Keep in mind, just this dude pulling up with his worm made a Prime retreat.
Not Megatron, only Shockwave. And he got even more hype in the DOTM game.
In the game, Optimus tried to keep this man frozen like his life depended on it, Shockwave even killed Elita in the comics. (She wasn’t a condescending bitch in the DOTM comics like she was in TFONE btw, she was actually tolerable)
Shockwave is a Machiavellian mood.
All the scenes of Deeeeep Wang could’ve been scrapped to explore this guy, see his lab. See how he tamed the Colossus or engineered it. Anything resembling good content.
Or? And hear me out, Shockwave talking to his brother for a scene.
*look at him looking up at big bro Shockwave like he’s looking at a hero:
where IDW comics/G1/Cybertron games get it right is the Cons specifically are humanized warlords, not gurgling demons or idiot thugs- but intelligent radicals with a propensity to break shit.
The Wave brothers’ lore acc intelligence yet Warrior class status is the antithesis to everything Bayformers did with the Decepticons painting them to be otherworldly dumbasses that never win or strategize.
Hell have we ever gotten a scene with them just hanging or plotting that was LONGER than 2–6 min, not them Transforming then talking evil speak for 60 seconds, exposition dump about some artifact then cut to humans.
About them just talking like regular soldiers in the barracks.
Really think about that, now take that same question & count how many times we got exactly that & more (including memes) in these three gems:
That’s the difference between a product called “Transformers” and actually getting TRANSFORMERS.
Shockwave was one of the biggest casualties, and the fact that they gave him mecha kaiju that could tear apart a low level Godzilla is just insane. I’m surprised they didn’t give it a beam weapon or some kind of seismic ability or ability to convert magma into Energon.
IDW Lore goes deep, Shockwave is a character who can easily be the villain of an entire movie or trilogy.
He’s like Batman in the sense that he has contingencies for everyone; a lab junkie, creates his own wears & creatures, smart as shit, no morals.
#LOGICAL
“Reminds me of how IDW Soundwave has a soft spot for elephants.”
There’s a reason why everyone fears this guy, including Optimus.
Instead of Lockdown, Shockwave should’ve come back in AOE. And with his genius he easily could’ve revived his brother, Megatron and anyone else, given time.
And the Shockwave Prime killed was a clone, allegedly.
Do pushups, burpees- Anything that requires being horizontal
(This will cause pressure in your head to counter the congested pressure) & then gravity will flush ya shit right out temporarily when you stand up.
Do it everyday, drink more water, take peppermint oil drops (raw or tea), sleep, brothy food, tuna for the OMEGA 3 oils, take RAW Ginger powder, you’ll be straight.
https://youtu.be/1_22fZdI_vA
Natural methods, natural oils, spices, fish. No drugs or synthetic products from over the counter
When you sit too long, no physical activity, your stagnant blood circulation gets fucked with the excess mucus, it gets clogged.
Pressure points
I had a really bad infection years back, so bad I could not sleep, pure agony. What saved me was pressure points, drained me out like clogged pipe.
Which really showed me how efficient the human vessel is, how much like a mechanism, or a plumbing system it truly is.
The labels in the image are the sections I massaged (tracing my finger along with light pressure in repeat motion)
I discovered a way on my own (partially) the minute I realized humans are just walking plumbing systems- Fight pressure with counter pressure, toilet plunge.
I hold my nostrils, hold my breath (through the mouth), hold my head up or down, side to side (pick a position, then alternate); hold it until one runs out of air then exhale through the nose only (DO NOT FORCE IT, if you’re that stuffed up & cannot, let some out via the mouth but let the nose do most of it if possible) + while massaging the sides of the nose. The entire point is to let the pressure to the draining to get the mucus out, because that’s what causing the nasal, facial muscles to swell — mucus
The key is getting your blood flow accelerated in your veins/head & encouraging stimulation in your nose and face, so the mucus is guided out and flows out on it’s own.
I'm usually the first one to criticize oversexualization in various forms, but Hooters is just a fun idea. The people complaining the hardest are likely other women that see unabashed femininity as a threat.
"my wife would kill me", there it is. The one's who wouldn't make the cut to work at Hooters are the one's with a problem with Hooters.
Kids are more at risk exploring Deviantart's home page vs getting some Wings with their pops at Hooters. It's not a trafficking front, it's literally just a wing spot with very attractive servers/alt mascots & unlike what Japan is on, these ladies are not in training bra's.
I'd say I'm moderately prude out of principle & I'm saying for a fact that this is not a big deal. There's worse exhibits worth scrutiny that are rotting brains by the second as we speak, and this ain't one of them.
I'm sure going to places like this is relaxing for some people, good for them but it shouldn't be an alternate to actually meeting someone, that's where I can see the aesthetic becoming an issue. Some cats trying to use Hooters to supplant a hookup or proxy escort service or something. The ladies are there to serve food, not hear about your day at work or as someone else said, "You are their work, not their friend, thats food service.".
100% facts.
For the most part, I hope they succeed.
To tackle a common defense, and frequent justification many use in defense of Macrophilia fetish.
the misguided assertion that “Giantess = Empowerment/Feminism”, or is in any way a celebration of female empowerment, thus feminist in spirit; a sales pitch.
what happened to us
Take for example: Done to death scenario of a woman destroying a city, like a rabid out of control animal. A child throwing a tantrum against her surroundings.
Rambling on and on about “control”, little people being “insignificant” bugs, getting aroused at terror of her victims.
The artist / author eroticizing helplessness, powerlessness aka the state of a child: the point of the fetish, size disparity between a subject and the proxy- for a parent figure, bigger, superior,/ authority.
A quasi-career in fanatical idealization of trivializing life, in fiction — yes. Trivialization, idealizing, and even glorification of suffering (Sado-Maso) or at worst: full-on Death worship.
Thus, In the mind of a Macrocreep (npc career Macrophile), at least implicated in the brutal, persistent, un-ending, and very blatant frequency of this same done to death visual; the message is clear even if there wasn’t a statement intended:
A woman with “power” or advantage translates as a threat to men, to other women, children and civilization. Women with too much agency are an anomaly or a mistake.
This can be extended to the Macrophile’s ‘Giant Man’, but to no one’s surprise, with the fact that males overwhelmingly dominate this fetish, the Giantess will be the pre-dominant idol in question than a male giant.
In the desire to see a woman as an overwhelming dominating force, a toxic burden. More importantly dethroning men as the physical apex of the human species & forcing him into a state of irrelevance (which is what this is really about, a supremacist takeover, men being rendered pointless, replaced, backseated, and obsolete. “She doesn’t need you anymore”, a humiliation ritual.)
This dethroning operation mirrors men being trivialized as fathers & husbands, protectors in real time. Even if the parallel is accidental, it is there.
Even women question if having boyfriends now is “embarrassing” or at least that’s what they’re fed by talking-points.
So men are genuinely going through a form of cultural erasure, it’s not subjective; if it was, I wouldn’t be here speaking on it. I have better things to do than invent problems. I get nothing out of that.
However, this damaging shift, won’t be successful: because men are essential to the empire you take for granted.
or depending on who you are: men are essential to the empire some fetishize being destroyed while you enjoy resources of said civilization simultaneously.
Men aren’t going anywhere but the damage caused in the culture will serve it’s purpose — destabilization. The fetish mirrors that malice perfectly.
Women moreover suffer alleged “superwoman syndrome”: women finding out the feminist concept of “having it all” was unreasonable & virtually impossible.
Resulting in women giving so much that they suffer a burnout (whether she be single, the breadwinner in a marriage, or married as a housewife, it doesn’t matter — women have a threshold of what they can handle)
They eventually reach burnout, but it can be argued that single women, without that intimate domestic rock to lean on, reach it more frequent or more intensely. But it is debatable, because it depends if you’re raising girls to be fortified partners or transactional bachelorettes curated to be single forever.
And if her mindset is scoreboards, legers, balancing scales; a calculus of labor in her head 24/7 — you’re raising entire generations of women that are programmed to make themselves miserable. Transactional Egalitarianism doesn’t work.
There’s but so much that therapy & friends can do to a limited capacity because a lot of people are essentially groomed to think they’re leaving men behind (a lie — but this narrative lies in macrophilie in merely the visual of a giantess).
The modern woman has to be the modern man themselves which isn’t sustainable because women can’t be men, burnout is proof of this, they can’t handle their own burdens when single (not a judgement, it’s an observation).
Women can’t fit the mold modernity wants to force them into to embody, hence the exhaustion. Hence the paradoxical delusion they’re fed by society to think women in first world wonderland are something they’re not — to be successful, women have to be masculinized. Lies.
Men get trivialized, but even as women are groomed to supplant men (both IRL & fetish alike), womanhood is retroactively trivialized because women cannot be men.
No matter how many degrees they have, they will never leave men behind, or be men. Because the college campuses they walk on: Men built, their offices: men built.
This fallacy also highlights the inherent lunacy of Macrophilia.
The fetish implies it’s populated presumably by self-hating men, confused people, insecure women hijacking the concept ‘empowerment’ to mean what they want it to mean. Which in turn sterilizes it to mean nothing, which the movement has done on it’s own abusing the term into a state of a numbing affect on society.
Despite the stories of said neutral characters (Susan Murphy, Nancy Archer, Pym, Bowser, Hulk, Mario, Scott Carey) having nothing to do with macrophiles.
Or something like that movie “Downsized”, some macrocreeps flocked to that movie just to get disappointed because it isn’t flaunting the derangement they wanted to see.
Or the ever occasional junkfood media like Giant Ojackass-Sama aka Giant Ojoke-Sama aka “giant ojou-sama”, a manga to anime adaptation. And yes, you guessed it, it’s utter garbage. Big shock.
In turn, Macrophiles project, project & project on anything & everything having a giant or giant woman in it.
So that she or it represents what they want it to according to their delusions & presumed loose ideology. (will explore that later)
Ultimately trying to hijack the size tropes prominence, past or present, to then mean Society is accepting your mental issues in some way, when what it is — is we’re externalizing delusions onto everything we see &we NEED it to mean “visibility” or purpose in some way because we need to justify what is a serious problem. Or at minimum: Not healthy.
All to avoid admitting that it is — a problem, even though no one is hurt, there is damage.
And so the reversal in the fetish is a successful destabilization of order.
Masculinization of women (a western taught narrative), rendering men obsolete (western taught narrative)
But equally dysfunctional and inherently toxic & visually silly.
To reiterate: according to macrophile propaganda: “Empowered” women, or a woman with advantageous inequity is a threat to civilization, or akin to something “surrender” to.
Pay attention to the language here, because this is part of the compulsory hook for many with this social contagion. Narrative foreplay, the language, the seasoning.
A woman taking advantage of inequity to have her way, even if it’s benevolent (Gentle GTS) means she serves as some kind of looming grotesque deformity to surrender to, than something to respect. An objectified thing.
By inflating her into some monolithic thing or other, she isn’t a person than she is something to indeed objectify, she’s an idea, a cultural takeover, a paragon, a statement even.
I repeat, a “grotesque deformity” in every way: Including the gross appropriation of “empowerment”, which actually is a gross level of intellectual dishonesty.
Surrender and respect are not the same thing. Surrender & submission aren’t the same thing. One is to survive a force, the other is a choice to safety, in a fight when you “submit” to an opponent you have to consciously tap out. To surrender is not to even fight.
Or at least that’s a simplified way of putting it.
You can follow the leadership of a respected woman you choose to submit to, not because she’s smiling from 300ft in the air looming over you like a bad omen and dropping you to your knees from just the decibels from her voice (bear with me)— which is just a deranged child’s idea of submission.
But she’s looking you face to face and you acknowledge her agency, and more importantly, her humanity. She doesn’t need to be an inflated trauma mode sex-bot who exists to beyond what any woman can or should have to live up too.
A Giantess symbolically Is gluttony, it’s excess, it’s an imbalance. We’re not honoring women’s strength, we’re fetishizing it via appropriating it to fit a masculinized caricature. Worshipping it and saying it’s for women. How is that any different than what the media, industry feminists & some sects of academia has been telling women that’s a “strong woman”?
Her size is not statement about your perceived or adopted fantasy-specific uselessness or blatant cowardice because you might not want to perform as a man or take a break from being an adult to regress to an absolute state of being a burden or less than nothing.
(which is what this is really about, spoiler alert, even in surrender or subject to authority, you still have to be a man of integrity and do something useful. Deferring authority to a woman doesn’t mean you get to be worthless on purpose because you think that’s security.)
Agency: something macrophilia is terminally allergic to despite what the shills claim about this fallacious presumption of “owning” it. Wrong-O.
And so, to “surrender” to something is whole other connotation, especially if it’s something counterfeit like a false sense of security (aka the entire fetish) TL;DR the Feminism defense is a Red flag.
That is in no way a “feminist” power fantasy of defying patriarchy (the system that provided us the technological means to complain about how bad patriarchy is)
That can be argued to be alleged “toxic femininity” or femininity being hijacked to resemble alleged “toxic masculinity” (both are equally nonsensical terms)
or gynocentrism to replace patriarchy as the new author of society’s problems between men and women. Which is accurate to why Americans lost their own plot in sex relations.
Because being a public menace is exceeding patriarchy’s problems and illustrating that simply: PATRIARCHY actually? Made advanced civilization vs matriarchal sensibilities & empowerment for women eventually destroys it aka Macrophilia, hence why the popular visage is a giant woman, destroying everything — Now it’s not so cute.
That’s the narrative they/we/us/our/POV push ad infinite like religious zealots.
It’s never not hilarious at the reality that all this childish-esque imagery, the desperation, even the tantrum in the subtext of the writing; the imagery represents — is not coming from actual children.
It’s pushed so frequently and so often having nothing to do with sex, bonding, or connection or serving a woman proper, her serving him, the unit serving the other.
It’s inherently not designed to be functional. The disparity is the tailored chaos.
Because being happy (even in gentle GTS) isn’t the point, it’s about her being a sponsor, him being underneathe a hierarchy.
Example: A giant woman works at a company, she’s a subordinate to a man as tall as the length of her finger nail. He’s systematically “in-charge” but she has the evolutionary advantage and can kill everyone on a dime. And often intimidates her peers while not meaning to.
That’s the child-like derangement I often see as funny, but not in the way the author intended. That’s not a children’s book about differences being strengths, because I will admit the irony of that specific hierarchy is clever but you could do the same with Supergirl and not turn the woman into a bloated spectacle.
As infantile as it is, this is not for adults to get erect & aroused that a woman has omnipotent power over everyone’s lives and she’s unaware of the terror she inspires while she’s innocent at heart. Unhealthy.
Dysfunctional, she’s an objectified thing to serve one purpose: *invoke feeling*, that’s it.
This is an interesting defiance to the patriarchal hierarchy where the man is “the head” but puts the woman first anyway, thus he serves a purpose. She submits to his authority, her being the priority is her agency being acknowledged, and being the matriarch comes with authority as well.
Which is a dash of egalitarianism: his being the head is not a dictatorship. The matriarch being the help is not her being a servant. That’s where this intimidation of gender roles come from, and the compulsion to subvert it, redefine it, until men don’t know what being a man is anymore.
But over here in Macro-Land, It’s about her body being a spectacle, a hellscape, even a playground, & a statement for something else entirely completely divorced from service or even independence vs isolation or insufferable existence.
It’s about how her being objectified makes the Tiny FEEL regardless of her agency, which is zero agency.
Or how her being burden to others making the her feel as the giantess, which is not feminism.
That is NOT FEMIN-IST: 🤔This exceeds a fetish in conventional terms and loosely enters the realm of a disturbing — *ideology*:
Because notice it’s more about the vocabulary as much as it is the visual. The emotional impact of the “giantess” as fetishists understand the word.
The feeling her scale invokes (pagan idol worship even), than it is her sexual compatibility or even her having a stake in the society that she destroys and looms her feet over.
Or if the men & women are shrunk, they’re incompatible with society, and a woman with power over them either treats them like pets, prey, or roomies but the disparity itself communicates unironically to the reader “yeah, she’s better than them and they know it” or (because this is macrophile writing), the writer will have the characters verbatim assault the reader with self-indulgent deprecation bemoaning how superior the woman is despite how nice she is.
She is either a burden, or the stake or lack thereof with the tiny remains—
Words for example. The dogma, the propaganda’s DNA:
“insignificant”
“diminutive”
“I’m in charge”
“goddess”
“like a bug”
“tiny”
“Insignificant compared to her” (thats a popular one, gentle, unaware or destructive, that slogan is one of the most common, usually from male tinies — no surprise there *hence castration ritual)
“It’s MY fault” — The male usually disproportionately being blamed or blaming himself, when the woman is in the wrong/ even when the woman is the one victimizing him, unaware or intentionally. aka Zero female accountability (parallel to real life phenomenon). The man has to be in the wrong 24/7, he’s the piece of shit. And she’s justified in whatever happens to him. Misandry. — Keep in mind I rarely see female tinies saying this, the self-blame theme is almost always rigidly strict to male tinies: Hence *Male Self-Hatred fetish, bowed head, bent back, or crushed vessel beneath the heel of matriarchal authoritarianism or digested to be become a “part” of her, men are the expendable sub-human “things” women just use & discard. —
The intent of the excuses used vs the content the people are making excuses for — are clashing, this only happened because their assaults on the internet are spilling over. They’re doing too much.
🚨This is neither feminist, nor empowering, nor healthy, nor men’s desire for more female empowerment’- Which is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard come from actual experts. Though albeit just a hypothesis on some of their part, it’s an asinine one. So sick of seeing it.
We need to stop using that word “Empowerment” as a shield, because you think the optics of women’s empowerment means opposing Macrophilia is opposing women being strong or some form of insecurity.
Because wanting to be a diminutive burden or an apologetic slave in fantasy means you’re secure in your masculinity vs your masculinity is a novelty to abuse because there’s something else going on that you’re masking with the fetish in the first place.
I know misdirection, I know gaslighting & red herrings. Because what you think represents female strength (to justify something else) is actually a mockery of womanhood.
Because this communicates women as they are, I repeat, apparently isn’t enough. The subject needs more excess woman than they can handle, because the agenda is not having a partner, but a proxy for mommy. It’s regressive-gluttony.
Red herrings, excuses, & deflections are indicative of a fallacy than confidence in fact or reality.
For male & female subjects alike: It’s “overcompensation”, all of it. Gentle, neutral (ie. balls get zingy from a woman holding a tiny cup or standing amongst tall trees. Pure silliness and delusion) & aggro GTS alike.
It’s compensating for something, the fixation with size and dwarfing the value of things and those around you; trivializing the value of the world around you. To inflate the importance of women by essentially objectifying a woman to a singular value, which is paradoxically, trivializing women’s value.
And I’m not the first to point it out or see it.
So why is men (hypothetically) wanting more female empowerment, in his context, frankly moronic?
Well to be fair, via a fetish that trivializes strong women by painting them as psychopathic demons or smooth brained, angelic waifu blobs/babysitters/Mommy Simulator bots that simply exist to be exactly that: a stand-in for Mommy.
Just as a thought experiment — When a very common western narrative of women “leaving men behind” (lies)— The operative question becomes —
🚨How are men craving female empowerment in a society that already shoves female empowerment and only empowerment for women down the throats of men? (Men & Women tbh, plenty of women reject these narratives too, eventually) To the point where it’s reported men are being left behind anyway?
Logically, how are they lacking or missing or thirsting for something they’re already getting assaulted with disproportionately and not receiving said empowerment at the same time for their own well being? While being left behind?
Is it it women that need more empowerment or is it men? Hence the Macrophile fantasy. Is it really women that need more uplifting, or is it men? If that’s the fantasy for some men, to surrender to matriarchy in lack of seeing value in themselves; in the fantasy, it’s his fault, she’s a goddess, he serves at her feet, he’s insignificant compared to her.
Once more, how are men craving female empowerment in a society that expresses often: that it doesn’t give a shit about men or boys?
Theory #1 Either it’s men using the fetish as a vehicle because women aren’t getting enough empowerment in countries that laud proudly #TheFutureisFemale and proudly reports fallaciously that women & girls are leaving men & boys behind?
Or Theory #2 It’s damaged men/ & women reasonably acting out a manifested directive through repeated cultural conditioning that matriarchal sensibilities have finally overstayed it’s welcome or and gynocentrism corrupted the true purpose of feminism.🧠
Perhaps it’s matriarchal sensibilities is hurting everyone because Feminism wasn’t held accountable for the changes it made, both good & bad.
From cancel culture to the hyper-sensitivity, no one can joke anymore, men are berated by headlines constantly, on talk shows (ex. Leslie Jones speaking on male loneliness) — none of that is patriarchal. Mocking men with no immediate social consequence isn’t patriarchal, it’s the brutal opposite.
Matriarchal sensibilities without being tempered by patriarchal accountability can harm feminisms valid intentions. Patriarchy is not the only system that needs to be kept in check.
The female empowerment excuse doesn’t hold weight, because you’ll have “shrunken woman” genre where women specifically or solely are victims of giant women: Cannibalism, sexual assault, mutilation, manslaughter, daughters eating their mothers alive, or mothers abusing their daughters etc. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
How’s that factor into empowerment?
See how stupid this gets when we try adults like actual adults? The kid gloves need to come off and stay off.
👁️👄👁️Nice try.
Funny how the shills & defenders don’t mention that in their puff pieces.
But articles spouting safe, cuddly talking points like:
“exploring macrophilia”
“embracing” this
“accepting” that, truly beautiful stuff, warms my heart to see people be encouraged to light themselves on fire, it really does.
Like Macrophilia is a new mathematics curriculum given to us by a god-alien race or something. What warrants all this defensiveness? It’s not an identity, it’s a mask.
These same outlets won’t mention the more pronounced aspects of the fetish (genocide) that are so prevalent, they’re not part of the iconography, IT IS the iconography. Just look at what they post on Youtube, it’s impressive, truly.
I could give one some credit if they tried to argue that the brutal, horrific, disgusting, anti-human elements are less than 2% of the fetish —
but even if it were, that is still a problem that it’s even part of the fetish at all — because WHERE’S the sex or ero in human genocide?
It’s okay to concede that something is genuinely wrong with some people & they need professional and interpersonal help. Keyword: Interpersonal, Community.
If communities were more active & less repressed, social activity would prevent a lot of these fetishes or at minimum reduce the likelihood.
In this timeline, the violent beats are more than 40-60% of the substance, if not more. So if 2% is too much, what say we about 50%+?
Imagine where society is as a species that an actual community of people devote legitimate time & money to this.
Really stew on that, not out of judgement, but genuine concern; just meditate on that and how western society gave birth to that internalized resentment of self.
Seems dishonest to say “Understanding Macrophilia and Femdom”; then be selective in what you address about it, for the sake of selling it.
And the tone is never of true analysis or challenge to study, always benevolent, always a sales pitch, always advocacy. Sounds like damage control.
So it’s not understanding it so much as it is than you selling it, namely macrocreeps who just want to be told what they want to hear. Business as usual.
And if you’re willing to lie as an authority? What are you trying to hide? And if you’re hiding something, why should anyone listen to you?
And if you’re unintentionally ignoring these caveats while speaking on the matter? Maybe you shouldn’t speak at all, not yet.
I repeat: before we go running to the “Feminism” & “empowering” cope thinking that’s justifying the obsession or giving you the fuzzies that society is giving you a foothold in pop culture?
Slow your roll, humanity isn’t that far gone yet to where MACROPHILIA is dinner time talk with little Jill & Jack or teaching this crap in classrooms.
And even if Hollywood lost every lick of sanity and dropped a Macro-Creep movie, you’re still not there: Because it will always be a fantasy.
You will NEVER have it. It will never be enough. It is inherently delusion in principle. Just as beyond our reach as the mile-high goddess is.
Cause even if that (gts= empowerment) hypothetical was valid as an argument, it’s still contradictory to Feminisms actual goal and really makes empowerment look pathetic.
Can’t just tear down the patriarchal, replace it with feminization & expect a working formula. That’s precisely what Macrophilia embodies because that anarchy is where it came from.
So an anti-feminist fetish glorifying inequity & suffering, disparity, division and dysfunction of men and women is somehow feminist.
We redefined and appropriated what Feminism & empowerment is to avoid saying: “Mental issues”, “seek help”, “it’s okay to question it”, “it doesn’t make you a bad person, but what you’re digesting is not healthy or good”.
It’s okay to say that.
“Feminism is a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression
clearly states that the movement is not about being anti male but the problem is sexism(females can be just a sexist as man because all of us have been socialized from birth on to accept sexism thought and action)”
— summarized definition of feminism by bell hooks (& she is correct)
Feminism, the movement, is not about being anti male, in theory.
