It's not gay, it's a woman's penis!

I'm pretty sure as I said earlier in thread, sleeping with someone who has XY when you also have XY chromosomes pretty much makes you gay.

I aint hating..... people can do what they like....
 
CREATIVE!11 said:
I'm pretty sure as I said earlier in thread, sleeping with someone who has XY when you also have XY chromosomes pretty much makes you gay.

I aint hating..... people can do what they like....
Click to expand...

I think the exception to that is perhaps intersex people with complete androgen insensitivity i.e.where you'd not even know as they still develop as female but with internal testes that have no effect and normal looking "boobs and vagine". Physically, on the outside, they're basically no different at all to a regular woman except they can't reproduce.

Once you start getting into partial sensitivity then you get more like Caster "it's a man baby" Semenya. She's a bit more than a butch woman and is rather masculine in appearance for good reason - unsurprisingly, though identifying as female, she is a "lesbian". I think you'd have to be a little bit queer to want to...

XY people with complete AIS could in theory be very attractive - they'd have good odds of being tall, having good skin, well defined cheekbones etc.. which is why there are often rumours about plenty of models/actresses who don't have kids etc..
 
LOL my Zimbabwean mate once told me that there was previously no word for "gay" in his language and they had to invent one more recently. It seems the perception sometimes is that homosexuality is the white man's invention.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
And then they'll get an inadequate rating from HMICFRS when they're next inspected. There's a requirement from the Home Office to better collect stats on hate incidents and crimes.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The requirement appears to be to inflate the stats, not to collect better stats. Although inflated stats are better for people who want to fabricate stats to use as a political tool, they're not better in the sense of being more accurate.

People are getting a record for thoughtcrime. It's currently recorded as not being a crime, but it's recorded as an incident requiring police investigation. People are getting a formal, permanent record solely because people with enough power claim those people are not conforming to whatever thoughts are mandated by whoever has enough power and those are being mixed in with actual hatred and with actual crimes. That's not better for anyone who wants accurate statistics and it's not better for society. Far from it. Very far from it.
 
Love how she’s not offended by some complete stranger on the internet asking her to have to have sex on camera and sell it, but is offended by his right to change his mind :D
 
wordy said:
Love how she’s not offended by some complete stranger on the internet asking her to have to have sex on camera and sell it, but is offended by his right to change his mind :D
Click to expand...

Like most if not all terminology of the ideology of authoritarianism and irrational prejudice that's labelled "progressive" by its followers, it a deliberate abuse of a word for political purposes. "Offended" in this context means "using an opportunity to gain power and do harm." It's not a new thing in itself (the "are you looking at me?" cliche, the "respect" thing, "honour" killings - all examples of people using "I'm offended" as an excuse to gain power and do harm) but the "progressives" have made it a political weapon on a larger and more effective scale.
 
wordy said:
Love how she’s not offended by some complete stranger on the internet asking her to have to have sex on camera and sell it, but is offended by his right to change his mind :D
Click to expand...

He probably spent time and money preparing and "she" turns up with a concealed weapon. I'd be annoyed.
 
Okay, I'm gonna be controversial here. I can kinda see the whole "it's a woman's penis" angle's logic. It is, however, deeply flawed.

If you like a bit of finger up bum from your missus, that's not gay. If you're imagining Tom Cruise doing it, that is. So it's the who not the what that matters, right?

The question then becomes how you're defining gay (eg being attracted to men), and how you define what a man is (eg having a penis OR simply identifying as a man).

The logic is that if being gay or straight is strictly limited to being attracted to a particular gender, then it's irrelevant what the body looks like. That's blatantly ignoring the fact that there are physical signfiers associated with gender and that form the basis for attraction. It's a massive simplification. I'm not just attracted to women, I'm attracted to all the bits that I've come to associate with the standard category of woman. So if someone turns up with different bits, it causes a bit of cognitive dissonance that isn't really conducive to attraction.

So yeah, this person is stupid as hell.
 
Devrij said:
[..]
The logic is that if being gay or straight is strictly limited to being attracted to a particular gender [..]
Click to expand...

I agree with your post, but I'm quoting just that part because I think that's the crux of the flawed logic you refer to - it's a false predicate. Being gay or straight is about being attracted to a particular sex, not a particular gender. It's biological, not psychological. Individuals may well have a gender preference as well, but that's nothing to do with sexual orientation. Sexual orientation is not gender orientation because sex is not gender. The false predicate is that sex and gender are the same thing. Any conclusions including that predicate, no matter how logical they may be, are so deeply flawed that any that are right are right only by coincidence.

I'm a man. If I'm attracted to men, that's gay. Simple as that. If I'm attracted only to masculine men, that's gay. If I'm attracted only to feminine men, that's gay. Gay either way because sex and gender are different things. Whether the men I'm attracted to are muscular and hairy and like cars and sports and suchlike or gracile and depilated and like shopping and musicals and suchlike...equally gay. if I have no particular gender preference...equally gay.
 
Exactly, if someone has sex with a post-op thai ladyboy that they thought was a biological female, there was nothing gay about the act as they aren't attracted to the male sex.

But that doesn't mean that it is every person's right to know the biological sex of someone and have a preference for that.

I'm only interested in biological females, and even then only ones of a certain standard, so I am not homophobic or transphobic, I'm uggophobic. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom