Biggus Titus of Oxford University

I mean Grayson Perry is a case in point

The thing is, once you have made it acceptable for some men to have breasts in public - implants, stuffed bras, breast-plates, whatever, then when does it become inappropriate? Where is the line where you can say, no, that is inappropriate, in a work setting/around children/etc. We all know that the massive, comedy breasts are inappropriate but at what size does it switch from acceptable to unacceptable?

Breasts are extremely sexualised in our society. Our breastfeeding rates are very low. Women's breasts are not valued for the job they exist to do so what motivates a man to give himself the illusion of breasts? All of them, not just the ones who take it too far.

Women should start wearing MASSIVE erect fake penises to work, the outline clearly visible through their trousers.

I don't think these men waste any more time considering the realities of being a woman than they spend time considering the realities of being a squirrel.

A caricature is a deliberate exaggeration.

This lecturer "reflects womanhood" by presenting as an OTT version of what a woman looks like e.g. overly big boobs, low-cut top and badly applied lipstick are obvious exaggerations. The motivation for reflecting womanhood in such a way is open to interpretation.

Here's a video of another male going OTT, this time with the idea of breastmilk:

https://x.com/RuPaulsDragRace/status/1680642200969834496?t=5Pwu1AtxwsToJoCwpxWlkQ&s=19

That video was on prime time TV at a time when families typically watch together. Again, the motivation is open to interpretation.

The obvious question in both examples is whether this is someone being their authentic self, someone taking the piss to degrade women or someone acting out their fetish in plain sight. These points aren't necessarily mutually exclusive.

If none of that bothers you, fair enough. It never used to bother me either TBH, so I totally get why it wouldn't. As you say, it's so obviously not a female that in many ways it doesn't matter.

Where I've realised that I do draw the line is that I don't want to be a bit-part in someone's fetish when it's obvious (to me) that the person in question is getting a sexual thrill from the whole experience. Especially when that experience involves hiding in plain sight and getting adulation and fawning responses, for being so brave etc etc. In many ways, it doesn't matter if I'm wrong in assuming that someone has a fetish, simply based on the way they are conducting themselves. The fact that I get that vibe is enough for me to find it grim.

Men's opinion certainly carries weight. I don't think they think it reflects actual womanhood tho. The porn version, maybe.

Hence all the actual women being called old, bigoted, behind the times, on the wrong side of history, etc.

Time again we see these men being handled with kind of kid gloves that are never, ever reserved for women. Everyone knows what sex these men are. That's why they're pandered to.

It's not really a caricature of a woman's body though is it, is just a bloke w fake tits. I find it impossible to feel that he reflects anything about womanhood in any way so I genuinely can't get offended. Not saying that to be cool or edgy, he's just so far away from anything Id recognise as a woman that it has no bearing on my identity at all.

I don't think they start out hating us. I think they simply see us as resources that they are entitled to. In the case of trans identifying men and AGPs our utility is to provide the female baseline against which their identity or fetish can be performed, and as long as we do that they are happy with us.

It's only when we say No that they start to hate us, to forment self-righteous anger so they can use it to justify to themselves and others ignoring our voices. After all they are just treating us like we "deserve" for the offense of saying no.

It is hardly a new thing for men to flip from indifference into anger and hatred in response to women saying no to what they feel is their due from us.

A year ago, Matt bemoaned the lack of engagement and interactivity from students on his Linked In. I wonder if he's ever reflected on why that might be? Supportive comments from his associates don't point out the obvious reason - that his students are intimidated and keeping their heads down.

His seminars might be different - he is criticising the lecture format rather than blaming Gen Z students. But I wonder if he's picking up on the wariness and psychological distancing of his students and copes with it by framing it as a problem with the medium.

I still remember, word for word, observations by some of my lecturers decades later. That's the impact a great lecturer can have, Matt.

----

"Today was my last "lecture" of the academic year - not actually a lecture according to the title, but a "surgery" - more like a Q&A... with slides... to the whole cohort... with me at the front doing all the talking while students sit there and "absorb" it... "if it walks like a duck," etc etc 🤔 I try and make the best of it and impart as much wisdom as I can in an hour, but the distinct lack of interactivity (even with questions being submitted by students for me to answer) means it feels like a lot of that just won't stick. The recording will be handy for them to re-watch perhaps and they do get some notes out of it - I had a good turnout too, so they must see some value in showing up for it live. But to be honest, I almost wanted to apologise to them - in their shoes I'd feel a bit hard done by, being dragged into the department for this! The romantic notion of the "wise sage regaling eager students" still hangs around - and I do get why. That's the uni experience right, and especially somewhere like Oxford, that's how we've done things for literally a thousand years, so that's how we shall continue. But it's well-established that lectures are less effective at building knowledge & skills than more active learning approaches. I worry that I'm burning my students' time, and in particular their brainpower, at the sharp end of the year when they're busy revising for exams coming up. They don't have the capacity at the moment for things that aren't helping them effectively, and it's at best indulgent of me to spend that limited capacity on a session like this. The real question then is, what to do about it 🤔 I might need to see what leeway I have to try some other things out! Any wisdom from anyone on here about how to make lectures as useful as possible, or, should we just bin them already?"

