sexuality and gender - new categories

[Ponyboy]

One topic that pops up again and again on this forum is people trying to define their sexuality and gender. I personally dont go for 'categories' because things are fluid, but then I started thinking - maybe we need to create a few new categories. So here goes:

1. Still exploring - the first category is self explanatory
2. Straight
3. Straight/ Tran fan - a person who prefers GGs but also likes the occassional Tgirl
4. Tran fan - someone who loves my beautiful Tgirl sisters.
5. Bi-curious
6. Bi
7. Gay
8. Proto Tran - someone with female essence, starting to take physical features of a woman but hasnt yet transitioned - androgynous. Might be very beautiful.
9. Tgirl - my beautiful sisters!!
10. Mife - someone with essence of female, life has characteristics of female not male, but has not transitioned due to life complications. May live by self, but if in a relationship takes role of wife.

Have I covered all options?

[Lester316]

how about no categories and just let people get on with being whomever they wish to be without a label.

[Ponyboy]

Hi Lester - yes that is a good option, but we are always getting people on this website wanting to define themselves.

[Ponyboy]

Many men who believe thay are 'normal' get a shock when they discover they like cock. Hence the confusion over their sexuality. They dont realise that there are many forms of normal.

[SanDiegoPervySage]

Do what you want. I'm not learning all that shit and 393 pronouns unless I know the individual personally. There is a point where things get ridiculous and I stop caring

[Billy Blueballs]

Hi Lester - yes that is a good option, but we are always getting people on this website wanting to define themselves.

I think what we see on this site is more about some people trying to define others so they can feel better about how they define themselves or how others might see them.

This recent social need for at last count 56 different "genders" is getting so out hand and usurped by identity politics it's making the absurd into law. A generation(s) raised with internet culture and avatars where you can "identify" as whatever you can imagine (doesn't even have to be human) and then insist that others accept your made-up identity as an objective truth, or they risk being charged with a federal "hate crime" for addressing somebody with the wrong terminology - even though yesterday they "identified' as something else ('cos they're "fluid") and if you can't keep up with whatever madeup term that the ???? identifies as tomorrow - you're a bigot/racist/nazi/baby eater/cuck/zionist/etc etc...

Yes it's more complex than straight/gay, and social media has made this into an insane hysteria of social identity and collective finger pointing. There's never been a better reason to stay single in the psychological madness of modern sexual politics and dating. I've got some age behind me, some coconut oil and an Internet connection, so don't need or want anything else in this madness.
OK, maybe one of those Lilo Hugo prostate toys but after that I'm done.

[Ponyboy]

The reason I started this thread was because I had just seen this thread... http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?104190-Confused-By-My-Sexuality

This is a question we see posted time and time again. There was nothing political in it. Given the number of threads that we see like this, you would have to say its common for people to get confused about their gender and sexuality, after their first Tgirl experience.

[Lester316]

There are always people popping up on here starting 'I'm confused' or 'Am I gay' threads (or similar); they might be looking for advice or an explanation to who they are. I can't say for sure what all those people really need or what answers they are always looking for but I know with 100% certainty that nobody needs a crazy list of terms that just adds more useless labels.

[Laphroaig]

The reason I started this thread was because I had just seen this thread... http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?104190-Confused-By-My-Sexuality

This is a question we see posted time and time again. There was nothing political in it. Given the number of threads that we see like this, you would have to say its common for people to get confused about their gender and sexuality, after their first Tgirl experience.

You gave a better answer in the thread you linked to.


Hi T-S Curious. Nothing wrong with your post, but i wouldnt bother trying to define your sexuality. It may change several times over your life as you learn more about yourself. You may discover things about yourself that you never expected, or then again, what you are now, may be it. Who cares? as long as you enjoy yourself. I think we need to add another sexual category to the list that currently includes straight, bi, curious, gay, LGBT, - the new category is 'still exploring'.

The highlighted parts are all that's required...:shrug

[Aticus100]

To my (simple) mind there are two categories of sexuality.
Straight
Not straight
I think sometimes the need to categorising the many versions of Not Straight can be quite distructive.
Not Straight is (arguably) a minority already without sub dividing it into ever smaller groups.

[smoothboi]

I've been referring to myself as queer for a while.

