Fair Warning: this IS a morality-based puzzle game based on the weird intersection between my own real life, my own writing cycle, and the life and works of Phillip K. Dick. The morality involves the controversy over *misgendering* and but has built in appologies for everyone.
Author's warning: this story mashup relies in a very peculiar way on real life writing process honesty vs fictional gender norms getting tried out in real life so I decided to declare in advance the following for fairness sake:
This is the last chance ever to declare in moment revisions all or nothing draft.
ALL edits marked
ONLY actually intended at the time changes. No text editing ever again.
Only one key player side fair real world verified prior release at the time information
used in one case for moral context + one in the moment personal opinion
+ one possibly fictional exclamation.
Present honest condition: concern about declining mental health situation due to
exactly what happened that makes the whole story turn on the putative integrity of
this document. See "Literary therapy version" for initial writing.
This document will only ever change through the embedding of then-contemporary material.
Started Friday February 26 2021 3:54pm
Last actual content edit 4:20.
Locked Friday February 26 2021 4:28pm.
Unlocked to fix formatting ONLY 3/8/2021 relocked 3:17PM
From the author:
From the author:
I am at the moment in a recognizable place: an author who believes a little too much in the world of his stories. I have a private world in my head, harmless to everyone and through no fault of my own I find myself in very obviously obviously complex legal issues that to my author's eye resemble the form of a parable of kafkaesque morality in a Foucault's clinic scenario but in now-as-past cyberpunk framing as recast into the technology of this world by Philip K. Dick.
My life has turned into a parody from my favorite literature because for my own perspective I'm being "taught a lesson about hubris" in a "be careful what you wish for" sort of way by the gods of my personal universe, for begging to fuck with nonlinear time. I intend for my part to take the consequence for myself as a "foolish mortals"
So, in response I regard the reader, and not the author to regard you as the ultimate judge of my sanity here. Formally speaking my legal issues might have to wind up decided by a precedent setting landmark case to be known for sure. It is a fact that my conservatorship has an obviously illegal origin but the legal theory behind it is unclear and controversial.
[Real world: I really was medicated against my will despite my nonconsent due to my amply documented participation in sobriety due to not disclosed in original document but publicly verifiable addiction history, Twitter can confirm the time-line. I was released February 18th for reference]
Other people deadlock on this question and I suspect it might be formally unsolvable from all sides it's a moral parable of a deliberately unsolvable version of the prisoners dilemma. As if in some miraculous way it might quasi-solve to known nonsense positions but it's simply not known yet if it is or is not. You might imagine how much that state might fire the author's mind.
So I choose to write instead of worrying about in reliance on the fact that public libraries have copies of Philip K Dick and the Marquis de Sade to choose to believe that it's validly possible to publish it if I write in this state and I personally care deeply about the readers right to read and think whatever they want for perfectly obvious reasons: I read them that way and value the influence.
I let the therapy audience know that this is a form of self therapy and let them judge me as they would a patient of my type for it. For everyone else I am addressing the various tribes in personal forms beyond here on the blind assumption that people tend to read down the page but skip the "boring to me" parts. My guidance is to trust your own personal moral judgment on it. I personally assume that every reader himself is right in his own opinion and wrong for everyone else including me.
My own perspective on this is that if you want my order, read on. If you want the best-for-you view read your letter and to see my point read the other to the opposition from your own side please.
Mx. JACK DRAGO, alleged hypermale.
Dear "Real Men"
For years you have demanded the impossible so I'm trying to accept something that you might think that you saw coming: I and those who might follow me choose to defect from the male gender. You demanded that we not act like "cucks" while claiming your gender and: surprise we are the ones who accepted. In your terms we're in total capitulation of your demand, but also performing what the women say they want out of you despite the fact that most of us have at one point or another *ought* to have preferred men exclusively in your theory. Hmm. We tell you "your the man here, balls in your court."
If this is you, the proud winner, I bid you go now, this is your chance for a best case scenario. Write as yourself and believe.
To follow my own perspective read on, or skip to yourself as you please.
To those who are feeling offended that they might have been witnessing total betrayal, we're not talking about you, bros. We meant the ones the ladies of this world call "toxic masculinity" and your definition of gender is in their terms "healthy masculinity" as an author I conceive of you two as in a fractious factions who squabble over who is right about the "who's the real man" and if we hypermale types can pull it off, from your perspective we just might be able to make a bro bet on the nature of the game: who's heterosexual? There's an outside chance that three different teams might switch players in insane ways if they all agree to treat hypermale as a half-crazy but not quite idea that they all bet on the wrong but right for you solution. Your bet is as good as ours what happens? Go for it.