A year ago, Matt bemoaned the lack of engagement and interactivity from students on his Linked In. I wonder if he's ever reflected on why that might be? Supportive comments from his associates don't point out the obvious reason - that his students are intimidated and keeping their heads down.

His seminars might be different - he is criticising the lecture format rather than blaming Gen Z students. But I wonder if he's picking up on the wariness and psychological distancing of his students and copes with it by framing it as a problem with the medium.

I still remember, word for word, observations by some of my lecturers decades later. That's the impact a great lecturer can have, Matt.

----

"Today was my last "lecture" of the academic year - not actually a lecture according to the title, but a "surgery" - more like a Q&A... with slides... to the whole cohort... with me at the front doing all the talking while students sit there and "absorb" it... "if it walks like a duck," etc etc 🤔 I try and make the best of it and impart as much wisdom as I can in an hour, but the distinct lack of interactivity (even with questions being submitted by students for me to answer) means it feels like a lot of that just won't stick. The recording will be handy for them to re-watch perhaps and they do get some notes out of it - I had a good turnout too, so they must see some value in showing up for it live. But to be honest, I almost wanted to apologise to them - in their shoes I'd feel a bit hard done by, being dragged into the department for this! The romantic notion of the "wise sage regaling eager students" still hangs around - and I do get why. That's the uni experience right, and especially somewhere like Oxford, that's how we've done things for literally a thousand years, so that's how we shall continue. But it's well-established that lectures are less effective at building knowledge & skills than more active learning approaches. I worry that I'm burning my students' time, and in particular their brainpower, at the sharp end of the year when they're busy revising for exams coming up. They don't have the capacity at the moment for things that aren't helping them effectively, and it's at best indulgent of me to spend that limited capacity on a session like this. The real question then is, what to do about it 🤔 I might need to see what leeway I have to try some other things out! Any wisdom from anyone on here about how to make lectures as useful as possible, or, should we just bin them already?"

classic example of the chilling effect in action. I'd bet my entire house that absolutely everyone thinks he looks at best like an absolute bellend and at worse like a walking fetish but absolutely no one dare say anything for fear that the stunning and brave wrath of the TRA will descend upon them

i wonder if a trans man sporting a 9 inch dildo rammed into their trousers would receive the same "nothing to see here" treatment.

I don't think they start out hating us. I think they simply see us as resources that they are entitled to. In the case of trans identifying men and AGPs our utility is to provide the female baseline against which their identity or fetish can be performed, and as long as we do that they are happy with us.

It's only when we say No that they start to hate us, to forment self-righteous anger so they can use it to justify to themselves and others ignoring our voices. After all they are just treating us like we "deserve" for the offense of saying no.

It is hardly a new thing for men to flip from indifference into anger and hatred in response to women saying no to what they feel is their due from us.

I don't think they start out hating us. I think they simply see us as resources that they are entitled to. In the case of trans identifying men and AGPs our utility is to provide the female baseline against which their identity or fetish can be performed, and as long as we do that they are happy with us.

It's only when we say No that they start to hate us, to forment self-righteous anger so they can use it to justify to themselves and others ignoring our voices. After all they are just treating us like we "deserve" for the offense of saying no.

It is hardly a new thing for men to flip from indifference into anger and hatred in response to women saying no to what they feel is their due from us.

“He has the giveaway AGP smirk.”

Hasn’t he though?

This is the reaction to being told ‘no, you should respect female people’s needs for single sex provisions’.

Why have we been led to believe that male people who believe they are women are different to any other male person who ignores women’s boundaries and reject women saying ‘no’.

Here is Alexandra Billings who self published these videos . This one first I believe.

https://x.com/gaynotqueer1/status/2032811484271817092?s=46

Then the chilling and menacing response to women saying 'no' here stitched into Amy Sousa’s response.

https://x.com/knownheretic/status/2032639781658833142?s=46

The menace is chilling to see. Yet, apparently we are supposed to welcome these same men into provisions designated as single sex for our protection from men threatening and intimidating us.

It becomes so clear that these men hate female people in general when they gloat over not being able to stop them accessing provisions that they should be excluded from and lack the inclination to self exclude from. Just as they gloat over organisational decisions to remove female single sex provisions in response to law changes that exclude male people from those provisions.

At the same time, we are supposed to believe that these men are most vulnerable and marginalised.

Here is another set of videos that shows the same dynamic.
Daviana. Who started posting videos about how he knew he was a man etc. He was considered to be 'one of the reasonable ones' because of that.

Of course, as he has made more videos more has come out about what and how he really thinks. .

https://x.com/KnownHeretic/status/2031523680136868150?s=20

https://x.com/KnownHeretic/status/2031873045682667588?s=20

https://x.com/KnownHeretic/status/2031975467725832460?s=20

These men are chilling once you see what they really think.

Billings and Daviana are just two men who are showing women who they really are. It seems some men really cannot help themselves in showing that these demands are also part of the power dynamic.