Is it true that cis women sexuality is closer to AGP (including meta-attraction and focused on self) than homosexual male androphilia?
>>41477272yes. proven by research
>>41477320Which research?
>>41477330try google
>>41477272lol no. It's just something agps tell themselves because they love being in total denial of reality.
>>41477360Many cis women have described their sexuality in that way.
>>41477272Yeah, Blanchtards are all coping, and they only have strawmen and motte and baileys to try and defend their theory. Women are generally more pro-social than men (whether that's due to nature or nurture is irrelevant for our discussion) and that translates into a sexuality more sensitive to social factors. This is why women's erotica generally has some kind of 'story', not necessarily a little story, but at the very least a specific kind of social dynamic.
>>41479501*literal
>>41477272yes blanchard is a fraud
>>41477272yes
>>41477360This
>>41477272imagine not being turned on by being plap-able
You'll find it correlates with the number of "dominant" women who have settled for weak numales. It's not inherent to the female androphilic experience which is in reality just as varied as any other.
>>41477272I think it’s the same as trannies in that there is some subset of women genuinely attracted to men outside of meta attraction or their status and the rest who have something that resembles AGP in a way.
