Edit | Leave a Comment | Favorite
More Like This: (Beta Temporary Feature)
User Comments:
whitetigergod01 commented at 2012-12-20 20:57:57 » #1228487
hmmm for me this is a unique situation...cause of Mariandale....even though im straight...im kinda attracted to her even though she used to be a he but is now a shemale...but i would do her
6 Points
Flag
hmmm for me this is a unique situation...cause of Mariandale....even though im straight...im kinda attracted to her even though she used to be a he but is now a shemale...but i would do her
6 Points
Flag
Samosuke22 commented at 2012-12-23 00:18:22 » #1229949
Mariandale = Poison has competition.
8 Points
Flag
Mariandale = Poison has competition.
8 Points
Flag
Anonymous commented at 2013-11-15 21:26:36 » #1436993
That doesn't really make any sense. That is, unless you are also making such arguments for traps as well.
Say you meet a girl, and you two hit it off. You start dating and get a bit frisky. Then you see the penis. Yet you continue. Are you straight or gay? Does it matter that said girl considers herself male or female? That penis is still there regardless and there is still no vagina. Does that make you straight or gay?
Now say you meet a heavyweight wrestler, somebody who could play the role of Hercules or Conan the Barbarian if they wanted. Say he hit on you, at which point you say something to the effect that you consider yourself straight. At which point he says, "I'm a girl, I just happen to be biologically a man." You consider him the exact opposite of what you are attracted to, and he even admits to having a penis. Are you straight or gay? This supposed herculean woman without a shred of femininity or androgyny and a penis, hit on you and you shut her down. Could you be considered gay since you aren't attracted to this woman then? Why would it be considered gay if he considered himself a man, but not if he considered himself a woman.
What about that same situation except it really is a girl, just a really masculine one. If the two of you had sex, she has a vagina you can enter into. If she considers herself a man, are you gay even if you enjoy vaginal sex with him/her and are attracted to them?
Now say you one day meet the most feminine woman, she has no penis, and has not gotten any sex change. Now are you gay if she considers herself a man?
And what about bigender and trigender people which are a subset of transgender people. Say you dated a bigender man who gender switched every day. Would you be gay one day and straight another?
The problem with using gender identity in determining sexual orientation is that it is inconsistent and at times contradictory. In this situation or any involving a trap or newhalf. If some guy said "that girl's hot", I would say they are probably straight. They are attracted to features that are normally held by women. And their attraction to said trap or newhalf would be without knowledge that said trap or newhalf had a penis. Many guys don't like futanari because of the penises. To the casual anime viewer, they might not know that Mariandale has a penis and become aroused by her. Reveal the truth, and the arousal goes away. Sure some become sexually confused, but most of them know they are not attracted to penises. Many might go through a phase where they realize they do like traps, and some eventually come to the conclusion that they like the penis even on traps. At that point, I'd say it's pretty indicative of bisexuality. But basing orientation on gender identity con-volutes things. A few years ago, I heard a lesbian say something to the effect of "I don't care how effeminate of a man you bring me, I don't care, the penis is still there and there isn't a vagina. I've dated butch women. They have vaginas." Basically said lesbian based her orientation on biological sex instead of gender or gender identity. She didn't like penises, which is why she was a lesbian, and noted she would even date butch women because they still had features she was attracted to, namely the vagina. If we go by the more pc terms, she would have to be attracted to the effeminate man if he considered himself or was considered a woman.
Another thing, if we call somethingsexuality attraction to whatever gender instead of biological sex. Then the name is a misnomer. Heterosexuality should then be heterogenderality or something to that effect. Bisexuality wouldn't work because bigender is already taken and would be too easily confused if there was bigenderality and bigender.
Hetero/Homo/Bi-sexuality makes too much sense to change meaning. What other terms are there? There isn't really a term for liking girls and traps (but not manly men). The closest I found was Gynephilia. Except that term is used by trans people to determine their orientation. Same with Androphilia. Both refer to the object of attraction without distinction of the one who has the attraction. What about traps and the people attracted to them. For the past few years, I've always just considered it a part of bisexuality. After all, heterosexuality isn't attraction to all of the opposite sex, homosexuality isn't attraction to all of the same sex, then certainly it is possible to be attracted to a certain type of the same sex while being mostly attracted to the opposite sex. Some people think you have to be equally attracted to both sexes, but research finds that is not the case, especially for men.
What terms do we use. Do we differentiate between those that don't particularly care which sex organ a person has as long as they exhibit the other traits they find attractive. So one gay man could be called phalliphilic (love of penis) and another is merely mascuphilic (love of masculine men or women). For the average trap lover, could they be considered phalliphillic and vagiphillic (love of vagina or perhaps they could just be considered femmephilic (love of feminine men and women).
Anyway, if there's one thing I learned, it's that sex politics are convoluted, contradictory at times due to inconsistencies, and most of all very confusing. Sexual orientation is already quite confusing, especially when you're growing up and discovering your tastes, even moreso if you find your taste seemingly change. All the extra terms and politics just make it more difficult. Sometimes it's due to not really having a term for somethings, but most of the time it is due to somebody trying not to offend somebody. I remember when I could just say I was bisexual, because I don't care about whether they have a penis or vagina if I am attracted to them. Now I have to explain that, because people assume that I am referring to gender, and then get mad assuming I am leaving out other genders such as transgender and intergender, or some other gender outside male and female. Even if that was the case, then why not get mad at heterosexuals and homosexuals. Going by their logic, heterosexuals leave out all of that AND the same gender. while homosexuals by their logic leave out all of those AND the opposite gender. And they should be furious at asexuals because they leave out everybody by that logic. "If you look like a girl, I like you, even if you have a penis" just doesn't have the same simplicity to it as bisexual though in fairness it is a bit more clear.
