The "BOTTOM" line...

[RallyCola]

resisting the urge to join the fray...

we can't we all just get along and ignore each others opinions?

keep calm and carry on

[BellaBellucci]

There is so much fail, hyperbole, misquoting, and externalized shame and hatred in Chase's posts that I've been ignoring them to the farthest extent possible. I'm merely speaking reality from my perspective. We're not even talking about my feelings about my own body in this thread - that was his red herring. We're also not talking about gentlemen who respect trans women as whole people, whether the women perform in porn (read: do it as only their job) or not. We're talking about people who fetishize penis and could care less who it is attached to as long as they could be considered a feminine person. If he can't make the separation between real and make believe, then I don't need counseling - he needs kindergarten.

And if he can't understand that this thread was a proportional response to 'Would you be seen in Public with a TS,' then that's even more evidence that he's just a troll anyway. He's not even attempting to understand my point of view, he is not trans, and therefore his continued protests make him the obsessed, self-hating one here. Attempting to bully other girls out of agreeing me is another indication of a weak argument. I mean just look at his name. He clearly thrives on the sensational. I'm curious to know who owns this sock-puppet.

Personally, I don't think anybody should address him anymore, but I'm sure we all will.

~BB~

[Chase_Mcthirsty]

I can agree with some of the points a person made without signing up for the cause.

Why?

[illnazty]

I understand where Chase's frustration is coming from even though I feel he came on a little too strong. Im attracted to TS and GG equally and there's certain things I like about all the girls I've ever been with regardless of what's between their legs. The problem is that it doesn't stop people from labeling me or girls from judging and that pisses me off.

[Willie Escalade]

I understand where Chase's frustration is coming from even though I feel he came on a little too strong. Im attracted to TS and GG equally and there's certain things I like about all the girls I've ever been with regardless of what's between their legs. The problem is that it doesn't stop people from labeling me or girls from judging and that pisses me off.

This right here.

[Jamie French]

The problem with labels is essentially a problem with words/definitions so let's break the actual words/definitions down and maybe try to make some sense of this.

A homosexual is a person who has an attraction to the same sex.

A transgendered person is someone who has changed their gender but not necessarily their sex.

A transsexual person is someone who has changed their sex and most likely their gender in a way that most closely resembles the classical assignment one would expect of their physical sex.

Seems to me if we are talking purely about sexuality then sex is really the only operative word and gender has absolutely nothing to do with the equation. This means that if you're physical sex is that of a male and you partake in sexual activities that involve male sexual genitalia then you are in fact engaging in a homosexual activity, regardless of the other parties gender.

I could see a guy taking issue with being told that they are attracted to someone of the same gender as it would imply that you are attracted to a gender role that they in fact aren't. It's a mislabel.

But being told that you are a homosexual seems completely legitimate as we are only talking about two people's (same) physical sex.

What's troubling is that being called a homosexual is somehow perceived as being less than desirable and in fact an a full on insult to most men who find themselves in this type of situation. I've known many homosexuals in my 33 years - not one of them has led me to believe that their homosexuality had anything to do with whether or not they were a disagreeable person. So I don't understand what's so bad about being called a homosexual... it's seems as arbitrary as saying that you don't want to be called an omnivore or a truck driver or a person who likes the color blue.

(As an aside: I am not excluded from homosexual labels - because, you know... logic.)

[Prospero]

re labels ... or bisexual if you enjoy GG and TG

[davebn]

The problem with labels is essentially a problem with words/definitions so let's break the actual words/definitions down and maybe try to make some sense of this.

A homosexual is a person who has an attraction to the same sex.

A transgendered person is someone who has changed their gender but not necessarily their sex.

A transsexual person is someone who has changed their sex and most likely their gender in a way that most closely resembles the classical assignment one would expect of their physical sex.

Seems to me if we are talking purely about sexuality then sex is really the only operative word and gender has absolutely nothing to do with the equation. This means that if you're physical sex is that of a male and you partake in sexual activities that involve male sexual genitalia then you are in fact engaging in a homosexual activity, regardless of the other parties gender.

I could see a guy taking issue with being told that they are attracted to someone of the same gender as it would imply that you are attracted to a gender role that they in fact aren't. It's a mislabel.

But being told that you are a homosexual seems completely legitimate as we are only talking about two people's (same) physical sex.

