us wouldn’t feel good wearing the uniform of a prostitute.
For most women, it actually doesn’t always feel good to be found attractive. It can be anything from inconvenient to insulting to terrifying.
And yes, as you say, that pathetic sleazy version of “attractive” no.
Oh, for sure it’s abnormal psych. I was just trying to show that it can still be understood in terms of pretty basic operant conditioning. Secondary reinforcers and such.
She’s deliberately putting herself in a position where she has to “educate” people who don’t understand her, and she’s doing so within a movement that heaps love and fame on crusaders purporting to do exactly that. Confounding the expectations of the normies is the Left’s answer to pwning the libtards.