Tribadism im

I read a book that introduced an evolutionary theory for the ongoing existence of lesbianism.
Wait, just hear me out -- the book ("The Traitor Baru Cormorant") features a lesbian MC who lives in a fictional, homophobic Imperial society that frames lesbianism (or "tribadism" as its referred to in this world) as an abnormal sexual behavior that is correctable with therapy and other more severe interventions.
The character, Baru, is originally from a culture that was conquered by and culturally assimilated into this Imperial society. In her native culture, homosexuality and polyamory were normal occurrences (Baru herself came from a two-father one-mother home).
At some point in the book, Baru, who has been totally conditioned and raised into this Imperial culture and in position of an extremely scientific mind, is struggling with a need to justify the biological existence of herself ("what is the point of me? If I am purposeless, biologically, how is it that I have come to exist?"). At some point, another character introduces a biological justification for the existence of lesbians.
Finally, we get to the point of this post (thanks for sticking with me to set the context!) in a nutshell, it says that a) overall, women are wired to be sexually competitive amongst each other in order to score the finest mates and thus produce the finest offspring, and b) but survival and child-rearing are hard, nigh impossible without groups of people working closely to together. Thus, c) WLW ("tribadists") women who have essentially "dropped out" of the race for the finest mate, play the essential role of legitimate lover and care-taker for other women. In terms of sexual competition in evolution, they are a neutral party, and this is important because women need each other to do the labor of taking care of each other and each other's children.
It's something like that. Its been a while since I read the books, so I am probably forgetting things.
I'm wondering 1) does anyone one know if this is a legitimate theory of social evolution? I find it intriguing and if it is something that exists outside of the author's imagination I'd like to read more about it. 2) Thoughts and opinions???
Also 3) it's a fantastic series. Not for everyone, but the trilogy ranks among my personal all-time-fav books.

(Draft and notes; not finished yet.)
I’ve been asked to respond to a top-level comment from /AcademicBiblical on the terminology of homoeroticism in 1 Corinthians 6. If you ask me, the comment falls a little short of the typical standard for top-level comments there — due to a preponderance of unsourced (and dubious) claims, with only the vaguest of gestures toward citing a comment by David Bentley Hart, which is equally dubious and unsourced. But then I wouldn’t have anything to respond to.
I’ll be quoting snippets of the comment and responding to them. For example:

homosexuality is a modern concept based upon the idea we call "sexual orientation"; and we must understand that this conceptual framework (which we today operate within) was entirely foreign to and absent from the ancient world in which the Bible was written. Therefore, technically speaking, the Bible does NOT refer to homosexuality in any place.

Indeed.

the word malakoi literally means "effeminate" or "weak" [yes, it's well-known that Greek culture was heavily misogynistic].

To be pedantic, malakoi isn’t singular (=malakos) but plural, and thus here means “[whatever] persons.” Interestingly, AFAIK, its use as such in 1 Corinthians may possibly be the first attested use of the plural as a sort of technical term in reference to a specific type of persons. It’s used elsewhere in the plural in a different sense (e.g. Aristotle, NE 1148a), probably as a more general descriptor. (Though cf. further below on its sense in the singular in Dionysius of Halicarnassus.)

But any good linguist knows that literal definitions are seldom accurate to the contemporaneously understood meaning; and, by extension and through colloquialization, malakoi ultimately meant "feeble, cowardly, [morally] weak, lacking in self-control, indulgent".

Yes, those are fair glosses of its meaning in certain specific instances.

It does not, however, mean 'effeminate' in the sense of a conventionally conceived "feminine-behaving" or "flamboyant" male, as might be anachronistically assumed.

Here’s where we start to get into trouble. The same commenter will go on to challenge the idea of it truly signifying effeminacy whatsoever in contexts such as these. Instead they’ll claim, for example, that

It’s a fair certainty that malakoi can best be translated into modern English as “immoral” or “hedonistic”.