16 Points
Flag
That doesn't really make any sense. That is, unless you are also making such arguments for traps as well.
Say you meet a girl, and you two hit it off. You start dating and get a bit frisky. Then you see the penis. Yet you continue. Are you straight or gay? Does it matter that said girl considers herself male or female? That penis is still there regardless and there is still no vagina. Does that make you straight or gay?
Now say you meet a heavyweight wrestler, somebody who could play the role of Hercules or Conan the Barbarian if they wanted. Say he hit on you, at which point you say something to the effect that you consider yourself straight. At which point he says, "I'm a girl, I just happen to be biologically a man." You consider him the exact opposite of what you are attracted to, and he even admits to having a penis. Are you straight or gay? This supposed herculean woman without a shred of femininity or androgyny and a penis, hit on you and you shut her down. Could you be considered gay since you aren't attracted to this woman then? Why would it be considered gay if he considered himself a man, but not if he considered himself a woman.
What about that same situation except it really is a girl, just a really masculine one. If the two of you had sex, she has a vagina you can enter into. If she considers herself a man, are you gay even if you enjoy vaginal sex with him/her and are attracted to them?
Now say you one day meet the most feminine woman, she has no penis, and has not gotten any sex change. Now are you gay if she considers herself a man?
And what about bigender and trigender people which are a subset of transgender people. Say you dated a bigender man who gender switched every day. Would you be gay one day and straight another?
The problem with using gender identity in determining sexual orientation is that it is inconsistent and at times contradictory. In this situation or any involving a trap or newhalf. If some guy said "that girl's hot", I would say they are probably straight. They are attracted to features that are normally held by women. And their attraction to said trap or newhalf would be without knowledge that said trap or newhalf had a penis. Many guys don't like futanari because of the penises. To the casual anime viewer, they might not know that Mariandale has a penis and become aroused by her. Reveal the truth, and the arousal goes away. Sure some become sexually confused, but most of them know they are not attracted to penises. Many might go through a phase where they realize they do like traps, and some eventually come to the conclusion that they like the penis even on traps. At that point, I'd say it's pretty indicative of bisexuality. But basing orientation on gender identity con-volutes things. A few years ago, I heard a lesbian say something to the effect of "I don't care how effeminate of a man you bring me, I don't care, the penis is still there and there isn't a vagina. I've dated butch women. They have vaginas." Basically said lesbian based her orientation on biological sex instead of gender or gender identity. She didn't like penises, which is why she was a lesbian, and noted she would even date butch women because they still had features she was attracted to, namely the vagina. If we go by the more pc terms, she would have to be attracted to the effeminate man if he considered himself or was considered a woman.
Another thing, if we call somethingsexuality attraction to whatever gender instead of biological sex. Then the name is a misnomer. Heterosexuality should then be heterogenderality or something to that effect. Bisexuality wouldn't work because bigender is already taken and would be too easily confused if there was bigenderality and bigender.
Hetero/Homo/Bi-sexuality makes too much sense to change meaning. What other terms are there? There isn't really a term for liking girls and traps (but not manly men). The closest I found was Gynephilia. Except that term is used by trans people to determine their orientation. Same with Androphilia. Both refer to the object of attraction without distinction of the one who has the attraction. What about traps and the people attracted to them. For the past few years, I've always just considered it a part of bisexuality. After all, heterosexuality isn't attraction to all of the opposite sex, homosexuality isn't attraction to all of the same sex, then certainly it is possible to be attracted to a certain type of the same sex while being mostly attracted to the opposite sex. Some people think you have to be equally attracted to both sexes, but research finds that is not the case, especially for men.
What terms do we use. Do we differentiate between those that don't particularly care which sex organ a person has as long as they exhibit the other traits they find attractive. So one gay man could be called phalliphilic (love of penis) and another is merely mascuphilic (love of masculine men or women). For the average trap lover, could they be considered phalliphillic and vagiphillic (love of vagina or perhaps they could just be considered femmephilic (love of feminine men and women).
Anyway, if there's one thing I learned, it's that sex politics are convoluted, contradictory at times due to inconsistencies, and most of all very confusing. Sexual orientation is already quite confusing, especially when you're growing up and discovering your tastes, even moreso if you find your taste seemingly change. All the extra terms and politics just make it more difficult. Sometimes it's due to not really having a term for somethings, but most of the time it is due to somebody trying not to offend somebody. I remember when I could just say I was bisexual, because I don't care about whether they have a penis or vagina if I am attracted to them. Now I have to explain that, because people assume that I am referring to gender, and then get mad assuming I am leaving out other genders such as transgender and intergender, or some other gender outside male and female. Even if that was the case, then why not get mad at heterosexuals and homosexuals. Going by their logic, heterosexuals leave out all of that AND the same gender. while homosexuals by their logic leave out all of those AND the opposite gender. And they should be furious at asexuals because they leave out everybody by that logic. "If you look like a girl, I like you, even if you have a penis" just doesn't have the same simplicity to it as bisexual though in fairness it is a bit more clear.
16 Points
Flag
1 2