[Billy Blueballs]

To my (simple) mind there are two categories of sexuality.
Straight
Not straight
I think sometimes the need to categorising the many versions of Not Straight can be quite distructive.
Not Straight is (arguably) a minority already without sub dividing it into ever smaller groups.

Out of curiosity then, what defines "straight"?
If a guy fucks his (GG) partner in the ass, is he still "straight"? Not according to some people.
What if he's never been with a guy, never thought of men in a sexual way ever, but likes it when his (GG) partner massages his prostate? Still "straight"?
What if he likes his (still GG) partner to shove a vibrating dildo up his ass because it feels amazing and he loves the feeling of being submissive to his (yep, still GG) partner?
I could carry these examples on and on, but the point is, there's a mindset of uber-straight conservative men that would consider any of the above "not straight", even if the guy in question has no sexual attraction to males whatsoever.

The need to label everything into A or B is part of why society is so ludicrously divided

[Aticus100]

Out of curiosity then, what defines "straight"?
If a guy fucks his (GG) partner in the ass, is he still "straight"? Not according to some people.
What if he's never been with a guy, never thought of men in a sexual way ever, but likes it when his (GG) partner massages his prostate? Still "straight"?
What if he likes his (still GG) partner to shove a vibrating dildo up his ass because it feels amazing and he loves the feeling of being submissive to his (yep, still GG) partner?
I could carry these examples on and on, but the point is, there's a mindset of uber-straight conservative men that would consider any of the above "not straight", even if the guy in question has no sexual attraction to males whatsoever.

The need to label everything into A or B is part of why society is so ludicrously divided

Nope. The need to label everything into A or B is why society is divided.

The need to label everything into A,B,C,D,D+,D+A, Pan-D and D curious/questioning is why society is ludicrously divided.

To answer your question I don't think it matters what a male does with a female, society will consider this "straight".

Iv'e been straight all my life until my met my GF who I am attracted to entirely as a result of her femininity and although so gay doesn't fit for me, nor does bi or any other variation.

Hence I am happy to consider myself "Not Straight" and not care what other wish to call me.

[Ponyboy]

I think division comes when you have an 'us or them' situation, but when you recognise that there are a whole lot of variations in sexuality, (or many different types of normality), it reduces the sense that there is one normality, and every one else is different.

[Aticus100]

Where I would suggest that falls down is that we only seem to be further deviding one side of the "Us and them".
To "Straight" people the endlessly increasing variation of people who are "Not straight" just seems like a bizarre race to be ever more exclusive which can only make it easier to marginalise people further.

[Laphroaig]

I'll leave you with the wisdom of Sinista...:dead-1:


I would say straight,On top of it there isn't shit straight about this lifestyle @ fuckin all

All clear now?...

[Ponyboy]

Your comments are so logical that I read them and think 'they are right, I am wrong'. But then I go away and think about it, and I think I am not completely wrong and we are both right.

My first thought is that I agree that we should ignore categories, and just get on and have fun, but the truth is, self perception is important. People do analyse and define themselves.

For example, whenever this issue is raised, it is by someone who is 'straight' but discovers they like cock. So, if we only have two options, they have to think I am straight or gay? In which case, they do not explicilty fit either category (hence their post).

I personally think most people are not 'straight' and have some form of variation, which if they were allowed to acknowledge, would make them more tolerent of other people's variations.

Also, some people because of socialisation define themselves as straight when they are growing up but ignore their own personal characteritics which clearly suggest otherwise.

I think one of the new categories I suggested is very important. Today, if you have a feminine essense the logical conclusion is to become a Tgirl, but this creates huge complications in life, and it is not just because of discrimination. You can still live a feminine life, faithful to who you are, without transitioning. I think this is a good life option that can provide much happiness.

But I also agree that you are right in that it would be nice of we could leave all definitions behind and just get on with life. I agree with the people criticising my views, but I also think there is logic in what I am saying.

