Question for the bi guys out there

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicki Richter

Are you getting this? That is what bisexual means... It means in either of those three scenarios you are turned on. It's the difference between man-love and something which I view as a lot different.

---

Vicki, I have to disagree with you here. I can't believe that you seriously think that a bi guy (like me) would necessarily be turned on just because he's fucking or being fucked by any guy regardless of type. But that's basically what you're saying here: Tom Selleck, hot Tgirl, or PeeWee Herman, all the same, if you're bi and he's got a cock then you must be turned on. No way! Are you turned on by every type of guy you see? (Or girl or tgirl?) Of course not. Being bi doesn't mean you're turned on by all guys--hairy macho to squealing boy toy--but that you are turned on by some guys as well as turned on by some girls.

Or, to take your comparisons to another level, let's talk hetero guy. I won't go into the depth of detail you (quite vividly, I must say) provided, but the hetero guy closes his eyes and visualizes he's with Paris Hilton, that he's slamming her cute, tight ass from behind, overpowering her skinny, sexy little frame. Now visualize Rosanne Barr.... see where I'm going? Some guys may be turned on by the macho Selleck type, some by the impish PeeWee type, but who is going to be turned on by both, or all the types inbetween (as you pretty much describe the extremes of the range). Some guys love a Rosanne, or a Mama Cass, and some a Paris, some an Anna Nicole, some Pam Anderson, some Eartha Kitt, some Alexis Bledel or Amber Tamblyn, some Nicole Sheridan and some Felicity Huffman. But do all hetero guys find all these types equally appealing? Why should a bi guy find all types of guys equally appealing?

I stand by what I said, particularly in the context of this conversation. I said it before, I don't have a problem with bi/gay sex or whatever. I just don't want anything to do with it. I'm not a big fan of the gay community and I'll make no secret of that point. Allanah unwittingly reinforced my thinking on this when she told her story about them not letting her in their club. Guess what, they don't want anything to do with TS once they become women. Before that they're a novelty (as drag queens) to entertain them.

Just for you Ecstatic, insert Dean Caine and Brad Pitt into either of those scenarios. :-) 80% of men who like TS are not turned on by men. Most of the 20% who are, are trisexual like you. There is nothing wrong with it... for you. But you of all people should be standing up and acknowledging my point... which is simply sex with a man is not sex with a TS is not sex with a woman.

All sex is great and a wonderful thing. Do what you want to do. Do what feels good and turn you on, but don't imply or pretend naivity that sex with a TS and a man is the same thing. Men smell different, feel different, taste different, and obviously look different. Just because the body parts are the same, or similar, doesn't make it the same.

Ah, thanks for the clarification, Vicki. I should have known (and half suspected) that we really weren't so far apart on that point. (After all, I adopted your wonderful, playful term "stray" as soon as you introduced it, lol.) Brad Pitt was one famous figure that occurred to me as a guy who I do find attractive. Dean Cain, OK, vastly more so than Selleck or Herman, please! PeeWee Herman?! I know you were making a point, but eww!

Anyway, if your point is that 80% of the men who like TS are not turned on by men, I totally concur. And I imagine that very few if any are actually gay; the remaining 20% as you say are trisexual. And yes (pardon the caps) I WILL STAND UP AND AGREE WITH YOU THAT SEX WITH A MAN IS NOT SEX WITH A TS IS NOT SEX WITH A WOMAN. No argument there; it's the diversity that I love, and a TS provides that diversity for me in spades.

I've never really been involved with the gay community (other than general support for GLBT rights). I only use the term bisexual because I enjoy sex with men and women (and TS, hence trisexual), but emotionally and romantically, guys don't do it for me. Women, oh yeah, and TS, definitely. Guys? Sex only, and then why be with a guy when I can be with a TS? Since the first time I was with a TS, I haven't been with a guy and have no desire to do so (though, if Brad Pitt dropped by tonight...).

wow, this is deep. I always wondered what to consider myself, but this seems to clarify it for me. Men totally gross me out too, yet shemales are very exciting. I guess im not alone on this. :roll:


Vicki youre soo hot. Coming to Ny anytime soon? :P

I am always willing to return to NYC and stage another sloppy drunken scene at one of Allanah's parties. I really wasn't that bad... in my mind anyway. I made out with 4 or 5 guys so you have pretty good odds, relatively speaking.