But the sense of effeminacy was in fact never far from many uses of malakia and malakos, well into the first century and beyond.
Of course — to give some broader background — weakness or softness in general was associated with the feminine/female in Greco-Roman philosophy and other texts. So was the notion of indulgent sensuality itself, conceived as a kind of civic or intellectual weakness.
Aristotle was the most well-known proponent of this view. In the Nichomachean Ethics, he treats the subject of μαλακία — the abstract noun whose counterpart is malakos — in tandem with the notion of ἀκρασία, lack of self-control. Specifically, he’ll summarize that "self-indulgence is a kind of malakia [weakness/softness]" (ἡ τρυφὴ μαλακία τίς ἐστιν). He'll go on to describe those who are incapable of enduring hardships in a manly/stoic way or incapable of controlling the passions as “soft and dainty” (μαλακὸς καὶ τρυφῶν, 1150b), and that this is precisely one of the things by which “the female is distinguished from the male” (τὸ θῆλυ πρὸς τὸ ἄρρεν διέστηκεν).
Aristotle will also mention the malakia of Scythian kings being innate/hereditary. This almost certainly draws on claims also found in the (pseudo-)Hippocratic De aere aquis et locis (§22), where the author claims that the majority of Scythians γυναικίζουσι: they “put on women's clothes” (ἐνδύονται στολὴν γυναικείην); they “do women's work, live like women and converse accordingly” (though overall this will portray them as asexual rather than hyper-sexual). Herodotus (1.105) will similarly portray them as suffering from a “feminine disease” (θήλεια νόσος), or disease of feminization.
Much of what’s been mentioned so far has close connections with things in at least a few other authors closer to the time of the first century, too.
Allegorically interpreting the budding of Aaron's rod from Numbers 17, Philo of Alexandria cautions against the weakening/"softening" (οὐ μαλακιστέον) of those who can't endure hardships, and of those "whose souls are softened/emasculated [τὴν ψυχὴν ἐκτεθηλυμμένοις] and whose bodies run to waste with ceaseless luxury prolonged from day to day." Elsewhere, not only using the same terminology of softening (ἐκθηλύνω) from the other passage, but also clearly echoing Aristotle’s old combination of “soft and dainty” (μαλακὸς καὶ τρυφῶν, NE, 1150b), Philo refers to those who “belong to the softer and luxurious way of life [εἰσὶ οὗτοι τῆς μαλακωτέρας καὶ τρυφερᾶς διαίτης], having been reared up for the greater part of the time from their very cradle in the women’s quarter and in the effeminate habits of the women’s quarter [τοῖς γυναικωνίτιδος ἐκτεθηλυμμένοις ἔθεσιν].”
But it’s a passage about pederasty from the Special Laws in which Philo is most detailed about feminization in connection with homoeroticism. Explicitly mentioning the “disease of feminization” earlier quoted from Herodotus, Philo goes to great lengths to describe the the eromenos' feminization in pursuit of their seduction of the erastes:

ὃ πρότερον μὲν καὶ λεχθῆναι μέγα ὄνειδος ἦν…
In former days the very mention of it was a great disgrace, but now it is a matter of boasting not only to the active but to the passive partners, who habituate themselves to endure the disease of effemination, let both body and soul run to waste, and leave no ember of their male nature to smoulder. Mark how conspicuously they braid and adorn the hair of their heads, and how they scrub and paint their faces with cosmetics and pigments and the like, and smother themselves with fragrant unguents. For of all such embellishments, used by all who deck themselves out to wear a comely appearance, fragrance is the most seductive. In fact the transformation of the male nature to the female is practised by them as an art [τὴν ἄρρενα φύσιν ἐπιτηδεύσει τεχνάζοντες εἰς θήλειαν μεταβάλλειν] and does not raise a blush.
These persons are rightly judged worthy of death by those who obey the law, which ordains that the man-woman [ἀνδρόγυνος] who debases the sterling coin of nature should perish unavenged, suffered not to live for a day or even an hour, as a disgrace to himself, his house, his native land and the whole human race.

(The idea of the eromenos' seduction/pursuit of the erastes will appear elsewhere in Philo, as well as in other sources, such as Asclepiades' epigram about a certain Dorkion; Greek Anthology 12.161.)
Various relevant references to malakia:
Claudius Ptolemy, Tetrabiblos (astrological text), 2nd century CE:

οἱ δὲ ἄνδρες μαλακοί τε καὶ σαθροὶ πρὸς τὰς παρὰ φύσιν συνουσίας καὶ γυναικῶν ἔργα, διατιθέμενοι παθητικῶς, ἀποκρύφως μέντοι καὶ λεληθότως:
But the men become effeminate [malakoi] and irrational/diseased in terms of (engaging in) unnatural intercourse and the functions of women — being used/treated as pathics, albeit privately and secretly

(This parallels what he says about tribades becoming masculinized,)
First century BCE, Dionysius of Halicarnassus on Aristodemus: one explanation for why he was called malakos is that “when a boy he was effeminate [θηλυδρίας] and allowed himself to be used/treated as a woman” (θηλυδρίας ἐγένετο παῖς ὢν καὶ τὰ γυναιξὶν ἁρμόττοντα ἔπασχεν). On being "used like a woman," cf. the nearly perfect analog muliebria pati in Latin; for ἁρμόζω compare the sexual sense of σύνειμι and other words.
Aelius Aurelianus had translated a text by the second century Soranus. In this, the latter challenges the idea that men who are passively penetrated by other men — who it's said the Greeks call malthakoi (a variant spelling of malakoi) — are suffering from some sort of physical disease. Instead, "they dress and move and employ other feminine attributes [aliis foemininis rebus] that are ... faults of a corrupted mind."
(Cf. similarly Scipio against Sulpicius Gallus — homini delicato — in Gellius: "For one who daily perfumes himself and dresses before a mirror, whose eyebrows are trimmed, who walks abroad with beard plucked out and thighs made smooth, who at banquets, though a young man, has reclined in a long-sleeved tunic on the inner side of the couch with a lover, who is fond not only of wine but of men [virōsus] — does anyone doubt that he does what cinaedi commonly do?")
Phaedrus elsewhere: "A soldier of Pompey the Great, a huge man, spoke effeminately and walked daintily, and so had acquired the reputation of being beyond a doubt a cinaedus."
Me on the Latin counterpart mollis and again on Phaedrus:

the first century fabulist Phaedrus asks what natural rationale (ratio) produces tribadas et molles mares: women who penetrate or otherwise have sex with women, and passively penetrated men. He eventually explains that Prometheus accidentally "fastened female parts on bodies of masculine sex and masculine parts on females."

Caelius elaborates at length, too, on the feminization of those who seek passive penetration:

At other periods in their life, their body is still strong and observes the natural sexual functions, and their lust for luxury is divided two ways: their mind is tossed about, now active, now passive. But in those who have been worn out by old age and have lost the masculine sexual function, the whole mind’s desire is directed at the opposing appetite, and so it more strongly demands the female sexual role. This is why so many people think boys are afflicted by this passion. For just like old men, they lack the masculine function: they have not yet acquired it, whereas old men have lost it.

The commenter continues

The root, arsen, meaning "manly, rough" is a strange derivative, since if we were to hypothetically make "homosexual" into a Greek word it would make more sense to see andro as the root.

It's extremely unusual to gloss ἄρσεν as "manly, rough." It's simply "male." I'm also not sure if this commenter is under the mistaken impression that homo- in "homosexual" comes from Latin homō, "man" (instead of Greek "same"); but in any case, even beyond the Jewish/Christian world, we have other early Greek compounds pertaining to love/sexual desire that use "male" and "female" instead of "man" or "woman," too: cf. for example θηλυμανέω (compare the late ἀρρενοµανία), and ἀρρενομίκτης in Pseudo-Manetho.