[Aticus100]

I can certainly see the logic in what you are saying and at the end of the day, there is no right or wrong in this subject as it's just our own opinions.
What I would say is that where you mention if there were only two disriptives (straight and gay) then most will identify as straight, if the two discriptives were Straight and not Straight then surely far more would identify as Not Straight. It also means that people don't need to choose which category of Not Straight they fall into and worry about all the further discriminations that come with it.
I, for example, am not gay. I don't fancy guys or masculinity one little bit so not Bi either. Definitely not trans and obviously not lesbian. I'm not Pan-anything or Q-anything either.
But I will tell you am. I'm definitely Not Straight.

[filghy2]

It also means that people don't need to choose which category of Not Straight they fall into and worry about all the further discriminations that come with it.


Sorry, but I don't get it. I don't think that straight people inclined to such discrimination care what label you choose to attach to yourself. All that matters to them is that you're not an 'Us', ie outside of what they regard as normal.

[trish]

Okay, let's sub-categorize the majority then.

Category 1: Those who are okay with others when they give appropriate expression to their own gender or their own sexual orientation or when they give appropriate public expression to their love for another.

Category 2: Those who aren't.
Subcategory 2.1: Those who aren't there yet. They're still uncomfortable but are getting over it.
Subcategory 2.2: Those who aren't and are never likely to be comfortable with gender and sexual diversity within their society.
Subcategory2.3: Those who are categorically opposed to the expression of identities other than their own.

[Lester316]

How about no more categories for anyone. It's all social constructionism anyway; the idea that anyone has to fit into some category defined by another is woefully out dated, reductive and frankly insulting to so many. If we keep trying to force people into little boxes and sub-genres of who they are how many more people will feel socially pressured to fit into one of those rather than just be themselves. We are finally reaching a point where people can be genetically born one way, say 'hang on a minute that's not who I really am' and be accepted by at least some parts of society (there are plenty of haters out there let's be honest) but here we are on a forum dedicated to people who have made their own choices about being who they want to be and forum members are still trying to create labels for anyone who is different to what is seen as "normal".

To put it bluntly bugger that; we don't need any more labels - stop coming up with more - in fact we could do with less or none at all.

[trish]

Then there's the category of people who say we don't don't need any more labels.

The problem is that as long as languages employ adjectives there will things and people to which those adjectives apply and others to which they don't; I.e. there will be categories. As meanings shift and words move so will the corresponding categories. The trick is not to morally judge people for the moral-free adjectives that apply to them; e.g. black, gay, elderly, female, etc.

Everyone wants to know more about themselves and others. Socrates' dictum, "Know thyself," is a natural imperative. And so we will always describe ourselves and ask others to describe us too. "Am I gay?" Am I bi?" "Am I prejudiced against this?" " "Am I intolerant of that?" "What category would you put me in?"

The thing to remember is that unless you're doing math or science, categories aren't jails and their boundaries aren't hard -but when you intersect all the categories together which apply to you, you get a category of one.

[holzz]

there are only two genders. and no, i'm not a bigot.

though sexuality is fluid, whilst gender is not.

men into trans women are straight, since it's the feminity we like. at best then maybe we're bi.

[Ponyboy]

Lester, i agree with you that we should just get on with it, but Trish is also right. No one is being forced into a category because of social pressure. People will always want to define theselves.

[fred41]

Lester, i agree with you that we should just get on with it, but Trish is also right. No one is being forced into a category because of social pressure. People will always want to define theselves.

People are forced into categories because of social pressure all the time (whether perceived or actual). Its probably the number one reason why people lie about their straightness, either to themselves, others or both.
Sincerity after careful introspection is the key.It isn't a hard science. Since a lot of this is still opinion, the label's ultra accuracy isn't that important. It's your willingness to accurately define it when pressed that matters. Without shade.
Also, that with changes in understanding and self-discovery, that often comes with constant revelation, usually brought on by time (life experience), your label may change with your perception. That's okay, you'll know if the fit is right for you, even if less than perfect, because it's your personal explanation or meaning as you see it that matters.
...as long as you're willing to give that explanation when social dictates call for it.
I think sometimes sincerity is more important than accuracy...just don't use it as a disguise.

[fred41]

BTW, I don't mind all the categories, but most of the time, if you mention anything other than 'straight' you'll have to explain it anyway.
"Not Straight" as has been mentioned, isn't bad.
or "straight with an asterisk".
I have used Bi a few times. I thought it would curtail a tiresome explanation, but it doesn't really.
So instead of a label, I tend to go with the explanation first and let the listener define it for themselves.