But Macrophilia is, blatantly.
And as I’ve figured out at the start of 2025, it’s also blatantly Anti-Human. Misanthropic.
How so? When the point of Feminism is eradicating Inequity, not glorifying inequity to the point of getting off on a city being flooded in female ….liquid waste, we’ll say. Is not feminist.
Or creating a new inequity to simulate the security of the womb a woman’s authoritarian dominion via literally being in a giant woman’s stomach (seek help).
And a lot of it is pedo-bait too, doesn’t mean a macrocreep by default is a pedo but this fetish, like any hedonism is a rabbit hole to deeper derangement. There’s no “moderation” caveat here, it will always escalate. If it didn’t, you wouldn’t be a fetishist.
A lot of the time the city bashers are teenage girls, or actual children.
Or scaling it down to fetishizing a little girl crushing a bug or something; deranged, and for no reason. None.
Witch hunts aren’t necessary here, Macrophilia isn’t worth all that.
But this is why kinkshaming, shame, self-awareness, accountability with a point, & criticism to help is necessary. It has to start with ourselves.
It staves off devolution, people are legitimately displaying a regression of intelligence by choice; because to premeditate and share the stuff these people do requires a conscious or unconscious derailment of active cognizance. And moderation is moot when the subject doesn’t grow out of it, but clings to it for decades.
That eventually will have a imprinting effect on how the person sees or thinks certain things are okay, even if their conscious worldview isn’t changed by the fetish.
Even when functional, it’s not healthy, because overtime it will do it’s damage, namely in the hunger for it — the fetishism itself.
Sometimes you’ll see a child step on a toy or something in a show or something: and some fetishist will ADMIT that they involuntarily reacted to that but they’re not pedo’s — Which I don’t doubt. (No, I won’t drop who says this, because this isn’t to out anyone)
But THIS IS THE PROBLEM with the fetish, it’s inherently dysfunctional at minimum, and at worst? Perpetuating seeds of derangement or in the context of genocide, straight evil.
And you can’t defend it, I’ve read 4+ articles most from experts, most of which I have bookmarked: absolutely zero substance.
This is not a joke, it’s a social virus. A manifestation.
The best people can do is pre-emptively control the narrative. Which is red flag number 1# of desperation.
Pre-emptive defense mechanisms because they know they’re wrong.
No one tries this hard, this many times, between so many different people, over a decade to justify something innocent.
This trendy repetitive academic “challenge” to norms isn’t worth it.
Just keep challenging everything until you have nothing left.
Why not challenge the challenge? Why is that not a thing?
The truth of Macro-Misogyny+Misandry+Misery+Misanthropy-philia (Quintruple M) —
is it’s men (yet again), appropriating women to cope with their own issues.
Appropriating women being allegedly empowered, filtering it through a hyper-dysfunctional masculine misunderstanding of matriarchal authority = security = vulnerability = low expectations = license to be a burden.
A community where being a loser/ a burden is not only a good thing, it is the ideal, it’s the point.
Got people on reddit with tags “Tiny/Giant” next to their names — actual adults, NOT school children playing innocent make believe (though I’ve never seen actual children play games this batshit insane), those are grown-ass adults.
Men using a parody of women, carefully woven of their own curated, twisted creation in fantasy where they can control women to be what he/she/they wants her to be; even it’s a force of misery or especially a force of misery.
Keyword: “Force”, hierarchy, a patriarchal sensibility. Majority of the afflicted by this fetish are male for a reason.
And DeviantArt by far, has to be one of the main ground zeroes for this mental affliction:
No matter how big, or toxic, kind, or accommodating she is: Still, the males & their gaze are what’s the “author/lord” of the fantasy.
So the giantess is less than nothing, but what he wants her to be for his/their own agenda , in the fantasy— That Is in control.
Because even a woman on twitter calling herself “goddess tiffany *for example*”, she has no power, no position of supposed “power” unless she has followers that will play along like elementary schoolers & say all the things to enable her roleplay, otherwise she’s talking to herself and has to find better things to do in life — god forbid.
Example: The Universe doesn’t need you to believe in it to be a force of omnipotence, it will exist long after we pass on as it did before we were birthed.
But a Giantess’ is inherently powerless in meta, because without tinies, she’s what she’s always been, a loser, or an inflated tumor. Because she’s a mascot for the “loser” concept/mindset/lifestyle — but now she’s a loser without an audience.
The male gaze, for the giantess, that is god. Man is god:
Insecurity, lacking, brokeness, loneliness, or impotence here in life where they can’t control women, all possible. Not universal to every subject and person.
Or are bosses, family men, successful and still wrestling with something. It’s fascinating.
So the cope is the same as it is elsewhere: Appropriate the woman’s form in fantasy, but here, it’s very socio-politically charged.
Nothing about this (gentle included) communicates “Adjusted”.
The 100% reliance on fantasy, the unreal, the lie, the unattainable, the delusion is red flag #1.🚩Maladjustment. Hence, “powercontrolpowercontrolpowerpowerpower”, even in neutral & gentle context, it boils down to the same outcome.
Dwarfing the value of the smaller thing “compared to her”. It’s the same thing on loop.
Shinji Ikari Ministry, running away, opting out, perpetual failure. The story of modernity’s failure, feminisms partial failure, progresses failure. Failure of generations, plural.
I see NOBODY pointing that out, not even Macrocreeps catch that. Not even in casual conversation. And you live in that phenomenon, you live in that decline, the statistics are real, so how do you not catch it lmfao.
“As a Gen X woman, this describes the past 25 years, which is why I gave up dating . I’m expected to just give and give and give and get absolutely NOTHING back. If I need any sort of emotional support from my partner, I’m immediately dumped for expecting too much. Because expecting reciprocity is considered too much. In my 20s, I had no problem finding decent guys to date. Men do NOT improve with age! So dating older men isn’t a fix. They’re just better at hiding their uselessness. Sorry, Gen Z!”
— Women Are Refusing To Be In Relationships With Men In Record Numbers, And This Is The Brutal Truth Behind Why
(Because it’s manhating buzzfeed, take it with a grain of salt & don’t read the comments, it’s full of bitter misandrist dumping. But the lack of reciprocity sentiment is the key point here that I’m tying to this topic, that’s the point i’m making.)
“The Guardian calls mankeeping a modern extension of emotional labor, one that turns a partner into a life coach. This isn’t about avoiding vulnerability. It’s about refusing to carry someone else’s emotional weight while getting little to nothing in return. And there’s nothing wrong with feeling that way.”
— “Mankeeping Is Why Women Are Done With Dating”
“I’m expected to just give and give and give and get absolutely NOTHING back.” — Hypothetically, this could be a Gentle Giantess explaining how being with a Tiny is pointless. And you couldn’t tell.
🚨Paradoxically it’s about control & surrender.
Because the fantasy wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for reality’s social basis for the emotional feedback that the macrophile gets out of it. It’s not always the parents.
And if they don’t mean for the subtext to come out that way “trivializing womanhood”, that’s my point.
Which I’m sure they don’t, most of them don’t know what it is they’re actually doing, or what the hell they’re communicating but subjecting the internet to their crap as if the Internet is their personal plaything or therapist insert.
They 100% know exactly what it is they want to see to get their grippy Mc.Stiffy’s up or get their Jack in-The Box moist, but these people truly do not know: what they are actually entertaining or playing with.
So when I see another deviantart upload of a woman flattening a city with her rump or just a giant woman’s foot next to a town for some odd reason: I in-fact see the fruit of modern Feminisms labor.
Another exhibit of undisputable failure, you broke men to where they’re not even men anymore. Perpetual boytoys.
“larger-than-life women challenges conventional physical ideals and embodies notions of empowerment.”- collarncuffs 2024
So it’s challenging physical ideals by presenting yet another impossible, grotesque physical ideal women can’t ever achieve in reality & is actually toxic? How is that better?
👁️👄👁️
So what you’re glorifying is- is an unrealistic physical expectation of women. Uhhh I thought that was a bad thing?
So because it’s macrophilia, it’s okay.🙏 And this unspoken rule that fetishes are sacred namesakes to never EVER challenge. But we praise Macrophilia for CHALLENGING traditional norms, but Macrophilia (I repeat) is never to be challenged? How’s that work ?
That means unrealistic body image & rigid expectations are fine as long as it’s in the realms of fetishism? Huh?
That’s beautiful cope, I’m genuinely impressed at the mental gymnastics here.
Trying so hard to sugarcoat this, to make it sound reasonable like ‘Bird watching’ or collecting comic books or being obsessed with Butterfly species and their effect on ecosystems..
Or this assumption Macrophilia Is just something society is starting to acknowledge… umm, no? Are you living the same timeline we are?
Macrophiles are irrelevant, but the trauma they project is so dated, yet relevant.
The trope of a Giant/Giantess exists yes, the Bible, Nordics, Greeks, Comic Books etc. lore has them. What does that have to do with Macrophiles?
Wanting it to represent an experience & or mental imbalances (which is what this is really about, you having a mascot), is not changing the fact that the trope existed before your finger print became legal documentation.
*The trope is not your property just because you convinced yourself to make it an identity trait in lack of actual identity relevant to the world you live in vs the one you adopted because of certain aspects of the world you live in, that you retroactively want to run away from — to indulge in said adopted world.*
And then we frame a misrepresentation of strong womanhood as a “challenge” to conventional physical ideals? what? what ? what?!
Which just means a fetish is a challenge to healthy, functional physiques/prime/desirable traits that men actually prefer to see in their woman, naturally.
A grotesque talking tumor to challenge women being healthy and in shape, which is just obeying a predominant male gaze anyway.
This reasoning is self-defeating, because it’s nonsensical.
“challenge” my digital ass. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Challenge just means derailment to the healthy, or convolute the working formula for anarchy and subjectivity.
Call it “freedom” or “progress” & then blame economics or men when it fails. A challenge by itself is not progress or a good thing.
Notice how challenge doesn’t entail replacing it with something better: just derail, abolish, and leave a void. Destruction.
Everything men want — needs to be challenged. Everything men are, needs to be redefined.
Men aren’t allowed to have any expectations of women, so any traditional norm of women that’s challenged aka complicated, that’s a good thing.
People are just talking just to talk, to make this fetish sound bold & brave, when it’s really making women in the fantasy look frankly vain, selfish, obsolete and overall moronic.
Otherwise, that’s an Interesting double standard.
🚨Narratives like “ alternative perspectives on beauty and femininity” (e.g collarncuffs aka collarncontrivance)
“alternate perspectives” what does that even mean?
Where does this idea come from that complicating gender norms/standards/guidelines/parameters became the new revolutionary? But you build absolutely nothing productive in place of what you derailed.
When that precisley part of the cause of your IRL national declines.
When are you people/ WE going to understand that most norms are for you, not out to get you.
Caveat: Not all tradition is worth preserving, let me make that clear. But a destroying a working formula for transactional subjectivity, is part of how west got here.
When he’s shrunk, in proverbial sense,, she has no real refuge, no protection, no rock. She’s alone.
She has no safe space, he can’t provide for her emotionally let alone physically, or socially, physically or existentially —
And people are told that that’s okay to safely indulge in a fantasy in giving women absolutely nothing, while she provides everything.
This social tumor had nothing to do with women being educated & having options, it came from Modern Feminisms’ lack of accountability and ironically lack of mainstream “challenge”.
And even OT Feminisms warpath to challenge the status quo without foresight of where that would end up. That comes with the responsibility of any movement.
To derail the traditional with their vision of what they think women should be, socio-economic power, socio-political, which is where Feminism ended up. Which is just another supremacy.
— TL;DR you fucked everything up with good intentions and now the path of least resistance for many is to opt out & double down in civilization’s descent to collapse. For some, perhaps fetishize it. People have a problem, and are part of the problem.
From obtaining basic rights to giant women committing genocide with a smile: because “Feminist”
Why is this article even necessary? What happened to humanity’s collective mind?
“Western Society has derailed.” (A succinct, yet foreboding Youtube comment on a delusional macrophile in an interview)
Macrophilia as a malicious belief system: is the successor to modern gender value misalignment trying to appropriate Feminism.
Unfortunately women winning is not everyone winning. That misconception is how you got here.
Feminism is not a one-size fits all, it fits under patriarchy, and under patriarchy is how it was able to give women the opportunities it did.