What's troubling is that being called a homosexual is somehow perceived as being less than desirable and in fact an a full on insult to most men who find themselves in this type of situation. I've known many homosexuals in my 33 years - not one of them has led me to believe that their homosexuality had anything to do with whether or not they were a disagreeable person. So I don't understand what's so bad about being called a homosexual... it's seems as arbitrary as saying that you don't want to be called an omnivore or a truck driver or a person who likes the color blue.

(As an aside: I am not excluded from homosexual labels - because, you know... logic.)

I like your approach Jamie but I'd have something to add. I think there are many words we use that when utterances are made in any other forum than a purely scientific one (specific to the field of that word) then we must consider the colloquial meaning, definitions and allusions attached to that word.

Language and communication is all about shared meanings and even though you may be entirely technically correct in your usage of a term if that is taken to mean something else by the majority of your potential (not necessarily actual) listeners then you have mis-communicated and the truth has been misrepresented.

I'm attracted to pre-op tgirls, but I think to declare my actions or my status as homosexual really betrays a truth - the majority of listeners would take that to mean I sleep with men, and as I have no attraction to men, while I wouldn't be offended at that notion, it's not what I'd be trying to communicate. Neither does saying I'm straight bring the whole story across because this would generally be taken to mean attracted to genetic women. On a more objective look at that truth claim I think there is something fundamentally different about someone who is attracted to genetic women only and someone attracted to pre-op tgirls also. To equate the two leaves out a truth. I don't think bi is adequate (although it may be getting closer) because that suggests that I like men and women. The problem with sexual labels here is that there isn't one for liking genetic women and pre-op tgirls (I like post-op too for the record but the issues discussed here do seem to center around the whole cock issue ... irony anyone?) so any label you try to apply is somewhat of a misrepresentation. People might get offended at being called homosexual and if they do that's a shame, but offense aside I don't think that term rightly communicates what that person 'is' or 'to whom that person may be attracted'.

So many grey areas, so few labels.

Right, bit of an essay already but one addendum. As far as attraction to cock goes I've never seen that as a big dealbreaker for your sexuality. Of course it is traditionally a masculine signifier just as a pussy is a feminine one. But thankfully we live in an incredibly interesting time where medical science is at a point that a person can alter their body to an incredible degree to match their psychology. So absolutist statements like 'a cock is masculine, therefore if you're attracted to cock you're attracted to masculinity' maybe were never true but surely not now.

It's a matter of context. If I see a picture of just a nice bum, am I attracted to it? Well, that depends doesn't it? I can comment on it being a nice bum but until we zoom out and see who's it is I can't really say if I'm attracted to it. A bum can be a shared male and female attribute. It turns out in our time so is a cock. I'm not attracted to a cock on a man, but I am to one on a woman. You know what, it's a fun thing to play with, but due to the wiring in my brain I can only experience that fun if it's in the context of a woman. 'Chasers' seem to be classed as those obsessed with the cock, and I'm sure that can be taken to an unhealthy level, but when we're horny we do tend to focus like that sometimes. When looking at gg porn sometimes all that matters is seeing a really sexy pussy, that's what we want at that moment. But context still applies; that would be ruined for me if the camera zoomed out and it was on a F2M pre-op ts.

Well, I'll stop now. 'Succinct' is not my middle name. I hope I made my point objectively and without any hint of defensiveness. Behind all that stuff and the bullshit from various people it's an interesting topic of sexual identity I think. And clearly an open question for many.

[RallyCola]

ya know. the problem isn't the label so to speak because the labels are well defined and absolute.

the issue is how you see yourself and your partner and how you resolve that against the well defined labels.

for that reason, there will never be a consensus because people don't want to be associated with particular labels AND more importantly, most people can't differentiate between sexual fetishism and reality, sex and gender.

therefore the debate, while not moot, is pointless because of many people's fears and biases, rationalizations and justifications, fantasies and what they really do.

[loveboof]

A homosexual is a person who has an attraction to the same sex.

A transgendered person is someone who has changed their gender but not necessarily their sex.
[...]
Seems to me if we are talking purely about sexuality then sex is really the only operative word and gender has absolutely nothing to do with the equation. This means that [...] you are in fact engaging in a homosexual activity, regardless of the other parties gender.

Do all you ladies agree with that?

Are you comfortable with the notion that no matter what you do, a man is homosexual if they have sex with you?

Seems controversial to me. But I am not a transsexual so will concede my thoughts to your informed opinions...

I think Jamie is definitely wrong on one level because homosexuality is also the attraction to a person of your own sex. Therefore an attraction to a t-girl shouldn't necessarily equate to homosexuality if that t-girl looks incredibly feminine.