nothing

[GinX]

Every time this topic comes up, it always gets out of hand, but I always have to put my two cents in...

Gay men are exclusively attracted to MEN...PERIOD. They do NOT want their man to have feminine attributes...they want a MAN.

If you are man who has discovered that the sexual act of anal penetration is physically pleasing to you,(as I have) that doesn't make you gay, unless you ONLY want to be anally penetrated by a man (which I don't). Anal sex and penetration are NOT inherently heterosexual or homosexual acts...it's your personal preference of partners that makes that determination.

So, if you are guy who enjoys being screwed by a chick using a strap-on or being topped by a t-girl, don't let someone decide for you that you are gay...YOU make that determination.

By the way, to all those 'straight guys' who are just going to spout 'bullshit' on this post, ...you are here on this board because you like/love/lust for t-girls...in fact, you love fucking them, even if they are pre-op...so let me ask you...how do you feel about the fact that the majority of the population don't see you as fucking a girl, but see you as fucking a surgically and hormonally enhanced guy and as far as they are concerned, that makes you gay?

Let the braying, crying, and flaming begin.

It seems that you consider gay to be a dichotomous variable... you are either gay or you are not gay. Your criteria for gayness is simple: if you want to be man-fucked, then, and only then, are you gay.

But this Dubya-think is simplistic. Gayness is a spectrum encompassing not only sexual dimensions, but also behavioral and linguistic aspects. A macho construction worker might like to get fucked in the ass by a dude. On the other hand, a lisping and dramatic man may like to get fucked in the ass by a shemale. Of these two, who is gay, and is it possible for one to be more gay than the other?

And what if the construction guy liked to get fucked in the ass by a shemale (as opposed to a man), would he be gay? As I understand your reasoning, you'd say no. You consider only the identity of the person someone chooses as the penetrator during a sexual act; however, there is nothing to substantiate the superiority of such a viewpoint. Why should we not consider the identity of both parties? Why is an effeminate man who likes to take dick up his ass not a homo, or at least somewhere on the gay-straight spectrum? In the case of an effeminate man who likes to get fucked in the ass by a shemale, I think you are still gay.

Furthermore, it is not enough to say that "YOU make that determination" regarding if you are gay or not. A guy can insist that he is not gay, but if has a gay looking avatar and suffers hissy fits, and if others view him as gay, it will affect how he is perceived and treated, and in the end it will mean very little if he is the lone voice insisting that he is not gay.

If, as you claim, there are these many variables as to what constitutes 'gay', then there could very well exist just as many variables as to what constitutes 'straight'. Further, what if the variables you apply don't mean anything and it's only the variables that others perceive that matters? Consider the last point you made...if the people around that guy thinks he 'acts gay' and perceive him as such, then it won't matter what he says...that goes hand in hand with the last point I made in my original post.

Since, from your point of view, there is as a seemingly increasing number of variables, then it would remain outside the providence of anyone-even one's self-to determine whether or not a person is gay or straight. You could claim that I am straight because of the variables you perceive...but I could claim I am gay because of the variables I perceive. Since we are going to lend equal claim and weight to the variables involved, that would mean if you call me straight and I call myself gay, we're both right...which, of course, is paradoxical.

The only sensible solution, as far I am concerned, is to examine the sexual activities of the person involved and then attempt to assign orientation. It is true that my own qualifications are simplistic, but they well fit the bill...from my own perspective, if you are a man and desire intimate and sexual relations ONLY with another man-and I mean the entire experience of what constitutes a man, not just his genitalia-and have no desire or interest in intimate and sexual relations with a woman, I would determine you as 'gay', simply due to the fact that given the qualifications in this example, how could we call you anything except that?

The reverse qualifications are true for assigning heterosexual orientation to someone, i.e., should you desire intimate and sexual relations ONLY with a member of the opposite sex.

The purpose of my original post was, as is perhaps yours, to point out that a singular activity alone does not qualify someone as 'gay' or 'straight'. I am still of the opinion that it is self, as long as the self is honest, that determines sexual orientation and not the perceived ideas of others.

And there, at the end, you hit the essence of the problem. You are not being honest with yourself. You have simplistically created "the only sensible solution", meaning the only solution that doesn't create cognitive dissonance for YOU.

But a man cannot:
1) dress like an leery-eyed fat femme in a goth-Jeffrey Dahmer get-up
2) act like a wounded priss when taunted
3) go on-and-on about how how he likes to take cock up his patulous ass
and THEN, claim to be straight, unless he is in total self-denial!

