01-29-2023, 08:33 PM
A certain video has inspired such a long series of conversations that I felt the central points made during the discussion deserved to be codified into a proper argument which people could refer to. To those who recognize the phrase in the title already, I am of course referring to this:
[Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2Y5KVtU810]
Two things immediately come to one's mind when one watches this video, the first of which is JoCat's completely neutered appreciation of women. The entire video is basically a mediation of JoCat's sex drive through the lens of weeb/gamer derived fictional archetypes with little to no actual sexual content, despite the fact that the video is about listing physical traits he finds attractive. The second observation which shortly follows is despite it's off-putting nature its not unique at all, but can actually comfortably fit into an established aesthetic and mode of desiring which seems to be an essential part of late millennial and zoomer online culture. Taking this as our basis, the brightest minds of Skorrcord worked their hardest to come up for an explanation for why people like JoCat exist and what are the common characteristics that unite them.
Straight homosexuals: The Basics
Most "straight" people are spiritual faggots. Homosexuality defined itself by the morality and standards of the sexual revolution and then progressively took over mainstream culture till it transformed what satisfying sex and erotic desire commonly meant. This cultural dominance peaked in the 2010's with the zenith of hookup culture and widespread obsession with paraphilias that have nothing to do with vaginal penetrative sex (anal, bdsm, etc.). This transformation of heterosexuality took on two broad forms, which can be called "vulgar" straight homosexuality and "romantic" straight homosexuality respectively.
Vulgar straight homosexuals are the easiest to define and the least interesting to talk about, simply because of how self evident the phenomenon is. Extreme promiscuity, obsession with sadomasochism and power relations, roleplaying and public sex all define the vulgar type, and one can see its origins in the stereotype of the tight leather wearing faggot sucking someone off at a glory hole in the bathroom stalls very clearly. For these types, sex can never be worthwhile if it's not intentionally filthy, transgressive and ultimately a show of power in it's most debased form. Pure heterosexual lust has been replaced by homosexual fascination with filth, for what defines the post-sexrev homo more than the love of writhing in one's own shit?
Think Medgold. Think Delicious Tacos. If you're imaging a balding 30 year old man getting a blowjob from a roastie on birth control with a nose ring in the back of a fast food joint who's going to brag to his friends about this event later then you know exactly what I'm talking about.
Romantic Straight Homosexuals:
Romantics are much harder to pin down because it's a much more complicated issue despite the label applying to a much smaller and more distinct group. Put in the simplest of terms, it's an outgrowth of tumblr gay/fujoshi fandom shipping culture which is defined by a pseudo-anime aesthetic, an aversion to male domination in all its forms, the sublimation of sexual desire into a parasocial relationship with the fictional archetype of one's choice which culminates in a non-sexual act which implies a high degree of intimacy and familiarity (like sleeping on a woman's thighs) and a desire to be validated and doted upon. The connection to gay fandom culture (obviously a zoomer phenomenon which is entirely different from hardcore late 20th century "gay culture) lies specifically in the obsession with specific "types" (twinks, doms, tops, bottoms, etc.) and their pairing in completely non-aggressive and "tender" ways. If aggression is tolerated at all, it is not to come from the character which the gay fan will identify with. Anyone who has ever interacted with fans of Sherlock, Undertale, Danganronpa or Homestuck has surely experienced what I'm describing before.
The Romantic is not attracted to regular women. When he says he likes milfs, he does not mean actual middle aged women. He means Misato and other anime girls. When he does find a physical woman attractive, it's always one intentionally approximating an anime girl through heavy makeup and editing, like this:
[Image: https://imgs.search.brave.com/60UlIm_vqt...jUxMS5qcGc]
He does not want to have sex with her either. Notice how all the muscle mommy dommy lovers almost never talk about how they want to have sex with their fantasy women, merely about being smothered by her, being beat up, doted on, spit on, etc? The RSH (as opposed to the VSH) is uncomfortable with the notion of a direct sexual encounter, largely because he finds the act of sex itself to be awkward and undesirable, which is why he feels the need to sublimate his sex drive into the virtual in the first place.
