Results 41 to 50 of 132
-
09-23-2007 #41
- Join Date
- Aug 2006
- Posts
- 3,694
I think the real idea between Eīs topic is his try to awake a consciousness that we are a community. We are a category of our own and I mean only only those who are into GGīs and TSīs or only TSīs if thereīs someone like that. Those who like TSīs and men surely donīt have this issue and define themselves as bisexual. Or maybe not? Labels might be wrong but a term is necessery to avoid any confusion. No one wants to be put into a category where he doesnīt belong. Labels are a result of prejudices but scientific terms as well. Itīs a fact that men who are attracted to the same sex are gay and no one canīt ignore this. Weīre attracted to TSīs who are not men so what Iīm I going to say if someone asks me what this is supposed to mean? What does it mean to be attracted to girls with dicks but not men?
-
09-23-2007 #42
-
09-23-2007 #43
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- nyc. dancing. living. smiling. laughing. again.
- Posts
- 2,455
Originally Posted by peggygee
i don't know how to explain it any better than that. it just feels right for me.
can i ask..is this suspect to you because of the fetishizing of transsexuals that goes on by the majority of men?
-
09-23-2007 #44
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- nyc. dancing. living. smiling. laughing. again.
- Posts
- 2,455
Originally Posted by Coroner
That's the big question.
-
09-23-2007 #45
- Join Date
- Aug 2006
- Posts
- 3,694
I also understand Seanchai when he tries to describe it as a fetish. He shows respect for T-girls by not making differences between GGīs and TSīs. But itīs not a solution.
-
09-23-2007 #46
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- nyc. dancing. living. smiling. laughing. again.
- Posts
- 2,455
Originally Posted by Coroner
but like you said, it's not a solution.
maybe we should just coin a phrase ourselves and pummel it into the social consciousness.
-
09-23-2007 #47Originally Posted by whatsupwithat
I'm not quite in the same camp you are, e, since I am not exclusively attracted to transwomen, and I have had fairly extensive experience with men, women, and transwomen. However, from a purely physical point of view (and yes, there is SO much more involved, but just to consider the physical for the moment), nothing gets my juices flowing like a beautiful pre- or non-op transwoman. That is, as you indicate, the way I'm hardwired. Now I am attracted to female beauty, which is a large factor (again, from that purely physical point of view), and a beautiful woman will always turn my head, but the effect is always much less than with a transwoman. And men do nothing for me, nada.
As to the terms: it's the prefix that determines form. Thus, hetero = other, homo = same, bi = both, and trans = across, over, changing (all of these senses apply). Thus, heterosexual means attracted to the other sex, homosexual means attracted to the same sex, bisexual means attracted to both sexes, but transsexual means crossing over to the other sex or changing to the other sex. Thus we need a different term. Pansexual (pan = all) doesn't fit any better than bisexual unless one is attracted to all variants. Likewise omnisexual. I have yet to find a term that does fit.
But then you give a strong clue when you post:
Originally Posted by whatsupwithat
Of course, this doesn't resolve the negative connotations of said attraction common to our society:
Originally Posted by whatsupwithat
Originally Posted by peggygee
Originally Posted by peggygee
Originally Posted by peggygee
Originally Posted by peggygee
-
09-23-2007 #48
Some time ago, in a similar thread I came up with a 3 dimensional sexual classification theory. Here's how it goes...
--------------------------------------------------------
While I have no degree in psychology or any other discipline that would make me qualified to come up with theories on the subject, it occurred to me that there a 3 dimensions of a person's sexuality...
1) Their identity (whether they identify as male or female)
2) Their genital preference
and
3) The aesthetic preference (that is whether they like the face/body/style of men or women)
If you factor in all the different combinations, including those with no preference in the last two, you have 18 "types"...
Type MMM: Identifies as male, and prefers male genitalia and the male aesthetic (gay males)
Type MMF: Identifies as male, prefers male genitalia, but prefers the female aesthetic (a man who dates transsexuals, what might be referred to in slang as a "tranny chaser")
Type MMB: Identifies as male, prefers male genitalia, and has no aesthetic preference (a man who will date both men and MTF transsexuals)
Type MFM: Identifies as male, prefers female genitalia, but prefers the male aesthetic (probably somewhat rare)
Type MFF: Identifies as male, prefers female genitalia and the female aesthetic (straight males)
Type MFB: Identifies as male, prefers female genitalia, and has no aesthetic preference (probably somewhat rare)
Type MBM: Identifies as male, has no genital preference, but prefers the male aesthetic (probably somewhat rare)
Type MBF: Identifies as male, has no genital preference, but prefers the female aesthetic (a man who will date both women and MTF transsexuals)
Type MBB: Identifies as male, and has no genital or aesthetic preference (bisexual males)
Type FMM: Identifies as female, prefers male genitalia and the male aesthetic (straight females and MTF transsexuals who prefer men)
Type FMF: Identifies as female, prefers male genitalia, but prefers the female aesthetic (women and MTF transsexuals who date MTF transsexuals)
Type FMB: Identifies as female, prefers male genitalia, and has no aesthetic preference (women and MTF transsexuals who date men and MTF transsexuals)
Type FFM: Identifies as female, prefers female genitalia, but prefers the male aesthetic (probably somewhat rare)
Type FFF: Identifies as female, and prefers both female genitalia and the female aesthetic (lesbians)
Type FFB: Identifies as female, prefers female genitalia, and has no aesthetic preference (probably somewhat rare)
Type FBM: Identifies as female, has no genital preference, but prefers the male aesthetic (probably somewhat rare)
Type FBF: Identifies as female, has no genital preference, but prefers the female aesthetic (women and MTF transsexuals who date women and MTF transsexuals)
Type FBB: Identifies as female and has no genital or aesthetic preference (bisexual females)
I'm somewhere between an MMF and an MBF.
-
09-23-2007 #49
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- nyc. dancing. living. smiling. laughing. again.
- Posts
- 2,455
Originally Posted by Ecstatic
We could go round and round on this one, huh? *head spins*
I'm exhausted...been discussing this all day. Ugh. I waiting to hear why my sexuality is considered demeaning from peggy. I truly do not believe that for a second. I do believe, as many have stated, that most of the men are in it for the fetish. I am not. I pretty much got over the fetish aspect long ago. it feels right to me. And to some others, like yourself.
Once again, i never quite understood why i should be looked down upon for my sexuality by the very people who should be lifting it up.
-
09-23-2007 #50
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- nyc. dancing. living. smiling. laughing. again.
- Posts
- 2,455
Originally Posted by francisfkudrow