YOU ARE IN DENIAL. I have nothing against you for being a homosexual, but at least have the honesty to admit it! I doubt I am the only one who has ever indicated such to you. You write that only your own opinion of yourself is what matters, but you do not live alone in your own fantasy world. The opinions of others, not just those of yourself, must count for something...

Oh I see....I thought we were having a serious conversation. Instead, you're just tossing out ad homs, apparently because a thread was closed, athread in which you never could justify your claims.

And for a minute there I thought you were half-way serious about talking about something meaningful...but you know, something meaningful could come out of this....

Tell you what....if you admit you are gay, then so will I.

After all, a man who:
1. has to resort to personal attacks rather than discuss the issue
2. Acts like a queen on her period when someone disagrees with him
3. Freely talks about liking to have sex with shemales
4. and tries to critique the the clothing I was wearing in my last avatar

...cannot possibly be straight! YOU ARE IN DENIAL. Oh sure, when you are topping a t-girl, I'm sure you think you're a straight guy, but the majority population doesn't see you having sex with a woman...they see you having sex with a guy who has had some alterations! I mean, the opinions of others count, right? I won't knock you for being gay, but come on...just open up that closet and we'll walk out together. Do yourself a service and be honest with yourself!

"Oh I see....I thought we were having a serious conversation."
Hilarious! Damn, you do a great imitation of an ex-wife!

And then?

"Acts like a queen on her period"...
you gay men and your love-hate relationships with female physiology

"Freely talks about liking to have sex with shemales" and "when you are topping a t-girl"
You must have me confused with someone else. I am into women, whether GG or post-op.

"and tries to critique the the clothing I was wearing in my last avatar"
I'm not that fastidious in my fashion criticism (no "queer eye", so to speak). I'm just a regular guy who saw a queer and chuckled (I think I wrote "leery-eyed fat femme in a goth Jeffrey-Dahmer get-up"). Yes, in that avatar, which you ditched, you look queer, literally.

"you're just tossing out ad homs"
Now we are getting to some real meat here! "Ad hominem"... Latin, for "to the man" ("against" is an imperfect translation that is used for the modern connotation). Essentially, you criticize me for taking my argument to you personally, by criticizing you based on your appearance. But, isn't that actually the reverse of what you were doing when you were slobbering all over Kelly and Mimi's pictures with your fawning cock-praise? You imputed a number of merits to their personalities with your sophomoric analysis, which was based entirely on their pictures! Come on hypocrite, if you are going to criticize me for bashing you based on your avatar, is it not equally shallow and stupid to praise the personalities of others based on their pictures?

Sorry to have caused you a hissy fit by taunting you about your effete avatar. I can't make you more of a man, but maybe you'll find solace when someone injects in your butt with their manhood later later today.

You know, what I find amusing, is when a 'man' like yourself joins a board for TS's and their admirers, claims he only likes women-whether GG or post-op-and then goes out of his way to try and slander anyone around him who thinks different.

If you were half as smart as you think you are, you'd realize that what I had to say about Kelly and Mimi had nothing to do with their pictures and everything to do with the choices they decided to make regarding how they rep themselves. I'm sorry if someone honestly speaking his mind and expressing admiration for someone else's decision so offends your 'manly' sensibilities.

You seem to be going out of your way quite a bit on this board to chastise anyone you perceive as 'gay' or a 'cock bandit'. I'm not sure what your hang-up is....whether you are also afraid of being thought of as gay or what, but I don't think I care anymore. A guy who claims to be all about pussy but spends time scouting out a TS board...well, whatever...think and say what you like...truth is more than what you say it is. You want to think of as some swishy bottomed queer with a bad fashions sense? Great. I'll think of you as a intolerant egoist who despises those who don't think as he does and cannot honestly admit to himself his what his own sexual nature truly is. In any case, you may respond to this however you like, call me whatever you like, offer whatever insult to me you like. I don't see the point in us going 'round and 'round on this anymore.

Yes, you can have the last word.

[mrbig]

I always find it quite amusing, how some guys on this board feel the need to use fancy and/or archaic words to make their point, which is, that they have no interest in cocks whatsoever and that everything related with it disgusts them. Let's not forget, that we're ALL posting on a TRANSSEXUAL board. Why does this guy (w/210 posts) (and others too) always have to ardently defend the fact that he's such a macho man? Obviously, Vietboy, there is something you like about TRANSSEXUALS, and don't give me that beating-around-the-bush-crock, that you like their whole modus operandi or whatever. Otherwise, you would clearly NOT have posted/ spend so much time on this board, but instead would've opt to write only on GG boards. Dont kid yourself playboy, as said, this is a TRANSSEXUAL forum, but I guess some people still have to come to grips with the fact, that they're actually attracted to something women don't have casu quo find it interesting to have sex with and/or look at pictures of TRANSSEXUALS and then play a lil bit with their little winkies. I guess, you just belong to one of them manly-men-coteries, who cope with this "problem" this way. It's all good.