The RSH manifests in two forms (high and low) which roughly map onto the first and third world. High RSH focuses much more on the parasocial relationship with the abstract archetype in a non-sexual form, whereas low RSH has a much lower level of abstraction involved and the fact that the fictional character is a stand in for some erotic desire is more obvious. The idealized women involved tend to be wearing skimpier clothes, are almost always "thick", and while they will still never have sex directly they'll still imply it much more than its high RSH counterpart. These are the people that put food on the tables of soft porn Makima artists, and if left to their own devices would worship a slightly more modest depiction of the Venus of Willendorf putting a poor neolithic farmer in a collar.
Origins of the romantic:
As all things before it in this post, my explanation for the origin of this type comes in a pair.
1) Inherited behaviour from a feminized upbringing. Basically an extension of the BAPist "origin of the homosexual" theory. Because of the lack of a proper masculine model in their lives, they've idealized the feminine perspective to the point where passivity, being a recipient of anothers attention and soft intimacy become the only form of desire that doesnt feel alien to them. This either means the woman takes on the aggressive role (muscle girls, mommies, etc) or both partners are equally passive and subside in contemplation of each other
2) Zoomer asexuality. Despite the fact that sex is wide spread culturally and everything is infused with a sense of perpetual sexual frustration, there seems to be more of a recognition of it's "weird" or disgusting nature with zoomers, as well as a profound uncomfortableness with the idea of interacting with it beyond the virtual level. Channeling their sex drive into a sort of asexual contemplation of "girl types" in a generic "I love girls" sense probably allows them to feel more comfortable. I think this ties into the first theory where since both sex and masculine domination are seen as alien, the only channel left to express this desire is through dominant/motherly women who you dont actually have sex with.
A more in-depth discussion on the origins of this type is warranted, but I believe the initial objective of this post has been sufficiently met and that adding too much detail in the OP would smother the possibility of further additions from others. I look forward to your thoughts on this post, both positive and negative.
[Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2Y5KVtU810]
Two things immediately come to one's mind when one watches this video, the first of which is JoCat's completely neutered appreciation of women. The entire video is basically a mediation of JoCat's sex drive through the lens of weeb/gamer derived fictional archetypes with little to no actual sexual content, despite the fact that the video is about listing physical traits he finds attractive. The second observation which shortly follows is despite it's off-putting nature its not unique at all, but can actually comfortably fit into an established aesthetic and mode of desiring which seems to be an essential part of late millennial and zoomer online culture. Taking this as our basis, the brightest minds of Skorrcord worked their hardest to come up for an explanation for why people like JoCat exist and what are the common characteristics that unite them.
Straight homosexuals: The Basics
Most "straight" people are spiritual faggots. Homosexuality defined itself by the morality and standards of the sexual revolution and then progressively took over mainstream culture till it transformed what satisfying sex and erotic desire commonly meant. This cultural dominance peaked in the 2010's with the zenith of hookup culture and widespread obsession with paraphilias that have nothing to do with vaginal penetrative sex (anal, bdsm, etc.). This transformation of heterosexuality took on two broad forms, which can be called "vulgar" straight homosexuality and "romantic" straight homosexuality respectively.
Vulgar straight homosexuals are the easiest to define and the least interesting to talk about, simply because of how self evident the phenomenon is. Extreme promiscuity, obsession with sadomasochism and power relations, roleplaying and public sex all define the vulgar type, and one can see its origins in the stereotype of the tight leather wearing faggot sucking someone off at a glory hole in the bathroom stalls very clearly. For these types, sex can never be worthwhile if it's not intentionally filthy, transgressive and ultimately a show of power in it's most debased form. Pure heterosexual lust has been replaced by homosexual fascination with filth, for what defines the post-sexrev homo more than the love of writhing in one's own shit?