[skirtrustler]

Although flavours of 'being non straight' are useful to find like minded souls I am against divisive and simplistic multiculturalism and rigid categories are divisive. We are all human.

I also have a problem with 'straight' as a simple term. Since there are just as many flavours of straight in oed.com, inc: properly positioned; honest and direct; conventional and respectable; undiluted; and of course heterosexual. Many of these seem to relate back to Victorian middle class values, where there was so much pressure to conform that people ended up being so full of themselves, their contradictions and their sexuality that the internal pressure of the undiluted bulls**t kept them upright and 'straight'. Leading to the term 'uncorking'.

My grey hairs allow me to say that often those who portray themselves as the 'straightest' are in many cases the most warped inside. By way of just one example - from many - those in the U.K. of a certain age will remember the Tory 'family values' mantra of the early to mid 90's; and how the mighty fell like bowling pins: on their 'swords of truth'; outed for paying for sex; insider dealing; or jailed for perverting the course of justice.

[fred41]

Some people may prefer two terms that already exist: Heteroflexible and Homoflexible.

[Lester316]

Lester, i agree with you that we should just get on with it, but Trish is also right. No one is being forced into a category because of social pressure. People will always want to define theselves.


People are forced into categories because of social pressure all the time (whether perceived or actual). Its probably the number one reason why people lie about their straightness, either to themselves, others or both.
Sincerity after careful introspection is the key.It isn't a hard science. Since a lot of this is still opinion, the label's ultra accuracy isn't that important. It's your willingness to accurately define it when pressed that matters. Without shade.
Also, that with changes in understanding and self-discovery, that often comes with constant revelation, usually brought on by time (life experience), your label may change with your perception. That's okay, you'll know if the fit is right for you, even if less than perfect, because it's your personal explanation or meaning as you see it that matters.
...as long as you're willing to give that explanation when social dictates call for it.
I think sometimes sincerity is more important than accuracy...just don't use it as a disguise.

My point about more labels is simple we just don't need more being made up by other people. If any person whatever their gender, sexual identity or beliefs wants to say "I am this..." I'm all for it; that is all about choosing to be yourself. The issue is as Fred has quite rightly pointed out (and that Ponyboy you are worryingly oblivious of) that too many individuals feel forced to label themselves as something they are not by a larger majority the end result of which is usually pain, sadness or even worse.

It's only a few hours ago I read something on my twitter timeline regarding the Nashville Statement (being in the UK I had no idea about this until reading more) and the account of someone who was lambasting it. To paraphrase briefly they pointed out that they had met teens (cared for them and been with them whilst an ambulance was on the way in some cases) in that part of the world who had been so ideologically and theologically constructed that they felt it was better to commit suicide rather than be attracted to someone of the same gender.

People are always being forced into labelling themselves and fitting into neat "appropriate" little boxes by someone else. You can bury your head in the sand and pretend it doesn't happen if you wish but it does and the amount of death, pain and damage caused by it knows no bounds. We tell children that bullying is wrong but a large proportion of adults spend their lives trying to berate, subdue and brainwash others into fitting their ideal of "normal".

[skirtrustler]

Thanks Lester316 for the heads-up on the Nashville Statement.

https://cbmw.org/nashville-statement/ ... from "the land of the free and the home of the brave". Where the only thing free about that is the freedom to affirm as a self certified bigot, and the only thing that is brave is to publicly join into a tribal orgy of togetherness with like minded bigots.

Leviticus 18:22 .. they will be burning us all soon, or throwing us off the rooftops.

[skirtrustler]

The hypocrisy of it (Nashville statement): "It's called the Nashville Statement and the national coalition says it's their response to an increasingly post-Christian, Western culture that thinks it can change God's design for humans."

I do so love religious dogma and statements as their logic is so often circular (it is wrong because ... it is ... errr ... wrong).

If God created heaven and earth, and Darwin is wrong as these people assert; then God's design includes LGBTIQ etc ... so it is God's design. However, 'we as a load of intolerant bigots cannot cope with this and want to clarify where God's design is wrong'.