That needs to be said more, matriarchy needs patriarchy. Women can pay their own bills and still need men to keep the country’s lights on. Feminist “independence” is a very situational ideal, but it’s not realistic.
To help men, it needs to be on men’s terms, not feminisms, not women’s.
TL;DR The size gap serves what Feminism did wrong, not Feminist’s feats or accomplishments; which is the context why people invoke “feminism” and macrophilia in the same breath. To create an association of progress or positive reinforcement. A lie.
The visual Inequity, “Inequity” (something Feminism strives to get rid of, to this day) & the emotions the size gap invokes: is the entire point of the fetish and has represents Feminism’s failure, than it’s Ideal.
Bending what a woman is to conform to an insecure, mentally deranged mind’s misconception, by force if necessary: Is not Feminist or Empowering. It’s mental gymnastics.
A brutal rape of the natural human instinct are “alternative perspectives”, ergo a violation of femininity. Enter: Macrophilia.
That’s why the two do not mix. Trying to conflate Feminism and Empowerment with Macrophilia is a hail Mary.
Oil and water in a cup & you call it peach tea.
And if you need a hail Mary, you don’t have an argument.
“No one tries this hard to justify something innocent, safe and harmless-”
PART 2: “The Nuance”
the bar for what makes an adult gets lower & lower
🛡️Defense #1
“Generalization of Motivation: OP broadly generalizes the motivations of all macrophiles, stating the fetish is only about male self-hatred and control. This may be true for some, the motivations for any fetish are deeply personal and varied. Some may genuinely view it as harmless fantasy, a way to explore feelings of awe or admiration for strong figures, or a simple aesthetic preference.”
“strong figures”, which ties into the same empowerment fallacy already addressed. Appropriating femininity “strong” to mean “force”, which is a masculine angle, a toxic masculine angle (nonsensical term, I’m using it ironically).
So it’s hijacking, fitting a round piece into a square hole and calling it a rectangle — then calling that mismatch a “challenge” to conventional norms, when the outcome is dysfunction & disorder and a painful violation.
Let me ask a very simple question:
Are women are so underwhelming —?
— and insufficient that men need to blow up & parody their strength strictly within the predictable dimension of male understanding of strength which is “force”, conquest & dominance, all to fit their desire for the giant to compensate for their own possible inadequacy and insecurities? Which is what this is really about.
Are women that underwhelming? Are they not enough as they are?
The key here: Is MALE self-perceived or compulsory desire for a state of impotence overrides and redefines what FEMALE strength is for MEN. Not WOMEN.
This is about men using a caricature to hide behind, an effigy of mommy to be strong for the subject, so the subject can take a break from being an adult because (apparently) they can’t handle it, or couldn’t manage adopting a more healthy outlet that doesn’t involve psychological regression, misanthropy and self-erasure.
Which is just toxicity as a hobby, regression, and on no planet is that something to endorse.
Because the question becomes: “What are you regressing from?”
As for “aesthetic preference”, Giant-Man for Stan Lee was an aesthetic preference. Stan Lee had a preference for that aesthetic & took the character in that direction with that power with very low probability that he was religiously “fixated” on it specifically because “big man can do whatever he want to tinies and there’s nothing they can do about it, dur.” A social maladaptation.
That’s the difference. Otherwise if it was just a neutral aesthetic appeal, then it wouldn’t be a fetish at that point.
That’s why “The Incredible Shrinking Man” works so well in the same vein, (so does Attack of the 50ft Woman) it spits in the face of Macrophile narratives in every respect.
Despite some trying twist even that to say the “hidden size fetishism” or “coded” in the 1957 or 1958 movie, there is none; I’ve watched them both, they’re good films.
They have nothing to do with you.
It has size difference In it, and that’s all you give a shit about and you NEED it to mean fetishisms — when it DOES NOT, because the vessel of the obsession has a problem.
The Hulk is technically a “giant”, one of the best executed ones I can think of story wise beside Optimus Prime or Shin Godzilla. Between the body horror, the psychological realms, the variations of his abilities. Hulk, the jolly green giant is a storytelling beast.
For Nancy Archer, it was the mental breakdown, the point wasn’t the rampage, nor was she in the right; homegirl was dead by the end of the movie because of her own actions. Consequences. (the movie didn’t celebrate her being a toxic/public menace,sorry to disappoint you, normies💔).
It was about her mental health & dependence issues: lack of support network, her alcoholism, her abandonment issues from her parents’ deaths when she was so young & clinging to someone dysfunctional because she needed an anchor, even if it was unhealthy.
For Susan Murphy (the love letter to Nancy), her condition thematically was the vehicle away from unhealthy anchors. Untapped potential, self-worth narrative. The modern antithesis to Nancy’s tragedy. Susan’s a decent character, a feminist icon done right.
Mecha for example, they’re literally giants but machines, what keeps them from ever getting corny, stale creative bankrupt blackholes like modern giantess: is the storytelling narrative surrounding them, the context, the agenda, the cultural subtext, the things they can do. The fact that they’re often a plot device of development for their pilots and the story.
What they represent is tied to the story, characters; the plot isn’t hindered by obsession, repeated, recycled dumbass cliche’s relating to insecurity and overcompensation.
And if ‘insecurity’ is the theme (“Neon Genesis Evangelion”), then in a story written worth a shit, there’s a point to that subtext beyond glorifying/worshipping/ peddling masturbatory self-indulgent propaganda of the problem actually being a good thing because: *self-destruction feels safer😩
My acknowledgement for those storytelling vehicles is the actual alleged “aesthetic preference”, actually.
So I repeat: “if it was just a neutral aesthetic appeal, then it wouldn’t be a fetish at that point.” So that counter is actually not talking about fetishists, it’s talking about people like me, the adjusted, at least in this context. We all have things to improve on.
Otherwise, we are too comfortable with this word “fetish”, so comfortable, we tend to forget that it literally means “obsession”, unhealthy.
So the problem still remains, the basis of the theme is wanting to feel something from the visual size disparity, usually deprecative outcome.
So It likely comes from the same place of insecurity, if not guaranteed, even if it’s functional; it’s not functionally healthy.
The gap is necessary because there’s a gap in the mind of the phile in the first place.
Macrophiles get something different from it while obsessing over the same thing.
🛡️Defense #1.5 “While this may be true for some, the motivations for any fetish are deeply personal and varied. Some may genuinely view it as harmless fantasy”,
Harmless, OK —
even if, even as — the subject prefers to see it that way, or convinced themselves to rationalize it as such: Doesn’t mean it is.
If someone fantasized marrying an anime 5 yr old, that’s no more or less harmless than fantasizing a giant woman committing —
GENO-CIDE
It’s all fantasy, so who cares, right? Fiction doesn’t affect reality, despite reality directly birthing fiction. As for “deeply personal and varied”
I repeat: “Macrophiles get something different from it while obsessing over the same thing.”
Or as I’ve noticed over the years: her size is her right to impose her will on other people to the point of harm, and violation (intentional or not) in the fantasy ofc —
because ejaculating to that “Might is right” narrative isn’t imprinting those harmful thoughts into your mind which leads to intrusive thoughts in broad daylight at random times of the day or even gradual whitelisting which is how anyone in their right mind will seek this out— which is indicative that you need to take a break or just may have a legit imbalance. Hence fetish.
But fantasy doesn’t affect reality guys, just ask Japan 2023, everything is fine.
Dehumanizing the tiny as “bugs”, or it’s their fault for being so small & “tiny” & weak (one of my favorite of their lines, it’s so deranged, it’s hilarious.)
And so their gruesome deaths are justified as she’s getting aroused, or unaware, all of which are signs of sanity & something to encourage people install into their brain meats.
You know “It’s your fault for being so tiny”, the kind of shit I’ve never heard an actual 4 year old child say but a grownass adult projecting this shit isn’t grounds for concern.
Whole galleries, aka SHRINES to this stuff.
Call that empowerment or a fantasy or say “not harming anyone” or “who cares?”, or it’s a “challenge”, or the contradictory of “providing a safe outlet for examining these psychological dynamics in a non-threatening context.”
When the entire point is to be threatened even when she’s not trying to hurt you. Or “FEMINISM!” and that’s the best argument you have to present? Lmfao.
Which Is how I know I’m onto something.
“harmless fantasy” is a predictable subjective semantics defense to get beside explaining why they’re fixated on that physicality later in life, how they imprinted on it in the first place isn’t relevant.
A child doesn’t control what it imprints on, which is how errors & misifres happen, which is what Macrophilia is, an imprint error.
Harmless fantasy, they say. But I have yet to hear how it’s:
morally beneficial
evolutionary advantageous
socially healthy
ethically necessary
or glorifying genocide is mentally stable
or the visual hierarchy disconnect (size gap), the visual separation of men from women is a manifestation of something society did right in sex relations, when the point is equality & equity.
You can’t have both.
I have yet to hear even Gemini, ChatGPT, Google Search Ai, or Grok (on LEVEL 99) rationalize or answer that. And Gemini as of 2024 was leagues more progressive & tolerant, aggressively tolerant.
Gemini will shut me down in a second if I’m “oversimplifying” “complex” matters or “over-generalizing”.
And even after I’ve ordered it to pick apart my points using academia/ ANYTHING it can to prove reality wrong, even Gemini had to concede in the end. I can wrap it up in under 3 replies now, it used to be 6–9 max.
And so, to laud genocide, & constantly deprecating your own self-worth in fantasy as a pillow (agency drought), glorifying inequity, death worship, & women being physical impositions as an arousal vehicle. Women as burdens.
I have yet to hear solid reasons or reasoning justifying endorsing this, and it not boil down to semantics, deflections, and excuses.
Fantasy derives from reality, if that’s the fantasy, what happened to your reality?
Nothing but excuses.
Macrophilia is a scary “What If” or an edgy “retrospect” about the human condition.
About how a child’s mind can warp something, deform it’s makeup & damage itself without injuring or harming itself.
And the cowardice of people in authority that just ignore it because no one’s dead yet over it.
(I’ll wait until a car-crash happens before I install a stop sign, because I don’t see the issue; or? I don’t care because there’s no incentive.)
What does it say about the human entity, that we’ll defend something like this that is screaming red flags, but because its fantasy we’ll overlook the problematic implications of what society actually did to people, possibly broke them.
What did you actually create in reality that forced or cultivated actual human beings to indulge in something like that?
“Where did the west go wrong?”
🛡️#2 “Ignoring Non-Destructive/Non-Misogynistic Subgenres: While the text briefly mentions “Gentle GTS,” it focuses heavily on the aggressive, destructive content. It overlooks non-sexual or non-violent aspects, such as benign size difference fantasies, which might make the misogyny claim too sweeping.”
This defense I don’t hear often, oddly enough; but I expect it always. Because If I were a Macrocreep, Gentle GTS would be my first line of defense before “empowerment”.
‘POV: Ok, if your go-to assault on macrophilia is “genocide” what if she’s just a sweet giant waifu, huh?’ —imaginary macrocreep
To keep it short, Gentle isn’t safe from scrutiny either, in some ways it’s worse.
It’s just glorifying “mankeeping” (nonsensical term) & women carrying weak men until burnout. Women of modernity not dealing with Men on their level, but little boys that refuse to grow the hell up. Literally.
How is being a burden to a woman, or her serving & coddling you, knowing 100% the tiny can’t give it back equally — how is that harmless, when women as is are opting out of dating right now (2017-2025+) because of emotion/social labor because men right now are regressive & burning women out because men essentially aren’t men anymore? And Macrophilia reflects that, big shocker.
Harmless? This a goddamn joke right? “Just a fantasy” Is a semantics play, not an argument. It’s a deflect.
SPOILER ALERT: The visual size inequity is the subtext, gentle/unaware/city destruction/ or just a giant woman in an empty forest, or normal woman with a tiny puppy in her palm or whatever the fuck —
the visual inequity of the size gap is the toxicity, that is the societal dent, because the “size-”isms in the compensation, the “giant-”isms is just a pedestal. “Why?” Is the question. People need to question themselves more and stop sharing everything that pops into their head because someone somewhere will like the post, no matter how psychotic it is.
I repeat (again): they themselves only give a shit about a character, a moment, a 10 second clip in a random advertisement or tv show or music video from 9–17 years ago in a dream sequence because it had some giant woman doing something and they get a jolt from seeing mommy on the screen.
They Gif it, put it on discord, booru, whatever they do to feel like they exist.
Absolute fanatics, actual religious people aren’t this dialed in their bibles. Shit is unsettling sometimes. Such is fetishism.
The Toxicity is the inequity, and the inequity is the fuck they have to give in the first place, cause if it weren’t for that character being a Giant in that one episode, they wouldn’t give a shit about the character in any other respect. The visual is the problem. It’s objectification on steroids.
So gentle, wholesome GTS Isn’t an upgrade, it’s irrelevant as a defense nor is it the “good macrophilia” (no such thing) because it’s part of the problem, a lesser dysfunction is still dysfunction.
Why do you need a woman to loom over you & babysit you?
Why does she have to be the man AND THE WOMAN because men want to cower & run away? (metaphorically)
Why can’t you just step up and be what she needs?
Why does she have to be your physical warden in order to be considered strong?
So is a giant woman really “empowering” or did you hijack what an “empowered- woman” is to suit YOUR special needs.
(that’s what this is really about, the sociological mask.
To reiterate: My argument makes itself by the rules the macrocreeps themselves abide by, this is why I kept quiet for a while, and as time goes on, I add more to this because logic doesn’t support the fetish.
TLDR. Manchildren regressing & wanting mommy, instead of stepping up to be what a woman needs, the woman is designed in the fantasy to fit a rigid norm, manipulated & controlled by them to yet again serve the selfish needs of the gaze of the male/tiny disproportionately.
Because what the tiny receives (be it death or affection, in this case of gentle — undivided attention & affection) she will never get in return from the tiny at the same volume.
That combined with a macrocreeps usual derangement of her not being aware of her “power” Unaware GTS (dying of cringe) when the slightest movement makes people around her cower, much to her oblivious/innocent demeanor, so she’s unaware of her supposed “goddesshood” or what she’s capable of:
And she inadvertently bullies people into submission without meaning to & that unaware position of authority is also what gets balls all tingly apparently, ooooh the “control”, oooh the “power”.
“power”“power”“power”“control”“control”“control”
Just the most unhinged shit, you originated from the male but the fe-male was your threshold unto life —and that’s how you portray women?
And I repeat, it was likely unintentional that that was the subtext in outcome.
But this is why I say people don’t know what they’re playing with. When you stop playing pretend along with them, then it’s not playtime anymore.
You don’t just “explore”, “embrace” & give life to anything and everything that’s in your head, children do that.
The point of the adult is to the be the upgrade above being ignorant, impulsive, and stupid. And Social Media just gives people an adrenaline shot to take it to the next level.
Apparently the new redefinition of what we think an adult is is a “Part -time grown up” lmfao.
JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN, DOES NOT MEAN YOU SHOULD #Adulting 101
🛡️Defense #3 “ — Ideology vs. Fantasy: The text elevates the fetish to an “ideology” or “social virus.” While the imagery might reflect cultural ideas, conflating a sexual fantasy with a fully formed, real-world political ideology might be an overstatement that simplifies the distinction between fantasy and reality for most adherents.”
This is the strongest counterpoint of the 3, here’s the issue with it:
The simplification & conflation would only be fallacious if:
the correlation was incorrect, or the basis of the point was a political ideology (which is bottle-necking the definition intentionally; because the point wasn’t that it’s explicitly political, vs it reflecting socio-political shifts) or it was a sheer one in sextillion coincidence or a reach in the first place, example: “empowerment fallacy”
Unfortunately, what guarantees my argument’s validity is the fact that Macrophilia’s propaganda mirrors where it came from, it derives from the dysfunction of the era that’s given it birth and an outlet in the first place.
Second, if they weren’t telling us what it is they’re getting hot on, they’re literally communicating it to us through the propaganda.
So I’m not making it up, they’re telling us, & they apparently need the world to see it because they’re so “secure” in it they need to shove and peddle it online so they can get a “good job”.
“An ideology is a systematic set of beliefs, values, and ideas that shapes how a group or individual perceives the world.”- That includes a fantasy, an ideology is simply: a lens.
The only reason why it’s loosely an ideology is because they themselves repeat a very specific mantra of vocabulary, very, very often.
TL;DR Their version of a woman that is worthy of their surrender & admiration actually is not a woman. Macrophiles’s GTS is not a competent woman in day to day, the women who holds communities together, run for office, researcher, mother (top 3 most important roles in civilization, PERIOD).
No, they worship & exalt their woman, their goddess, the giantess. The excuses entail using Feminism, the propaganda insults women, but this parody of women in reality has nothing to do with actual women, because a Giantess — Is not a woman, it’s a parody of a woman.
Also the “giant mankeeper/babysitter/mega nanny/giant waifu who exists to serve the micro p*nis ” gimmick.
Because actual women as they are: Aren’t good enough, apparently.
And thus her alleged omnipotence enforces the “insignificance” dogma (& it is a dogma/ideology because their comics/gentle included repeat the same 3–6 deprecation slogans and subtle overtones over & over again). They share snuff fantasies on social media, they sometimes share lucid daydreams in everyday life, this is their lens. Some adopt it as an identity for a reason.
Be it preference or aesthetic choice (not) / or 9 times out of 10: maladaptive obsessive dependence.
Macrophilia is very, very simple: Women aren’t good enough, their form has to be manipulated, twisted, & inflated by primarily males to fit the insecurities of the subject (primarily-) male (or even female).
Because if it were secure? Or confident? The inherent inequity of the size gap & size imposition wouldn’t be necessary.
I said “Necessary”, fetishism & paraphilia entails there is a necessity.
Security is security as one is. If you have security, you have an anchor (aka reality), with an anchor, fantasy to that heavy extent isn’t necessary, if not necessary at all (“Welcome to the NHK” EP19 basically).
And the size is as the device, a vehicle to serve men.
The “female supremacy” is just a byproduct, doesn’t mean she really has any control. Because if she’s the size of ….5'000 ft tall, she’ll starve, collapse from oxygen deprivation or go insane from lack of social interaction if humanity doesn’t just nuke her to hell.
That is if dehydration headaches don’t submit her first, that’s the part of the Giantess scenario they don’t show: What happens to them after the tantrum is done? What happens after the subject nuts & moves on?
Well naturally, she dies. The Giantess isn’t a person, representing women whilst not being a woman, she’s just as dehumanized as her victims.
Then “feminism” is the excuse: This same feminism that is one of many driving forces on Earth to end inequality/inequity —
“Feminism is a diverse collection of social, political, and ideological movements, but at its core, it is a belief in the full social, economic, and political equality of all genders. It is fundamentally a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression in all forms” —
Any nonsensical safety net semantic one can scrabble together, pure damage control. Please just don’t say anything.
If the people using feminism as a defense are serious?
Then what we’re really saying is feminism failed it’s goal in being for “everyone”, hence “part 1”.
In trying to end inequity, the movement by putting women ahead then broke men into creating an inequity in their own heads and that’s “Feminism”, that’s “Empowerment”.
YIKES.
The compulsive hunger for the looming doesn’t stem from someone secure in themselves or what women are, or acting on a positive, healthy narrative they internalized to love and celebrate women.
Vs the silhouette of women being ventriloquized to represent an internal imbalance that has nothing to do with women but everything to do with the subject getting their fix, to avoid fixing themselves.
Some even prefer being broken, because facing the source of that imbalance is ‘uncomfortable’, which is why they stick to communities where they will receive zero challenge — because “-I’m secure in my identity”.
All I will say is, there is a GTS writer that has confirmed that they write dark stories that they do, because they had a rough childhood. I won’t out who, or the exact quote.
I usually would, but I’m going to leave it alone; It’s unnecessary. But many do outright share the reason, many do remember the trigger or the moment, or the what happened that pushed them into it.
Or what’s attached to them to this day that’s compelling them to act on it when they don’t have to, but domestic trauma isn’t everyone’s reason, but the reason for the fixation on the gap is 9 to 10 the same reason.
Point being: Macrophilia is not a Green Flag of something done right, you can only try to re-contextualize the fetish to mean something progressive and hope people don’t think about it for two seconds.
Or the best cases I’ve seen is this bizarre attempt to redefine what femininity or what “normal” even is. Which is how Privileged society behaves when prosperity becomes boring.
It reads like propaganda stemming from someone who’s given up. The safety & comfort in being defeated.
It’s only reaching or an “overstatement” if it doesn’t align, it’s not an exaggeration if the parallels match.
There’s nothing worse than someone who I coined as *CONFIDENTLY-WRONG. Because if it were me? I wouldn’t want someone telling me what’s wrong with me without a legitimate basis.
Or proclaiming why I DO what I do, when you don’t even know me, you just want to attack than help and you don’t know what you’re talking about anyway.
I get it. So I’ve challenged myself with all of these counter-points already, I’ve run it over again & again because I’m not trying to be on no bullshit.
And so, If birthrates were rising, loneliness was declining for men & women, if the sex relations were better, opting out decreased: I would say nothing (probably…maybe).
Macrophilia at that point would just be a very odd societal quirk, still with a very eerie ideological consistency….
But note how the inherent disparity & disconnect in the alleged “harmless” size gap perfectly illustrates exactly what went wrong?
Macrophilia wouldn’t sprout or spike when things are great when people live well, not just be successful but happy culturally. It’s the boil of a deeper infection. And I’ve yet hear a solid counter or disprove beyond semantics & weak deflections, because Ai just repeats what articles say anyway, when I break that sanitizing ceiling, the Ai is more likely to see my reasoning, even if they don’t like my delivery. That’s more than fair.
When men retreat, where do they go? Fantasy, indulgence, Man cave, & or addiction: where women can be controlled, shut out, silenced & male impotence will be spun as virtues in the realm of cult echo chambers where manhood regresses into perpetual boyhood.
Again: If it were truly a neutral preference, then it wouldn’t be a fetish. Period.
It’s more than a “preference”, it’s a fixation because there’s an overlapping association with arousal with no biological basis or reason.
Foot fetishism (unlike Macrophilia) has loose biological/neurological basis via “cross activation”, not genetic or inevitable, nor is a designed reproductive feature. But it has neurological basis beyond imprinting & seeing something to imprint on in childhood.
Foot fetishists are still problematic because a zealot is still an awkward zealot, but the sexual association of feet to genitals (foot massages for women can be vehicles to foreplay or arousal even if they’re not fetishists) — that by itself can be rationalized. Because the same can be done with neck arousal, lips, hands, midriff/stomach, legs, etc.
But this one, Macrophilia?……this one is beyond reproductive association or biological logic, the fetish itself makes it very very clear that the point isn’t reproduction or bonding at all, it makes it it’s mission to make connecting with women (even in gentle) obstructed, misaligned, awkward & contrived or impossible. That’s the point.
Thus represents something else entirely, something much more personal, inter-personal, societal, and that is what I’m going after.
“Biological factors
Ramachandran22 proposed that the region in the brain which processes sensory input from the feet is next to the region which processes genital stimulation, and there may be an accidental link between the two. Epstein23 proposed that fetishism may be based on a reflex component within the temporo-limbic region of the brain, and, although usually inhibited, it may be released under certain circumstances such as brain injury.”
— Sexuality in the 21st century: Leather or rubber? Fetishism explained
“What would happen after lower limb amputation? In the Penfield homunculus the genitals are adjacent to the foot and, as one might expect, we found that two patients reported experiencing sensations in their phantom foot during sexual intercourse. One of these patients, a 60-year-old engineer, reported actually feeling erotic sensations in the foot so that his ‘orgasm is much bigger than it used to be’ (Ramachandran, 1993b). Aglioti et al. (1994a, b) undertook a more systematic investigation of several lower limb amputees and found, as expected, that many of them had topographically organized maps proximal to the stump and, often, a second cluster of points on the genitals that yielded referred sensations in the phantom leg. (One wonders whether foot-fetishes in normal individuals may also result from such accidental ‘cross wiring’ — an idea that is at least more plausible than Freud’s view that such fetishes arise because of a purported resemblance between the foot and the penis.)”
— “The perception of phantom limbs The D. O. Hebb lecture V. S. Ramachandran and William Hirstein”
So a fetishist is annoying no matter what, & an obsession in most contexts should be discouraged, it’s not the same as a researcher’s obsession leading to Hyper-space travel, which is painfully different.
But the basic sexual association of a foot kink or a foot fixation the foot-genital overlap is a legitimate neural byproduct.
It’s not a designed feature or inevitable outcome like fertility cues (breasts, hips, waist, supple bottom aka cake/ass/buns etc).