Clearly it is difficult for a cock-bandit to understand anything other than his own fetish for cock. I'm into post-ops, and the idea of a post-op pussy is probably so repellent to you that it makes you queasy (if so, steep a little ginger tea before you go back to your cock-banditry).

As for me using big words, I'm sure you could get your mouth around them, if you tried.

BTW, why are cock-bandits so sensitive to gay jokes? I mean, you're not gay, right?

Smdh, your implicit teleological interpretations and assumptions are getting old, very old. This is exactly the reaction I expected to read from insecure frustrated girly acting pussies, who are still in denial in regards to the REAL motives, as to why they're interested in somebody who is "born in a wrong body". So, If I'm not concurring with your statements about these, in your thoughts, disgusting lil' bitches, who like to suck on some creamed cock, and aren't also going to expostulate with ya on this board, that said fuckers have no place on HA, then I'm a ginger tea drinking cock bandit too? Damn, dude, that are some serious mad debating skills you've got! Why do you feel the need to spread such calumnies about me? It just doesn't make any sense, It's unsubstantiated and unnecessary, to say the least. But I have to tell ya, It's a perfect way, for punk ass pussies, to camouflage their underlying sissy-feelings (that they so bravely are trying to suppress) towards tushy lovin' twisters, just like yourself. So what, I bang tgs and enjoy watching their dickies dangle between their legs, and you fantasize about bangin a post-op; heres a scoop for ya, buddy: same shit. We're both still bangin/having sex with a man --(yeah, born in the wrong body, I'm well aware of that, and I'm def not trying to step on some girls toes here) --at the end, sport. Get real, brainy! You're still trying to rationalize the fact, that your fantasizing casu quo fucking a man "born in wrong body". Just drop the act and deal with it, but not in this childlike manner.

[endowed]

As for me using big words, I'm sure you could get your mouth around them, if you tried.

BTW, why are cock-bandits so sensitive to gay jokes? I mean, you're not gay, right?

Smdh, your implicit teleological interpretations and assumptions are getting old, very old. This is exactly the reaction I expected to read from insecure frustrated girly acting pussies, who are still in denial in regards to the REAL motives, as to why they're interested in somebody who is "born in a wrong body". So, If I'm not concurring with your statements about these, in your thoughts, disgusting lil' bitches, who like to suck on some creamed cock, and aren't also going to expostulate with ya on this board, that said fuckers have no place on HA, then I'm a ginger tea drinking cock bandit too? Damn, dude, that are some serious mad debating skills you've got! Why do you feel the need to spread such calumnies about me? It just doesn't make any sense, It's unsubstantiated and unnecessary, to say the least. But I have to tell ya, It's a perfect way, for punk ass pussies, to camouflage their underlying sissy-feelings (that they so bravely are trying to suppress) towards tushy lovin' twisters, just like yourself. So what, I bang tgs and enjoy watching their dickies dangle between their legs, and you fantasize about bangin a post-op; heres a scoop for ya, buddy: same shit. We're both still bangin/having sex with a man --(yeah, born in the wrong body, I'm well aware of that, and I'm def not trying to step on some girls toes here) --at the end, sport. Get real, brainy! You're still trying to rationalize the fact, that your fantasizing casu quo fucking a man "born in wrong body". Just drop the act and deal with it, but not in this childlike manner.

I think MrBig missed the joke about being able to get his mouth around big words. What a dork. LOL.

[mrbig]

I think MrBig missed the joke about being able to get his mouth around big words. What a dork. LOL.

....said the vassal manqué.

[Alyssa87]

u boys get so up in arms about what bothers u about how other guys view tgirls, and what they find attractive.

u all want sex with trannies, shut up.

[exstudent]

It’s the body and face I'm attracted to. I'm not that interested in their cock. I nice pair of balls are
always attractive though.

[sheyum]

whatever alyssa says.....

[Castor_Troy05]

Although it can purely depend on the girl and any feelings towards, but given a choice, if there were 2 identical women apart from the genitals, I'd probably go for the cock

[Nicole Dupre]

Bump.........