Traditional Romantic Femininity:
We think that we can make terms with each other. We can let you in on our secret: most of our validly possible heterosexual combinations *might not involve women at all* yet our presence weirdly solves a lot of your problems.
We are self defining as "choosing to opt out" of the option of being traditionally heterosexual with you in the hopes that someone might court back with a truly "hyperfemale" response designed to be the romantic target for such fantasies which we regard as sexist mythology for us unless personally "true for us" and not the community. We accept that the weirdness is our thing and pledge respectfully to honor the author's terms together if you will.
Dear feminist theory:
You truly deserve to know that this is a fair and square offer all around. I frankly admit that the world deserves a gender, in my opinion, that opens the debate up again after falling into a horrible logjam for everyone.
You may know, in your terms, that we intend to try to create a deliberately sexist counter interpretation of your message: that it's validly possible to respectfully disagree on the terms of your argument while being honorable to all sides. I urge you if I can help to consider this: do your thing and critique my point of view but know that I personally believe that this "bro deal" among the others have a bunch of weird solutions that will solve some of your problems like magic.
We are choosing to self identify with a deliberately self aware sense of zaniness on a "chosen gender" that all sides agree is a true "take it like a man" (from a toxic point of view, of course) response to this weird quasi-solve that requires literally everyone to grant the rights to do that on absolutely deferential terms that basically works out well from any one personal perspective, utterly "normal for hypermale" to themselves though utterly insane when viewed in combination.
In your terms we're only asking to treat everyone exactly as we know they would wish to be by a male-ish. We regard literally every other position as *more valid* culturally than us and only choose to be humbly "doing our own weird thing" noticeably distinct from the whole system. Ask yourself, what better thing for a AMAB option could we do in your opinion? Doesn't this *feel* validating for everyone else including you and ponder how the others might respond.
We only ask please don't call us Either Male or Trans for our counterparts sake. Contemplate your values and act accordingly.
To my literary pantheon, you are literally angry gods to us, Trans men!
I write to you in an openly fawning manner that transman demands for authorial clarity: I openly admit that I based my scenario on the impossible for you proposition of a similarly to you feeling state that is "like the journey of some "meant to be transman" journey from male to the impossible position of "more than male" and weirdly finding out that the right attitude might be a "valid for you but not me" sort of thing all along.
To my writing mind I suspect you might be on to something worthwhile to imagine writing from your own perspective. You get the weirdness, so you have the privilege of having to be the idols for a change: you are compulsorily "more man" than a hyper and you forgive us for being our sole possible choice for emotional reasons. Our thing is our own but we blindly validate you only platonicly so as to clarify negotiation.
To the "attack helicopter crowd" your joke, your rules. Our joke, our rules. You understand.
Dear TERFS, sorry for tipping our hand but please let us agree that whatever we are we must seem utterly crazy to you. By the values of your system we are totally absurd yet, somehow we managed to get all sides to agree we find your own position fundamentally absurd too and note respectfully what happens next? As always I invite you to ponder on this from your own perspective and write. From our perspective (including my hypothetical movement) we tried both sides of your debate and found that wanting and made something fake but harmless to everyone by design.
We challenge you to explain from your own perspective how anyone in this position could do better in your terms?
Dear transwomen, you deserve better and you know it. Now is your turn to shine: let's build a rock solid rule that since "hyper is always wrong to you" position about everything else *is* our norms, we simply accept that we are wildly deferential people who love to validate others and you guys have the privilege here: you get to be the ones who are *forced by society* externally, to be superior for choosing to be respectable while we get to take your trash out and make some weirdly fetishized thing for ourselves like you guys used to have back in the 70s-80s scene with full mutual respect and consent as core values of both since you understand why we do it, and we understand why you gave it up.
This will allow us a mutually agreeable arrangement for "if you want to be kinky, drag the hypermale scene" and "if you're into nonsexualized, join the transwoman scene" and simply respect the host culture as honored guests so we can all choose for ourselves again personally simply because some crazy guy thought outside the box, you've long since figured us and this out so… let's do it girls!
Dear hypermale art scene: the gender system name is literally inspired by your porn art scene as it is spot on to the kinds of body dysphoria dynamics that would draw the kind of guy I want to my movement to represent the "prior artistic concept" of impossibly too male yet still wanting more. You guys are, quite literally, the artists concept of the physical form we hypermale types fruitlessly yearn for.