What's also strange is that same-sex intercourse was a known phenomenon in the context of the 1st century Roman Empire, and yet none of the terms denoting male, same-sex behavior or partnerships were used. Again, instead, Paul used a made-up, fake word for some unknown reason.

I have no idea why this commenter uses language of it being a "fake" word. Ancient Greek authors coin neologisms all the time; yet no one I know describes these as "fake." In a follow-up comment, they also write regarding the etymological derivation of arsenokoites from LXX Leviticus (18:22 and/or 20:13) that

There's literally no evidence for the derivation you stated and it's purely conjecture.

That there's "literally no evidence" is an extreme opinion. Especially in the wake of Wright's well-known article contra Boswell, the overwhelming majority of scholars who've opined on the issue locate the likely origin of Paul's neologism in LXX Leviticus. A number of things support this (admittedly not always known or articulated by scholars) — from the similarly unattested LXX-based neologism idololatres that Paul uses just words prior to this in 1 Corinthians, to other contemporaneous awareness of these passages in Leviticus which paraphrases them using similar language (Josephus, Sibylline Oracles, etc.), to similar rabbinic terminology.

since the current scholarship on those two passages is that they’re referring to the prohibition of men using a woman’s bed.

Notes/drafts
Need to incorporate this quote by Williams:

To call a man either mollis or cinaedus, in other words, was not necessarily to impute an exclusive preference for the receptive role in anal intercourse or even an exclusive, lifelong preference for male partners. An anecdote reported by Plutarch and translated for a Roman audience by Aulus Gellius describes a wealthy man in markedly effeminate terms: he is dainty, has curled hair, speaks with a mincing voice, and “his lustful eyes are full of enticement and pleasure”—yet he is “intact” and “free from stuprum,” euphemisms signifying that he has not been sexually penetrated. On seeing him, the philosopher Arcesilaus tartly remarks: “It makes no difference with which bodily parts you people are cinaedi—the ones in back or the ones in front.” In other words, this man and others like him (Arcesilaus generalizes, speaking in the plural) can be called cinaedi regardless of whether they are penetrated or penetrate others. And those others may include women: Plutarch indicates that Arcesilaus’ words were aimed at both womanizers and “wanton men” in general. Finally, it is particularly significant that in the ancient physiognomical literature three types of men are described in similar terms: the cinaedus, the mollis, and the androgynus. What unifies them is not their participation in homosexual acts but their effeminacy; their sexual partners, implicitly coded as masculine, do not belong to the same category. Indeed, one anonymous text describes cinaedi who attempt to divert suspicion from themselves—not by conspicously engaging in sexual relations with women, but by trying to look more masculine.
Nonetheless, cinaedi were most often described as desiring to be penetrated specifically by men.

I'm looking for fanfic with vulva/clit-centric het sex, something I sadly rarely can find.
By this I mean things like (most to all of*): little to no piv, no pia. More female than male orgasms, more clitoral/vulval stimulation than male genital stimulation, female genital stimulation that's mostly to wholly external. Genital-genital rubbing, including on his balls. Dynamics, positions (eg scissoring) and acts generally considered "lesbian" or exclusive to FF sex. Including tribadism (humping his back, bum, arm, breasts, tummy, thigh, calf, foot... Anywhere and everywhere lol)... Very gentle female domination. Males being eager to be taught, to please, turned on by offering/helping stimulate her, get her off, giving cunnilingus, getting humped... Long, varied sex. Vulva/clit-stimulation (specific acts or as a whole) being considered sex.
*What can I say, I'm a picky one 🤣
I write it myself (what's that saying, it's easy to please yourself? 😋 One can write exactly what they want) but would love to find others.