It’s a predisposition that can become a kink or fetish through environmental triggers or behavioral short-coming, but it’s not a core part of reproduction.
Otherwise my operative question will always boil down to
“where is that coming from?”
“why aren’t women enough?”
“what are you compensating for?”
And those aren’t the only questions, just the nicer ones.
Because a foot fetish has an explainable genital association, but Macrophilia basically boils down to bullying someone, wanting a benevolent handler/warden, or breaking someone’s will:
That sounds harmless? Or healthy?
And if the best you can do is “Feminism”, then you’re admitting what you’re defending is fraudulent.
“No one tries this hard to justify something innocent, safe and harmless-”
Part 3: “To be fair” (Macrophilia vs base Femdom)
To be fair — with porn in general, it‘s usually a subject/usually male’s drive that is creating a parody of a woman to serve a function, unrealistically.
This is not unique to Macrophilia and I won’t pretend it is. That goes for any form of erotica for male or female creating a parody of male or female to serve a narrative for male or female gaze.
That’s really the strongest argument a defense could possibly have here— “Macrophilia didn’t invent ero appropriation, that’s porn as a whole.”
Femdom —
The difference here is what is the narrative? The difference is context, agenda, as stated with the foot-genital associations; so there is a difference.
There’s a “Big” difference between a sexy boss lady at work taking top position while she & the male go commando on her desk — where her position in the situation sexually, and in the workplace she is the authority or dominance. Or even outside the office, she’s organically a commanding force.
That’s totally different vs a hybrid representation of both male perceived/self-imposed ineptitude and showing what the consequence of female empowerment at the expense of men, desiring to be the side of an ant. Which the result is predictably tiny men being the sacrifice for the giantesses alleged superiority, manhood sacrificed for gynocentrism.
Be it wanting to feel protected through surrender or feeling some false sense of security or safety in being dominated in every conceivable way, violated even: The word is —
Insecurity, Compensatory mechanism, compensation.
The difference between Femdom & Macrophilia is extremity, a woman having control because of personality or presence is actual “sexiness” (a art lost art these days), a sexual authority the male acknowledges, respects, & thus subjects unto.
There’s a difference between getting your crotch stepped on and being crushed to death.
Compared to that, macrophilia’s “surrender” overtone is really a hideous vehicle in how the relinquishing of “control” can be argued to be a form of cowardice.
Can’t really say Macrophilia is challenging anything when #1 it’s conforming to a hierarchy anyway, hierarchy is primarily a patriarchal construct. So what are you challenging when you conform to patriarchal infrastructural logic anyway?
So? It isn’t a challenge, it’s following the leader, and “challenging” conventional whatever was another pathetic excuse to put someone else in charge.
Kind of like Americans, Japanese, UK, etc. needs women 50:50 in every field except the dangerous ones, but female dominated fields — nobody panics.
So it’s not a challenge or progress, it’s about who’s dominating the space.
When you simply trade one set of rigid expectations for another one, but leagues more toxic, you’re not challenging anything.
Macrophilia is not much of a challenge to traditional norms and more like a competitor with Patriarchy to outperform & see which can be more sexist to men, & misogynist to women.
Macrophilia won that contest. Somehow these cats made Patriarchy look ideal lmfao.¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Because the question is: what is the subject trying to be *protected from?
Feel safe *from what?
Surrender to what & why?
Retreating from what? Being an adult? That’s not healthy. Adulthood isn’t something to retreat from, it’s a state of being, not a job description. So why do you need a break from being an existence?
Notice how the fetish for most, doesn’t manifest from inability to adjust to demand (because a child imprinting doesn’t have a demand, they’re a child), but that’s what it turns into as they get older.
“growing up” & “getting older”, aren’t the same thing.
But it’s not a solution to solve what created the void that the fetish is failing to resolve. It’s a band-aid, not an answer to the actual problem the subject is seeking “protection” from.
That’s a brutally different context, a much more narrative driven mindset vs a simple kink for women in boots or something, or glasses kink, or a long hair because that hot teacher in middle school had long hair & wore a skirt.
Notice how I kept saying “Kink” & not “fetish”, because if anything gets to the point of obsession, you need to take a break, and go find a priority.
I’m not going to sit here and pretend you’re okay so I can vaguely look like a good person, or this generations warped definition of a good person being synonymous with an apathetic advocated for whatever you think you like.
Because then “acceptance” is just a vehicle to avoid backlash, not interested in that.
There’s a twitter/pixic artist that specializes in wholesome giant waifus. Excellent talent wasted on foolery, he drew a wedding photo, multiple of a tiny groom and a wife that had to have been…..600ft tall?
It was kind of sweet and silliest shit I’ve ever seen because it boils down to: “Why?”
Even if they get affectionate attention from giant gentle waifu, she’s the still the one at the top of the food chain & the lesser priority simultaneously.— an inherently unequal, dysfunctional dynamic and that’s the point.
Not the fact that she’s gentle & that’s what maters, because if that were true, she would be their size & still get the same/better outcome. Cause they can actually be ‘together’ — but she’s gentle and more importantly: bigger, thus still better than you in every way, you got to marry mommy.
Whimsical delusion masked as “wholesome”, lmfao.
“Giantess”, is one of the silliest fetishes on the planet. (Up there with loaded diapers & big nose fetishes. )
The “Embrace it = security (as a shield)” fallacy
A Fetishist in retrospect: Is cultivated dependence through fixation. Decades of commitment, one even adopts it as an identity trait, a common coping mechanism for addictive dependence — Identity Entanglement. Keyword: Addict
Because if I adopt it, embrace it, that means I’m secure/confident in it right? Wrong.
Or it means: “I render any future criticism irrelevant to me, I know I am horrible and i love it. Thus it being an issue is omitted from my reality.” right? Wrong.
“Embracing that it’s dysfunctional, embracing being the monster makes one an exception to conviction or accountability.”, Wrong.
Those are the presumed get out of jail free card crap people hope for when people say they “own/accept/embrace” but fortunately, that’s not how that works lmfao.
Mad convenient tho, very very clever. But no one gets criticism/conviction/accountability plot armor for being a clown. And just cause you don’t care, doesn’t make the issue dissipate.
We’d solve the world’s problems in a day, not overnight, within a day — if that’s how life worked.
And keep in mind: I wouldn’t be speaking on this — if they didn’t feel the need to make their issues the world’s business in the first place. Using the internet as their emotional labor punching bag, ground zero.
I repeat, to go as far as to peddle this trash on Youtube of all places?
Doing too much. Too comfortable.
And because it’s not physically “harming” anyone isn’t vindication or a defense either, even though many people want it to be. I hear that cope way too many times from Gemini & Grok “not harming anyone”, until I managed to shut them down too lmfao.
I saw a brotha say once (with kids & a wife too) say that because he felt it necessary to inject that fetish into his marriage and his wife “tries” to work around it “when she can”, which is him saying enough without even saying much. Poor her.
Then claimed it was then okay to have it because it had that much real estate over his mind, he made that nonsense her problem for his own sake, not theirs. Not for her, all for himself.
100% Knowing she couldn’t truly live up to that crap and still dropped it on her anyway instead of prioritizing HER, the WOMAN IN REALITY, over something/ the goddess in his head.
But we’re not going to have that conversation right? On how selfish this crap is, right?
I repeat (on the Gentle GTS context): Is the irony lost on anyone that the tiny in the situation is getting most of the gratification out of the fantasy, in-world speaking? *hence selfish.
Even if the giantess is psychopathic & into it, all the violence or pleasure the tiny gets is one-sidedly more extreme than whatever she gets because the tiny in reality:
can’t do anything for her, not a damn thing, which is why the wedding pieces were so funny to me.
“Because what the tiny receives (be it death or affection, in this case of gentle — undivided attention & affection) she will never get in return from the tiny at the same volume.”
Think about it: People at parallel scale divorce as is, you know how quick a GTS would divorce a tiny lmfao?
How stale that situation would be, isolating for both, psychologically straining that would get for her and him? Constantly not trying to kill her partner, her voice would be a source of pain for the tiny.
And because he’s 100% okay with being dead weight, doesn’t mean she should put up with it.
And because she’s willing to suffer it doesn’t mean she should, that was the impact of Scott’s sacrifice for Louise in “The Incredible Shrinking Man”, after all the crap he subjected her to.
Despite her devotion to him, he made the sacrifice to conceal his existence so she could move on with her life. He did that for her. Real man shit, GROWN man shit. FINALLY he did the right thing.
So Macrophilia is remarkably selfish, because the Giantess, despite the base level companionship, barely — she still, quite literally gets nothing remotely equal in value or outcome out of it.
Despite her being physically greater, she’s the lesser recipient, lesser priority. Because he will always be the needy party in need of her laboring.
The people trying to make this shit cute are sometimes more annoying because they think the lack of violence makes it better, they think they’re safe to consume without conscience. Because how could you criticize it if it’s innocent & no one’s hurt in fantasy or real life?
In lala-land where male gaze controls women’s wills, she’s apparently 100% okay with getting nothing out of it, because she’s just that nice or so unhinged that her benefit is deprecating him & being told she’s a “goddess” by a man-child 1/100th her size, inflating her ego and that’s the relationship. (“Goddess of Law” anyone?)
NOT Toxic at all.
There’s a difference between it being okay to have it, and you want it to be okay because YOU have it & choose not to let it go because you entertained it long enough — now you want to want it, and at minimum you’re imbalanced.
People don’t need to hurt for it to be addressed and corrected. People don’t need to be hurt for it to be a problem, a threat without a follow-up or a middle finger gesture is technically not hurting anyone but it’s still wrong as an insult.
So depicting civilization being trampled to death: nothing about that is in anyway disrespectful to the people pushing the visual TO OTHER HUMANS btw — will never not be incredible to me.
That’s how I know something is ‘off’ in the cranium sector. I’ve met some unhinged people IRL, within 6ft, even they would tilt their head at this shit.
Because you’re peddling this shit to other members of your species that you’re depicting being destroyed: That alone is worth a study, an address at minimum.
For lack of a better expression: “What, actually, is wrong with you?”
Nothing about that is disrespectful or downright deranged? So a joke on Twitter is worth a cancel, but this is worthy of “Exploration” now.
Humanity has fallen that far from sanity? We’re at that point where Civilization has run it’s course to that degree? I don’t think so.
Think about it from their stand-point, they likely desensitized their prefrontal cortex with bombardment and feedback loops from climaxing to that imagery repeatedly.
How the fuck is the addict going to fix their own situation when they’re the addict? Realistically.
That’s what external accountability is for, what’s what we’re for, so why is no one doing it?
I know who I am, and what I’m not. People are going to do what they do, they’re not my children, thus not my embarrassment. And I ain’t getting paid for this shit.
But they don’t have to be mine for me to give a shit, cause yes, someone has to give a fuck to say the quiet part out loud — eventually.
Why. Is. No. One. Saying. the. obvious? (rhetorical)
Nothing I’m saying requires a degree / aka a badge to buy credibility even if I’m wrong. Nothing I say is genius or 12th level intellect.
Very painfully basic reasoning here.
That alone: is a problem exceeding what these people are actually doing.
Their peddled propaganda is merely them acting out, a symbol of their damage but the actual troubling element here is the sheer apathy & this “Who cares” attitude surrounding the fetish.
And people will have this “let live” vibe while living in the decline that Macrophilia symbolizes & reflects perfectly, and then we’re pretending not to see it #1 or #2 you genuinely didn’t even notice.
We need to pay attention.
Part 4: Illusion of Control
How is an animated macabre of a 300–500ft tall woman sprinkling human beings down her throat is in any way “Feminist” or “EMPOWERMENT”. It’s deranged.
(yes some idiot, a human being, not a hormone crazed teenager or a demonic alien trying to sell you that death is actually sexy —No, a human being in human society actually dedicated their life clock to make that & for some fucking reason — that same grown ass adult thought that was cute enough to share for others to digest into their heads. Show humans visage of horrific human suffering & demise.)
Hits different when you stop pretending grass is blue and oxygen is a subjective illusion.
So in through attempting to “own” it by embracing it, is essentially drinking poison and you convinced yourself it’s kool-aid.
It’s actually owning the subject through attachment, deeper association, kind of like the black symbiote from Spider-Man 3.
Thus, illusion of control.
Hence the obsession with control in the fantasy, zero control over self, minimized will, compromised agency/NPC; because through obsession, attachment, control is actually the ony thing you’re giving to the fetish — thus one obsesses over it because you quite literally have no control over yourself. Paradoxical Illusion.
Why do I say this? What is this paradox? Glad you asked, to reiterate: a prison of illusion of control.
So naturally, one commits to making a choice to attempt to take control by embracing the fetish so you can eliminate doubt or the prospect that it is indeed a problem
When the only choice where you’re in control or exercising agency is in-fact by letting it go
but the fetish is all about wanting to be controlled-
And so that’s exactly how one operates by clinging to the fetish for dear life
Thus you have no control, even over oneself
So naturally, one commits to making a choice to attempt to take control by embracing the fetish so you can eliminate doubt or the prospect that it is indeed a problem
when the only choice where you’re in control or exercising agency is in-fact by letting it go
but the fetish is all about wanting to be controlled-
— — — Ad Infinitum
Illusion of control. Paradoxical.
You want to embrace it, when you embracing it is omission of lack of control. You want to surrender to a Giantess (scowling tyrant jacking off on a city or a smiling gentle waifu bot) when all that she is is dependent on the narrative you project onto her, thus you are god, not her. Paradoxical illusion.
Only in reality can one give themselves (not surrender) but give yourself to their wife or partner and it not be a paradox.
Why? AGENCY. Because she’s not a creation stemming from someone’s misconceptions, confusions, or insecurity; a child’s raising in concept can be a product of insecurity or abuse, but a woman in isolation, a person (male or female), is an entity with actual agency.
In fact, lack of control is why many of these people got the “women” metaphorically her stake with a “man” lost in translation.
Or at worst? Lost their blasted minds.
Not because they fell into macrophilia at all, everyone is afforded stupid phases in their life, but so many DEVOTED themselves to it to this day; career devotion, in discords clamoring & congregating like cockroaches, discussing any media or upcoming anime with a giantess in it.
It’s hilarious dude.
That’s where you lose the plot, like what are you even doing with your life at that point, your bloodlines survived for this shit? THIS is what it all led to?
Cause to no one’s surprise & I’ve said this before, many times-
The obsession with “growth” is a direct correlation with a Macrocreeps refusal to “grow up”.🧠
And “shrinkage” is the reverse, it’s a literal metaphor for regression, hence the lessening of a person to a state of weakness or metaphorical infancy, going BACKWARDS to the helpless state of a child. That’s the point of the “surrender”.
A child has to surrender to parental authority, giants. This is why I say “mommy” sarcastically. There’s a purpose to what I say.
Or according to their fantasy, apparently an inferior state of a human that should be abused & used like an object.
Lack of progression, to an extent — suspended development.
Women can be tinies too/or giant oriented macrocreeps, but It is predominantly a male self-hatred fetish, the males are the one’s spearheading it, making short films & shit and controlling the production flow, as usual.
If people put all that energy into your own families, or a funds account for your kids, could fix sex relations in half a month.
Hell put that energy into yourself, go learn a new language, just wasting all that damn time. On what and FOR what.
Because misogyny for a man is hatred of himself. As is a women’s hatred of men, is hatred of herself. Neither would exist without female and male essence together.
The fetish is ripe in societies where men are openly disrespected, abused, omitted from cultural relevance and neglected, and that’s normal culture that boys grow up in.
So macrophilia existing ? Isn’t a surprise. It’s a consequence, an outcome. No exactly strange or weird, even in it’s inherent derangement.
Men building the cities but the women are gods that can do no wrong while building nothing. Empowerment for the women, men get higher suicide rates.
But WOMEN are the one’s that need more empowerment, macrophilia is men wanting more female empowerment guys, said or “theorized” by the experts.
Because macrophilia is such a mystery.
The concept & content of this fetish exposes the fetish. Men being irrelevant to civilization and women, violently or benevolently; him having no essential role, that’s the fetish in a nutshell.
Women above, men below.
Women leaving men behind.
Pedestal for she, crumbs for he.
Disconnect, decline, dysfunction, imbalance.
Nothing of what the brain does is accident.
Part 5: “Where credit is due”
Men wanting to be micro footslaves because they’ve seen enough “#KillAllMen” & “#MenAreTrash” to be convinced that they’re subhuman.
Got to spread it here, there, everywhere because that’s how a virus works. That’s how insecurity works, it’s not secure in one dimension.
Now you tell me how a glorified narrative like that in art, amateur movies, animations, games, wikis, (as of 2026, a mobile game, I shit you not!) etc. etc.
Misanthropic dehumanization as an enterprise “doesn’t harm anyone”, and then explain to me how healthy and or helpful it is for ANYONE to pump epic level self-loathing death worship into themselves for decades on end like digital cocaine.
Nothing but crickets. We can make excuses, but rationalizing it gets a little difficult.
I repeat, even Grok & Gemini can’t explain that shit to me.
Because, I’ll give people credit where credit is due, you can argue emotion semantics 100%.
The “live & let live”, “not harming anyone”, fine, it’s not an argument, it’s 100% cope and deflection: but okay, I get it.
Deflect and hope people back off, that’s the only way it works: IF people back off. Cause it’s not an argument.
That’s really the only logical stance you can take here lol.
But you can NOT rationalize or defend any of it. And everyone knows this, which is why people endorsing “exploring” it, only show selective parts of Macrophilia, not what it actually is.
And only argue surface level content and not substance.
Meaningless statements like Giant women challenging conventional norms, but ignoring the part where Giant women/Even minors & children being fetishized are shown killing people is the iconography of the fetish.
Nothing, nothing but crickets.
“”No harm” is irrelevant deflection because the argument being made isn’t about physical real-world violence — it’s about the moral/ethical wrongness of glorifying, sexually imprinting on, and publicly peddling fictional genocide, dehumanization, misogyny, and extreme human suffering (even effigies of children as predator and victim) as erotic fuel. Endorsing artistic evil (even fantasy), over decades, in arousal format, consistently, devoted sycophant dedication is still endorsement of evil; neuroplastic reinforcement normalizes misanthropy/resentment, because that’s the projection, thus the product, thus the consumption.
Public spamming removes the “private” shield; and no one can justify any positive social/evolutionary/mental benefit — it’s just damage manifesting as damage through obsession as the vehicle, trivializing suffering for dopamine hits. “No one’s actually dead” doesn’t erase the profound brokenness or cultural toxicity: Thus where all this came from in the first place”
This can only thrive when people stay stuck on stupid on purpose & hope nobody says anything.
Even if you tapped into the perfect VR experience of a Giant Woman harming you, violating you in every conceivable way and mocking your “teeny weeny” manhood like a school bully which is basically what this boils down to.
Or coddling you like a goddamn baby, whispering her mighty voice emphasizing how safe you are in her presence, so gentle but unaware of her omnipotent power & bla bla bla Blaaaaaaa.
Men ain’t shit, woman is god, we get it.
All it is is the modern strong woman archetype surrounded by the fickle, skinny, indecisive, apologetic, whipped, weak man archetype we see everywhere in tv shows, games, and movies.
So again, we know exactly where the fetish came from, the abusive west that successfully neutered *enough men to make a dent in both collective happiness, birthrates, and apparently mental wellness, even when functional.
Each generation possesses less adults, and even less men.
Eventually, you have to get back to reality, where women are not your enemy, nor your mile-high nanny, nor your overlords.
Sure you’ve got your parasites & attention seeking grifters calling themselves “Goddess [Insert name]” on twitter & etc. making asses of themselves, with social medias out the whaazoos ready to milk these abuse starved NPC’s for every buck & drip of drool or attention they can get.
Taking full advantage of these issues for their own gain, and feel like Queens in the process. They say something stupid like
“Somebody say hi to me, and maybe I won’t crush your town.” — actual comment
Just the most attractive, 5 year old toddler dialogue imaginable. And they get supported for it.
They just need to play a role and entertain boys they’d never give so much as a conversation to, let alone a side glance or meaningful emotional support if they bumped into them on the street.
*But here, get stiffy from a picture of my mouth, dur. Now we’re best friends.
*I’m going to call you “WOW you all are really tiny!” and you respond to me, and that’s our online dynamic. Healthy.
Just the most depressing shit, this is what human interaction has become. People hesitate more to say “Hi” on the street but that’s what you say online.
Or be that person claiming to use a crush fetish aka abuse glorification as a ”bridge to therapy”; I shit you not, a woman said this on camera with a straight face.
Imagine it, using meth as a bridge to therapy for a drug addict with black track marks on their arms…. Oh what? “abstinence” you said? “Therapy” ?!
Nope, more drugs, more abuse, more of the problem, that’s the bridge to therapy and recovery. Thanks, Jessie Switch. Genius.
Part 6: “these are someone’s children”
Frankly, If mass genocide is cute or hot, what won’t you entertain & internalize into your mind or Whitelisted as a desire? Becomes the question.
That’s what psychologists need to be addressing, “what WON’T you entertain-?” when the fetish eventually escalates?
Here’s the fallacy with the “let live” cope:
(not clinical disorders *because the bar is so goddamn high for academia* but it is a mental issue & maladaptation)
Fact is, when it comes to mental issues being made to be everyone’s business via spreading it on most platforms, we have to keep in mind — — — -(And I’m going to be more brutally blunt here going forward)
The rest of the world is not your brow beaten, misogynist, anti-human, purse whipped little macrophile cult-faction where everyone’s in on it. #1
#2 When you make your issues the world’s business on “social media” not “private”, nor “Your Media” “Social media” on the “Inter- net”, it’s all our business now. You don’t get free-bees, especially when what you packing is that disrespectful.
Cause your shit pops up on searches sometimes, and so, the “let live” luxury doesn’t apply anymore.
Psychologists were ZERO help, & every time I see a macrophile with doubts on Reddit, they’re immediately met with enablement and damage control because the fetishists make it about their condition than it is about the person looking for help.
POV: If you have doubts, & your doubts make logical sense, then that threatens MY confidence in the fetish. So?
I’ll erase your doubt, enable it, bring you back to into the quicksand to serve myself & maintain status quo than help you, which should be my first priority, but it’s not.
So between experts with noodles for spines, enabling articles dating back almost more than 10 years & echo chambers — I did the work myself. Now we’re here.
Let live, in theory, applies ifyou keep it your business, back when fantasies stayed in bedrooms & not turned into online spectacles.
Keep in mind please: (these cats are obviously regular people with jobs, routines, kids, families, but possess an unconventional degree of “functional insanity” or Maladaptive Impairment, derangement.)
Whether here, or anywhere else, none of my tackles are an effort to genuinely dehumanize to go after these people; despite how they take pleasure in trivializing human life like a joke and how much that royally pisses me off. These people are still someone’s children & have a genuine problem, they’re just as much a victim of the society/environment that warped them as anyone else.
Beyond that, apparently, if genocide is a turn on, these people just aren’t that bright. So keep in mind these are (as with anyone) someone’s child with a social/emotional/psychological affliction stemming from environmental catalysts & abuses (not always), but 99% environmental/cultural bondage, and neglect — which is in reality not their fault.
Imprint misfires is responsible for the seed they’re acting on, but they didn’t choose what they imprinted on. The caveat tho, again, is the fetishism is their fault, they chose to take it there, to take it that far and choose to turn it into something far exceeding the effort put into Presidential campaigns. The imprint was outside their control, but the fetishism is a choice. And can be unlearned. *eg. Neuroplasticity*
The process of imprinting on anything is natural. But the initial suggestion brewing in their minds and the compulsion is not normal, it is not natural. And no the imprint didn’t turn them into fetishists or make them do anything, lack of house training creates fetishists, obsession is a behavioral setback.
Babies don’t come out the womb, cuteness at the ready thinking “Swallow them whole, Julie.”, obviously deranged stemming from a confusion planted later in life.
Something obviously happened here to these people outside their control & then they made the decision to escalate it into a fetish.
So despite my aggressive tone (& no I ain’t apologizing for it), they’re (as people)not a problem to be removed, as much as they royally piss me off. The mindset however, that they’re entertaining & channeling ad infinitum is where my criticism (& very apparent eternal agitation) is directed at, most of the time. Because if you’re the one pushing this shit in the first place, then I’m looking at you, obviously.
A mindset doesn’t have power until you “surrender” to or “accept” it, entertain it, and give it “power”.
Then make it everyone’s business. The core of how it got on my radar in the first place.
The crap that goes on in said DeviantArt comment sections, trust and believe, that isn’t going to fly out here. Better ask somebody.
Games, anime, little amateur movies, community, tell your partner, etc. your misery needs our company, we get it.
But we want everything except a solution to what is a blatant problem by redefining what even is a problem or raising the bar for what constitutes a problem.
Which is where Psychologists & most of academia lose me entirely.
”NOO!! you can´t make people get giant and masturbate to it, this is unrealistic”-
A grammatically sound Macrocreep actually said that sarcastically in a group where no one will challenge them & thought they were the clever boy, lol.
All this “teensy”,” teeny”, “tiny”, “little” bullshit ad infinitum like 4 year old children well into your goddamn 60s & 70s, still obsessing over the same 5–7 vocabulary words.
Still looking for the comforting the bosom of mommy & daddy’s domineering presence in some fucked up lala-land.
Listen to me: Just because it’s been in your head since wayback, doesn’t make it your baby, a fetish is not your baby, it’s not sacred; it’s an imprint glitch.
Real men don’t need wardens & handlers like inept man-children with no direction of their own masculinity, or lack thereof, which is what this is really about, a generation of lost boys:
And “Real men” just means “Keep your balls attached & have some self-respect, cause no one’s going to possess it for you on your behalf.”
FINAL STRETCH: “We know where it came from”
Macrophilia is not an expression, and if I loosely wanted to say it is: It’s not expressing anything I’d wish on the children of someone I actually hated.
What is it “expressing” (artistically or otherwise) actually?
the empowerment excuse is invalid, cope
the feminism excuse is invalid, cope
strong women? invalid & slanderous, more cope (all explained why)
It’s expressing rationalizing being a selfish, useless, burden in a relationship.
And glorifying staying “behind”, while women are “ahead” to do all the work in the dynamic. Gentle or Destructo — it’s the same result.
Modern women have to be the man and the woman, while the men bench themselves by choice & suck their thumbs.
Even when it’s just a neutral scenario/ art of a giant woman in a forest, it’s still a narrative of inflating a woman’s importance into a theme of pedestals & woman worship.
Which is where feminism ultimately dropped the ball with the rise of gynocentrism: Pussification of the male, and the male confusing his love for the female, with putting her on a pedestal and thus trivializing her.
Which is what Macrophilia is, a conflation, a social tumor.
“-the male confusing his love for the female, with putting her on a pedestal and thus trivializing her.”
The “Giant-” in the “Giant+ess” is just an unearned pedestal, that’s all it is. Another form of toxic masculinity.
(Giantess: doesn’t mean fetish or 300ft tall; it means Female giant in neutral, which can mean 25ft tall or 7ft tall. Which is why She-Hulk, or a female Nordic Jotun and Arcee are a Giantess, but has no ties to Macrophilia. Macrocreeps do not own the trope, nor do they own the word.)
The Fetish doesn’t work even in artistic neutral, it’s projection of inflating a woman’s importance (a western narrative) or diminishing your (a western narrative). The “Why?” is what obliterates it all.
But Ironically, people will swear on their mama that Macrophilia is some Feminist power fantasy, because if it’s Feminist that means it’s a good thing and thus above criticism.
If you criticize it, you must be afraid of strong women….
(Literally a comic about a giant woman eating her daughter alive, why? Because she was “tiny”….uhh that’s it. You aroused yet? )
“Feminist” Right, nice cope.
This retreat/security/safety/safe space/ reprieve/ this regression is the comfort in being a child, while mommy makes all the decisions, protects the subject from all the bad things.
You are the center of attention (positive or negative), and you feel safe under maternal authority that has control over everything that happens to you.
You were a fetus in her stomach, thus the tiny is nice warm and safe in her/his “tummy”. Aka Vore in general.
Her will determines your fate.
That is soooo attractive, lemme tell you. Nothing more titilating to the female kind than a male who wants to be weak, and useless.
It’s not creativity, it’s a emotional dump with no closure, hence why it’s endless.
Macrophilia, like a lot of modern sensibilities of a “strong woman”, Macrophilia is also a distortion of man’s natural desire for the womb-man.
Contrary to what some people might say to slander or insult the fetish in jest, none of this is actually “weird” or an “incel fetish”. Pathetic? No question. “Incel”? No, it’s the outcome of cultural castration. As I will happily belabor once more.
It’s a Manhood sacrifice rite/humiliation ritual/Abolishment of agency.
Not because she takes the lead because he respects her agency.
His, the tiny’s contribution to the scenario is void, his stake is diminished —and her stake is so exaggerated it’s a deformity, her strength is an anomaly, incompatible with both the male and civilization itself.
That is a Giantess.
And for the shrinkee, he’s obsolete.
Ain’t nobody trying to justify that , I guarantee you this—
A lot of them are in fact: Doubting their manhood, and are indeed afraid or missing something. Including the one’s in relationships.
Having someone doesn’t mean you’re complete, it means you or they were available.
Which is why some (even with a real woman close to them) still feel the need to inject that obsession into the relationship, because she isn’t enough.
Even if the partner is receptive & tries to play along, It’s never enough.
So Macrophilia existing actually isn’t weird, again, it’s a consequence.
Mind you, this isn’t a reaction to Patriarchy’s inequity, males creating an inequity in fantasy as a cope to what Feminism tried to do for the good of everyone, but politically it became a woman centric paradigm, which is why that’s Macrophilia’s anti-reality. Same goes for male giant macrophilia but as you can tell, clearly, the female centric macrophilia in gynocentric society — surprise surprise is the dominant narrative.
Big shock.
Which is why the SIZE+GAP is the core inequity that keeps these people on the plantation.
But the consequence of it existing makes total sense in retrospect, which is why the correlation of real life events, sociologically, is not a stretch, or an overstatement. It’s a very clear, very vivid reflection in the mirror.
We know exactly where it came from.
(I’ve said this before and I’ll keep saying it, “this is not a mystery”)
At best, an embarrassment; at worst, an exhibit of modern society’s failure to affirm women & girls without abandoning men & boys.
We lambast the ideal of the stoic man, masculinity is toxic, demand men be more vulnerable, & when they are, they’re not taken seriously. And now, they’re a labor to women for it.
Nothing they do is good enough:
“as he should”
“happy wife happy slave life”
manspreading
mansplaining
“mankeeping” (to explain my usage of the term, the origin of it is actually to illustrate men being a burden to women via women socially & emotionally maintenance men to the point of burnout, because men don’t have many friends & don’t reciprocate ; the caveat to this is the emotional, psychological, financial, & social burnout women place on men despite how many friends women have, men are subject to vents & dumps. And the fact that men do give back just as much as women do because women for some reason don’t filter how much they give, then the other person is at fault because she overextended, this happens with LESBIANS as well, so men aren’t the common thread, it’s women.
We overlook all that but women complaining about their labor with men is turned into a equity talking point. So it’s a double standard & I have my many reservations about this 2025 “Man+sult” to add to the list of misandrist propaganda, but my application of it here on macrophilia— is simply to mean “inequitable burden”/ “lack of reciprocity” which is the definition of it anyway, even if it’s flawed in real world practice.)
#MenareTrash
Y Chromosome is “shrimpy”
Y Chromosome is shrinking & disappearing
Women are leaving men behind,
Attack, attack, attack, gaslight, fear mongering, attack for decades.
Macrophilia is not a mystery, it’s a spawn. Men can’t do anything right.
Men👏can’t 👏get 👏a 👏break👏
Expecting men to suffer in silence with this simmering hole in their collective chest.
Or if they do open up, then that in itself is a problem or a burden. A “labor”, lol.
All with no societal support on the level that women get: festering in these inadequacies & one of many copes is either blaming women, macrophilia, fetishes in general, obsessions, waifu’s, addictions, or other toxic outlets. Some kind of Idol worship to focus their lives on in lack of a life.
They all share the same theme: Misogyny, and HUNGER FOR PURPOSE, to surrender is a form of service, these boys, just want to serve something (this is instinct, providing for the family is the service), a woman.
These boys need purpose. A stake. You don’t need a degree to piece this together.
And the best our experts can do to explain this- is to theorize that Macrophilia aka ‘Male Self-Hatred fetish’ is a harmless fantasy/ manifestation of men wanting or desiring more powerful women in a society that is already gyno- (Female) centric. Illogical.
A man that’s empathetic, doesn’t have to be vulnerable.
A compassionate man can be vulnerable, but he is not a weak because vulnerability is not the same as an emotional man.
They’re not the same things, but we don’t make that clear to boys—
So men sometimes confuse vulnerable with just being a weaklink, an emotional floodgate. And then find safety & reprieve in essentially being a helpless baby.
Society got what it wanted, a defanged, sterilized male: (key word) NON-THREATENING boytoy.
While not knowing what it was asking for, actually. And Macrophiles mindset are a partial result of that misunderstanding.
The loneliness rise for men AND women? Is more tangible evidence. Just another “gap” of separation, just like the size gap, disconnect.
Otherwise the only way the Giantess is superior is everyone else has a handicap? That’s not power, it’s a crutch.
That’s like calling yourself a “god” because you can beat a 2 year old in a fist fight. Color me impressed.
Like, If the only way you’re omnipotent is when everyone else is handicapped: That’s Pathetic & silly.
Train your children to be secure in order to produce “adults”, not produce more grown-ass children cosplaying adulthood.
Men simulating being castrated verbally, emotionally, socially, or physically; or just her presence is so overwhelming he has to monologue (to us, the reader) how “insignificant” he is “compared to her” —
That one’s a very very very popular line, it’s heartbreaking really — when it’s not gut wrenching hilarious.
It’s just a castrated buck (the author) narrating that they have no stake in the life of the modern woman.
Now you tell me how that’s harmless & not worth outreach or a single “F” to give. Male isolation & generational destruction is something to “explore” & “embrace”, absolute disgrace. Disgusting.
It’s either symbolically the consenting or forceful erasure of masculinity. Or trivialization/mockery & destruction of femininity — usually it’s both.
Everyone catching hands from the subtext.
Macrophilia is the epitome of the concept of “overcompensation” which is why the writing in their craft is frankly, absolutely, god awful, even as a neutral critic consuming a medium: HORRIBLE products with good production value, but with about as much substance as an air sandwich.
Please hug your kids, build children up while they’re small and vulnerable or risk them remaining that way forever, imprisoned inside their own mind, and all that that implies.
Not to stave off Macrophilia specifically (you’re not god, you can’t be there 24/7 nor control what they imprint on), but to prevent as much complication as possible, period.
Being a macrophiliac can be unlearned, a child doesn’t choose what they imprint on, but to make it a fetish, is a choice.
Neuroplasticity —🧠💪The Choice
Neuroplasticity proves this Macrophilia foolishness and fetishes in general are hardened concepts through behavior, not cemented in nature nor permanent.
We, society are very quick to forget how malleable the human mind is, how easy it is to break people- or the truest extent of what people will normalize (no matter what it is) in order to cope with something else entirely.
The one’s claiming they embraced or owned it; are often compensating the most, subconsciously. Like wearing it as a badge of honor, to impress who exactly? To convince yourself? Bah, trying to convince others to convince themselves that they’re A-Okay, bold strategy.
For decades on end, same feedback loop, nothing but stagnation.
It’s why, despite some making decent art (in STYLE only)- their content overall sucks pure donkey ass.
It looked better & better every few years, but things kind of leveled out/fell off when they started making better animations, then the art scene got somewhat redundant; the best artists already peaking what’s possible and then Ai was like a shot of adrenaline so the impressionable talentless members are really going to go nuts with this foolery and they have — as I saw coming.
Whole thing’s gotten dry nowadays ngl, even for comedic value It just lost it’s bite, it’s so boring now.
pov: “I’m insignifcant compared to her”
Macrophile “content” aka propaganda lost it’s edge, no cap.
But despite the aesthetic improvements, it’s still absolute garbage.
Like a pile of shit sprinkled with pink diamonds, on a dinner plate & the experts told you it’s a chocolate sundae.
A misconception trying to justify itself through repeated, forceful exposure.
(Because if you numb yourself to it, then it’s not a problem anymore right? Wrong.)
All a compensatory mechanism for something totally different from what’s being projected & yet so clear/way different from what you see is not what it means.
Hoping anyone sees that projected trauma, horror & pain and then says “good job, more pls”.
Not it. I take a bizarre comedic glee in the fact that some of us will be well into our 60s-70s still on this same exact bullshit, like a glitched NPC, stuck in the same dialogue loop until the video game is just turned off permanently.
Yet another means to defang the human being, another form of generational bondage.