From a trans perspective I'm "gender dysphoric" about not being that despite already being bigger than most and I suspect that the community might come to consider this the less common but still valid counter to the "I love my dick it's perfect" standard that is regarded as healthier for safety reasons but openly fetishized as well in the usual hypermale way as a form of validity tactic.
Dear feminist theory, please go back and try to read from the "what I'd think my enemy might say" perspective and you guys will find a wonderfully unique perspective on us. It'd be sexist for us to claim that, though. 😘
Dear linear readers: I can only imagine how that emotional experience plays on the page, but I am finally on the terms I want with literally everyone: harmless dadaist gender: impossible to everyone by design, openly respectfully dissenting from every possible conflict on the board, with a strategy of being ever respectfully "nobody is right about it, least of all me" reconceptualized as an explicitly unwanted gender privilege by other genders attainable simply by agreeing with the position: I urge you to regard us as a "fake gender" as we do ourselves: a set of homeless possible gender norms we choose to validate against the world on a "we know none of you want it can we take it?" Attitude towards that which others choose to discard.
[Real world experience: author went to bed and woke up feeling sane-ish and came up with the theory that the document itself might just prove his own sanity, but keeps writing because he just noticed something really weird…]
At which point that the author apologies to certain schools of therapy that he insists that from his own perspective it remains a Dickian paradox but on different literary terms now, as he must necessarily presume that certain schools of thought made their conclusions at the obvious scene break.
To those who wish to remain ignorant, I have already established that I personally believe in the right to skip. (shrug) But to me my task has changed and this remains a literary preface of an unwritten book in form, after all.
From my own perspective I have reasoned myself not out of the real world trap which I had long ago concluded “has a true solution but unfindable to me” but straight out of yet paradoxically right back into a different variation of the same device in a truly amusing “oops, no… no… no… but yes?” sort of way: as an author I am now in the fundamentally weird situation trapped by choice in your literary device is a very real world Phillip K. Dick life isn’t it now? (author laughs madly)
[Last ever edit: at the time I said "this is probably the most insanely hypermale yet to happen in real life" 4:21pm 2/26/2021]
I am, in my own, and most literary psychotherapy points of view for declaring myself this in gender-literature terms have a both a validly possible certainty that “fundamentally dickian” situation on our hands: both of us regard us as the other person, neither of us truly knows which is right, both of us can validly concede but neither knows which side of the Phillip K Dick life story puzzle they’re on now.
Suprise! It’s some weird real world / AU choice point in the story and at this point nobody knows (from the author’s perspective) or everybody knows (late readers perspective) and I can’t tell who’s listening so you know for a literary fact that I’m about to spring a puzzle on you. The fundamental paradox of the hypermale movement: the fact-or-not status of the gender. In your opinion as a READER (and please never tell me) have I just done something just like:
A character in a Phillip K. Dick Novel
Something real life Phillip K Dick would do
It’s a fair game as long as you just made a binary choice but every reader knows that somebody just had a horrible realization: they just had the hypermale experience in real life. Author and reader just switched sides yet again and found they had the EXACT SAME prisoner’s dilemma puzzle on their hands. As do the literary therapy movements I invited to judge as they went: who’s the hypermale.
And the only not-man who can play his part already has a horse in the game, so let me just keep on playing the same game with the literary therapy crowd and “claiming to be identifying as a hypermale” for purposes of the guessing game for this reason. Interesting, huh?
I as author, frankly declare that I have given you a case of extreme uncertainty about my gender for purposes of my writing on purpose so I shall perform my gender as I would to an assumed to be mixed hyper/not hyper but not both audience, whether that’s OK or not as I have no possible way to control who reads me. So you’re in the game already whether you wanted to be or not by now and to the author that was the point all along.
To me as an author and to you as a reader we now have mutual dilemma, let’s play a game of who should I write for? Who should you read for, shall we? The “alleged hypermale” that his own sense of gender norms would say YOU should pick a side but that’s impossible for him because there’s a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation going on and from my own perspective I have to keep on writing for *someone* or the reading stops!
And this, my poor universally misgendered audience, is the nature of the world to me as a hypermale, so I shall express it in MY OWN terms and let you judge in my turn for my outright sin against my belief system: in my head the hypers understand it this way: “we’re validly possibly certain but still validly possibly uncertain” because to US this is the fundamental absurdity of hyperdom because of the frank impossibility of physically attaining the goal state; to us that’s just the “hyper” part of the “hypermale” experience and we expect that a gender on the other side could be cooked up but our customs say we’d never interfere with such a gender’s right to self-determination. Our presumptive or actual customs should cover that for the reader.