Hello there! You've found my profile. I am Grapes, he/him, and this is my reddit alt for roleplaying and other smut shenanigans.
For the longest time I've mostly been one to check out people's posts, and reach out for the ones I was interested in or mostly just voyeur through people's ideas; but this time around I'd like to write something of my own for once.
Do note that if you stumble on this, as of the writing of this my profile is mostly an idea/prompt exercise dump - I am not actively seeking partners for the stories presented.
That out of the way, it's time for a proper introduction. I am your average person, trying to satisfy a few kinks through creative writing; an extensive kinklist will be provided below, but my main one is monster people. Both monster girls and monster men or boys. Your typical fantasy creatures: mermaids, harpies, lamia, and the like. From the traditional to the exotic. I have been roleplaying for quite a few years now, and it's always been about monsters to some extent. Yes, I am perfectly able to write more mundane things, and do have an interest on just that from time to time, but there's no helping it - monsters are just much more interesting to me to realize through this medium. So as it turns out, most of my prompts may just focus on whatever I wanna explore in exotic monster bodies.
Fandom and Cosplaying is a bit of a secondary interest. As someone who spends probably way too much time in video games, I can't help but get ideas with all the pretty characters I see around. For every character in my art folder, an accompanying deviant fantasy I've spent way too much time putting together.
For more bodily interests, my favorite parts of sex include outercourse, creampies and getting touchy and cuddly. Naturally, such interests vary between setting to setting - these three I've mentioned point towards wholesome stuff, but I believe I am perfectly capable for raunchier or even meaner stuff from time to time.
As for roleplaying preferences, I write in third-person, past tense, on longer term. Such long posts can vary from a simple paragraph for faster-paced scenes, to around four. As such, I usually take my time between posts - I try my best to keep it to less than a week, if life isn't driving me to the floor. Most often, I'm seen playing female characters, though as of recent I've wanted to exercise my male characters as well. Writing dudes always feels like I get a little too close to self-inserting. Futa and FTM/cuntboys have been a bit of recent curiosity, too! My main platform is here on Reddit, through either Direct Messages or Chat (both is optimal! I love OOC chatter, and splitting between them is perfect), though I'd be glad to move to a better organized Discord server for us to chat away if we do hit it off.
As for more side interests, I'm an avid video games person. Don't really stick to just one genre, but ask me about fighting games or JRPGs and I'll probably be very easy to talk to. Favorites include Final Fantasy 7, Death Stranding, Cave Story, Zelda Twilight Princess, Guilty Gear +R, among others.
Have my kinklist. Feel free to ask questions! I know the way I've put it together may be unclear, but think of it as conversation starters.
Below you can enjoy a table of my prompts.

X4X	Prompt	Date	Main Features
[M4F]	[The Bard](placeholder)	xx/xx/2023	Monster (Satyr), Fae Mischief, Tavern, Trad Fantasy, Relatively Vanilla? (idk all my offerings below this are exotic af i need something more basic lmao)
[A4A]	[In Her Coils](placeholder)	xx/xx/2023	Monster (Armless Lamia), Tail and Coil Focus, Long Tongue
[MF4F/A]	Stamen and Pistil	08/21/2023	Monster (Liliraune), Threesome (MFF), Tentacles (Vines)
[CB/M4F]	[Merman's Short End of the Stick](placeholder)	xx/xx/2023	Monster (Merman), Unusual Genitals, Tribadism and more "lesbian" fun
[F4M][Futa4F]	At the end of Dawn, lies only the Sea	11/10/2023	Arknights, Skadi Alter, the third act of Aliens Resurrection, emotionless sex, sea monster

I'm looking for books with hetero tribadism (vulva rubbing on her partner's body) eg thigh, bum, tummy, breasts, calf, foot, arm, back, knee, hip... Any and everywhere lol. Balls and dick included.
Maybe there's an opportunity she couldn't pass up while giving him a massage or while she's making her way up to his mouth by way of tummy and titties... 😏 (But I'd go for any set up/going for it lbh)
Bonus if it's treated as and called sex/fucking, lots of time/description is spent on it, there's little to no piv &/or there's a variety of parts humped... (And I certainly do not object to it being reciprocal...)