Think Medgold. Think Delicious Tacos. If you're imaging a balding 30 year old man getting a blowjob from a roastie on birth control with a nose ring in the back of a fast food joint who's going to brag to his friends about this event later then you know exactly what I'm talking about.
Romantic Straight Homosexuals:
Romantics are much harder to pin down because it's a much more complicated issue despite the label applying to a much smaller and more distinct group. Put in the simplest of terms, it's an outgrowth of tumblr gay/fujoshi fandom shipping culture which is defined by a pseudo-anime aesthetic, an aversion to male domination in all its forms, the sublimation of sexual desire into a parasocial relationship with the fictional archetype of one's choice which culminates in a non-sexual act which implies a high degree of intimacy and familiarity (like sleeping on a woman's thighs) and a desire to be validated and doted upon. The connection to gay fandom culture (obviously a zoomer phenomenon which is entirely different from hardcore late 20th century "gay culture) lies specifically in the obsession with specific "types" (twinks, doms, tops, bottoms, etc.) and their pairing in completely non-aggressive and "tender" ways. If aggression is tolerated at all, it is not to come from the character which the gay fan will identify with. Anyone who has ever interacted with fans of Sherlock, Undertale, Danganronpa or Homestuck has surely experienced what I'm describing before.
The Romantic is not attracted to regular women. When he says he likes milfs, he does not mean actual middle aged women. He means Misato and other anime girls. When he does find a physical woman attractive, it's always one intentionally approximating an anime girl through heavy makeup and editing, like this:
[Image: https://imgs.search.brave.com/60UlIm_vqt...jUxMS5qcGc]
He does not want to have sex with her either. Notice how all the muscle mommy dommy lovers almost never talk about how they want to have sex with their fantasy women, merely about being smothered by her, being beat up, doted on, spit on, etc? The RSH (as opposed to the VSH) is uncomfortable with the notion of a direct sexual encounter, largely because he finds the act of sex itself to be awkward and undesirable, which is why he feels the need to sublimate his sex drive into the virtual in the first place.
The RSH manifests in two forms (high and low) which roughly map onto the first and third world. High RSH focuses much more on the parasocial relationship with the abstract archetype in a non-sexual form, whereas low RSH has a much lower level of abstraction involved and the fact that the fictional character is a stand in for some erotic desire is more obvious. The idealized women involved tend to be wearing skimpier clothes, are almost always "thick", and while they will still never have sex directly they'll still imply it much more than its high RSH counterpart. These are the people that put food on the tables of soft porn Makima artists, and if left to their own devices would worship a slightly more modest depiction of the Venus of Willendorf putting a poor neolithic farmer in a collar.
Origins of the romantic:
As all things before it in this post, my explanation for the origin of this type comes in a pair.
1) Inherited behaviour from a feminized upbringing. Basically an extension of the BAPist "origin of the homosexual" theory. Because of the lack of a proper masculine model in their lives, they've idealized the feminine perspective to the point where passivity, being a recipient of anothers attention and soft intimacy become the only form of desire that doesnt feel alien to them. This either means the woman takes on the aggressive role (muscle girls, mommies, etc) or both partners are equally passive and subside in contemplation of each other
2) Zoomer asexuality. Despite the fact that sex is wide spread culturally and everything is infused with a sense of perpetual sexual frustration, there seems to be more of a recognition of it's "weird" or disgusting nature with zoomers, as well as a profound uncomfortableness with the idea of interacting with it beyond the virtual level. Channeling their sex drive into a sort of asexual contemplation of "girl types" in a generic "I love girls" sense probably allows them to feel more comfortable. I think this ties into the first theory where since both sex and masculine domination are seen as alien, the only channel left to express this desire is through dominant/motherly women who you dont actually have sex with.
A more in-depth discussion on the origins of this type is warranted, but I believe the initial objective of this post has been sufficiently met and that adding too much detail in the OP would smother the possibility of further additions from others. I look forward to your thoughts on this post, both positive and negative.