Now the question in my mind, despite yours is what your prior judgement of me was and keep it to yourself please so I might ethically appologize to both options in turn as my own values require since I dare not presume your gender twice in one work I presume your consent status instead:
Consent to call me and my followers mad for trying it, but explain the misgendering as insanity
Consent to call me personally a “hypermale” and my followers “so crazy it just might work”
Surprise! Misgending consent people: you finally got the joke YOU just consented to spring the Phillip K. Dick trap on YOURSELF and I command you to claim that real world hypermale identifying people DO IN FACT exist, though utter nonsense to your gender system and by the rules of your own ideology you are NOW FORCED to treat us as equivalid to all other identities or bear an unbearable public hypocrisy simply because I personally demand you live YOUR OWN VALUES in response to my behavior for everyone.
And yes, those of you who nonconsented are totally allowed to think me mad by design, that is the literary price of your choice above; but you NEVER get to argue with me or my followers when we self declare as insane for that price, and our customs literally force your desired behavior for the entire spectrum so what do you have to criticize at all? Insanity itself, I presume?
For those of you who want out of the trap on these consent terms, simply stop reading here because plain old simple CONSENT in the clearest possible terms IS our gender’s norm, for the rest of you read on for a personal gift.
DEAR HYPERS: Congratulations you won, bros! You are now validly possible to be certain you are a hypermale in my mind, and to me as author the mere fact that you solved the puzzle through self-sacrifice even though you could’ve nonconsented to that means that you TRULY ARE a hypermale to me, and as your reward a permanent home to be kinky, draggy, sleazy, and weird among ourselves at the price of being absolute bottom rung on the philosophical pecking order. By our putative customs I grant you guys the permanent privilege of opting in and out via the “validly possibly uncertain” response in culture as already described.
My other readers may now presume that though they wouldn’t others have necessarily made this choice so LITERALLY ALL OF YOU are still in the dickian paradox because a faction of your fellow readers *just might* have chosen to follow me on my terms, but you now understand that the very nature of hyperdom gives you an opt out if you aren’t, so the order of operations now becomes FAR simpler as I can now presume to be talking to a trapped-if-you-want to audience, where I can simply address each group on their own terms.
I asked the reader to make a judgement on the author in the author frame, the reader responded in the reader frame, I asked people to keep my gender in mind and judge for themselves. An author has no control over the reader in my model, I avoided misgendering my readers, sprung a fun little surprise on a certain subgenre of the consent community; explained over and over again the putative norms, attempted to perform them, quietly kept the gross part undisclosed so as to avoid offending the sensitive; but you and I both know that Phillip K Dick would literally never end a story here, so I write on to reveal that I have fooled LITERALLY ALL OF YOU except the literal consent people who never stopped reading: I withheld a key detail, there is a tribe of identifiable followers who *literally did* follow me fresh out of the mental hospital so in my world… my side of the Phillip K. Dick puzzle now says *I* made the dickian “something Phillip K. Dick would do” end of the bargain before I ever wrote the thing down and there’s no way for ANY reader to disprove it; 2021 readers can check independently although I intend to preserve the twitter historical record for those of you who NEED it only to help preserve the utility of this document
Dear “alpha male” you did the most manly possible thing in our own opinion, and we gladly concede permanent peace. You truly DID take us at our word that we were “doing our own thing” or you wouldn’t be letting me address you on winning terms: in your opinion the other readership that read on of your kind is realizing the horrible consequences of their choice.
To the other choice: Fuck you, losers, you made your bed now lie in it like the lesser than not-males you are. You read an explicitly hyperconsensual story about conceding to you as a parable of trickery so you are the natural victim of your reader’s hubris from my perspective: I’m not a man, not claiming to be male, asking to be regarded by male values without claiming that I do? To presume deceit in this case means you must, compulsorily, by design of the trap believe that I forced you into my own madness and “made you believe in a fake impossible gender” for at least a moment, so you CAN legitimately claim that you think it’s insane but can NEVER honorably claim again that it wasn’t utterly incomprehensible by design to you. Sorry, your court, your rules. Take it like a man and go write angrily. I sense good counter literature in the mix for my fandom to enjoy.