*vomit*

[Ponyboy]

Lester316, No one is being forced into a category. We define ourselves. Secondly gay people are not picked on because they are a 'category'. They are picked on by bigots who think they are morally superior and dont like difference.

Gay people actually have a lot of categories for themselves eg twinks, bears, rice-queens, etc.

Lets just have some fun Lester!

[marcome]

One topic that pops up again and again on this forum is people trying to define their sexuality and gender. I personally dont go for 'categories' because things are fluid, but then I started thinking - maybe we need to create a few new categories. So here goes:

1. Still exploring - the first category is self explanatory
2. Straight
3. Straight/ Tran fan - a person who prefers GGs but also likes the occassional Tgirl
4. Tran fan - someone who loves my beautiful Tgirl sisters.
5. Bi-curious
6. Bi
7. Gay
8. Proto Tran - someone with female essence, starting to take physical features of a woman but hasnt yet transitioned - androgynous. Might be very beautiful.
9. Tgirl - my beautiful sisters!!
10. Mife - someone with essence of female, life has characteristics of female not male, but has not transitioned due to life complications. May live by self, but if in a relationship takes role of wife.

Have I covered all options?

I love the eighth category


1070655

[KelliBlueEyes]

One topic that pops up again and again on this forum is people trying to define their sexuality and gender. I personally dont go for 'categories' because things are fluid, but then I started thinking - maybe we need to create a few new categories. So here goes:

1. Still exploring - the first category is self explanatory
2. Straight
3. Straight/ Tran fan - a person who prefers GGs but also likes the occassional Tgirl
4. Tran fan - someone who loves my beautiful Tgirl sisters.
5. Bi-curious
6. Bi
7. Gay
8. Proto Tran - someone with female essence, starting to take physical features of a woman but hasnt yet transitioned - androgynous. Might be very beautiful.
9. Tgirl - my beautiful sisters!!
10. Mife - someone with essence of female, life has characteristics of female not male, but has not transitioned due to life complications. May live by self, but if in a relationship takes role of wife.

Have I covered all options?


No trans men or trans masculines?

[seth123]

Ponyboy..............Have I covered all options?
"Nomosexuals" https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nomosexual
Not so obvious but I've met quite a few over the years. Business associates, travel partners, no hidden agendas, lunch is just lunch, dinner is just dinner.......

[alcoolsrimbood]

where is the "bitch please.." category????

[Lester316]

Lester316, No one is being forced into a category. We define ourselves. Secondly gay people are not picked on because they are a 'category'. They are picked on by bigots who think they are morally superior and dont like difference.

Gay people actually have a lot of categories for themselves eg twinks, bears, rice-queens, etc.

Lets just have some fun Lester!

Sadly however people chose to define themselves there will always be a bigot (or group of them) rushing to label them in some negative ways. Your original post said you don't go for categories as things are fluid but then you decided to make a list - seems a bit redundant to me.

My point has never been that people choosing a label for themselves is a bad thing - it's their choice after all - and I'm well aware that there are numerous ways gay people (and others) choose to define their sexual preferences, body type or character.

Choice is a wonderful thing. It's just there are a lot of nasty folk out there who want to take that choice away and in a time where hopefully binary stereotypes are being slowly broken down, gender and sexuality is becoming more fluid, and where young people can discover who they are with hopefully less pressure I don't think creating more labels for the bigots to attach negative connotations to is a particularly good thing.

[Ponyboy]

[QUOTE=marcome;1834894]I love the eighth category

I do too!! That androgynous look can be so beautiful, but often they dont know how beautiful they are. I regret not telling someone.

[Ponyboy]

No trans men or trans masculines?

Yes, You are right!!

[Ponyboy]

"Nomosexuals" https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nomosexual
Not so obvious but I've met quite a few over the years. Business associates, travel partners, no hidden agendas, lunch is just lunch, dinner is just dinner.......

Good point, I suppose its hard to imagine someone without a sex drive. I always assume they are getting it off some way we dont know about, but i am probably wrong.

[Cereal Escapist]

i have 3 categories only.

1. Women I want to fuck
2. Women I don't want to fuck.
3. Men

All else doesn't matter.

[Ponyboy]

where is the "bitch please.." category????

Why alcoolsrimbood... that's me!

[morim]

I'm "Straight/ Tran fan" (50/50)!