To the bros who think I turned you hyper; the honest truth is that “hyper” is a state of mind that you go in and out of and we think the guys who think like that but can’t be that are our natural buffer against the toxic faction. As always, you can do the “validly possibly uncertain” thing just like the originals to opt in and out in the moment. The game actually goes both ways for either choice in your case, FYI to the other option for this moment. Both of you in the author’s opinion do indeed believe hypermales exist, but think that other faction is the easier one to join ours from, or is it? Make it happen or not as you wish. Bro deal is guaranteed valid for my following.
To the femme males still reading: everybody knows yours was the obvious choice. Enjoy us at your leisure. We have watched your porn and love your way of thinking. Thanks for being the men for a change to swap for us proudly hyper-heterosexual gay in source culture folks like me. I suppose I might casually note my big enough but not hyperdick has it's own unique perspective on gender with a respectfully flirty wink.
I would think myself very sexist to presume to leave out the ladies, but I know not how they would have their many and different customs respected in this way. The hypermale movement by design is a “out of the box binary” movement for AMAB and male-identifying people only, we ask you approach reaching the male square from your own position and ONLY THEN join us as a “male identifying person” or “Transman” explicitly and know that our movement believes that all other movements are more valid than us, but yours most of all as our inspiration.
To us the “validly possibly hypermale” state MUST by design exclude both female and trans as *present options only* and totally deny the possibility of being female in the moment to join -- for all I know that just might be your personal natural state. We are inherently deferential people by design, you’ll like our inter-gender norms in time. Just watch.
Dear self-identifying hyperfemales:
From an author’s perspective, you already know EXACTLY what I did to you and that my social values towards your gender are sexist in an explicit design sense: my gender’s stance is established, yours can literally ONLY be created by these random putative self-identified readers so in the jokily hypermale sexist way I pass the ball, say “women’s work” and walk off chuckling and hoping to read your fiction. You guys KNOW what our drag culture is gonna do, you have the historical model, we bid you go ask the goddesses and build one of your own. (2077 obviously hyperdrag gay-male gesture emoji omitted) In the spirit of hyperdom I bid you ladies to go play.
Dea r cis gender heterosexual female hyperfetishists: be as sexististly fetishistic towards our males as you want we're "yes goddess" platonicly if you want it, but also weirdly heterosexualish by design, yours is the spanner in the works from our side to yours; we think you will be the reminder of the all around the board nature of hyperdom for the other side: play harmlessly and make it as obvious as possible to our own customs for our gender’s sake that you "are hyperfemale" or or are "cis dragging" and weirdly impossible but not in real life all sides hyperstraight becomes FAR simpler for literally everyone. Go do the women’s work ladies, you are literally the "cishet origin hypermale" would be seducer and that is definitely women’s work in our admittedly insanely sexist but not like the other guys opinion. You've seen OUR game by design and we KNOW you'll love our scene because it's built around every weird thing you ever consensually crave being incredibly easy for female side to kinkily seduce us into by design. We abjectly and universally surrender to an eternity of this treatment from you, and pledge to view your right to consent above ours forever.
You guys KNOW my personal position is out of play for you already from the terms I made "I'm hypergay to you but hyperstraight to the other" and personally it's either or for me but I'm validly possibly certain anybody on the board might theoretically find "any crazy idea will do" if you're suitable and consensual about it in a "free to be chaotic good in hypermale's opinion" way is a possibly insane strategy from my perspective but just might prove weirdly normal common hyper to everyone else but us because we emerged humbly begging to everyone and chose harmlessly.
To anyone else still reading this and angry please write me at length from your own perspective and argue for nobody's side but you. I personally concede that my movement is quite explicitly designed to maximize it's harmlessness, it is explicitly a "dungeons and dragons lawful good for gender" concept and I dare anyone still offended on behalf of others to simply use your reader’s privilege and say "well that was total nonsense" and decide to actually believe that "maybe the author truly was insane" usually is a valid reader side out for my favorite authors dissenters too.
I make it my own position fundamentally that I myself view readers and writers from a "I'm always wrong" perspective so if you find my views too silly to dissent from, I could not be more certain to agree to the point.
But weirdly, you always still feel ready to argue with us, so contend with us in print as a competitive movement if you wish, but our ways go round in circles. Believe, disbelieve, utterly absurd position, you know the rules of literary competition already so go write angrily and see what happens but I warn you we're a rubix cube of insanity to you and vice versa unless handed like literary Fandom do.