;P

:shock:

I don't know why everyone has to be so fixated on labels. They don't categorize so much as they isolate. No one can even agree on what they define and they are applied arbitrarily and haphazardly, at best. There is a huge flame war on another board now, where someone claims being a transsexual requires getting SRS. Everyone else is a transvestite. Others feel that getting SRS means you are no longer transsexual at all, but a woman. Some say being transgenderd refers to whole spectrum of gender expression. Others say being TG means being full time but not on hormones. Some think that TV and CD are different categories, but one is just a latin version of the same words.

There also appears to be a double standard. Guys define themselves by how they feel, not what they do. Nevermind what they may do sexually, they self define themselves as straight because thats how they feel. So much for " by their deeds ye shall know them"

On the other hand, those same guys seem to define a girl by what she does, not how she may feel. If a girl has done hormones or has implants she is a transsexual, no matter how she might otherwise present herself. Without that, she is "just a crossdresser" and subject to scorn and verbal abuses, notwithstanding that she might be otherwise completely feminine. But every defintion for transsexual refers to the desire to change as paramount. "Our intention creates our reality" Dr Wayne Dwyer

having said all that, here is what it boils down to

homo=same
hetero=different
trans=cross
vestite=dress
bi=two
sexual=sexual

The defining external characteristic of a male of the species is a penis. for the female, a vagina. Everything else is a secondary sexual feature. It doesn't define or exclude. But what makes man a man? Or a woman a woman? Its more than what is or isn't between their legs

Benjamin Franklin said "We must all hang together or assuredly we will all hang seperately". I doubt he contemplated how the word hang (hung) would come to be used, but his ideal is uncorrupted. Maybe we should keep it in mind when we discuss things here.

Felicia

Vicki, are you listed on Eros when you visit NY?

Well said as usual, Felicia. This topic certainly is perennial, surfacing every few months here and on other boards. (The only other forum I pay attention to is SER; I occasionally visit TER, Red Book and others, but it's too much to keep up with.)

If we take the literal meaning of hetero as different, then I'm heterosexual because everyone is different to me! :)

It's true though that there are double standards abounding. Were you here many months ago when this topic was really roaring, and there were a couple of very outspoken transwomen (to use their term) who held that position you mention that you're not a transsexual unless you have SRS, and also that no transsexual--period--would ever top and they all hate their penises. Why on earth isn't there room for TS who really do want SRS--yay for them, I'm happy for anyone who realizes her dreams--but also for those who don't, who are women otherwise but don't want to make that change?

While not perfect, it seems the cultural attitude in Thailand is more enlightened than most places (like here in the good ole US of A). There, from what I understand, a katoey (ladyboy) is often proud of her in-between status and has no desire to become "fully female" (which is still an illusion, albeit a more subtle one). Many never have breast implants (I think that's been changing due to the lucrative sex trade with Westerners who expect their girls to have breasts). Seanchai I sure can speak with a lot more authority on this, but I'm speaking based on what some Thai girls I know have told me.

Yet another strange double standard here in the US is that men want their TS to be women--beautiful, sexy, big boobs, nice ass, all of that--yet a large percentage want to be topped. Girls I know from Mexico and Thailand have told me that, in their countries, their partners only ever saw them as women, in the passive or bottom role, and it wasn't till they came to the US that they found guys wanting to be topped. They thought it strange a first, but then discovered how good it feels, and now prefer topping to being bottom. (Again, does this enjoyment--a natural product of their sexuality--make them less TS than a TS who only bottoms? This gets back to Vicki's point about men, women, and TS as three different categories, and guys who, like me, enjoy all three as trisexual.)

Thanks for the thoughtful responses everyone, especially Ecstatic and Vicki. Maybe trisexual is the term to use. I believe I am attracted to people, and sometimes those people are women, sometimes they are men, and maybe someday one will be a tgirl. Maybe I'll get really lucky and get to meet Vicki.

Vicki said: "If you want to go the route of the shemale fucking you, or you sucking her... I can create some really nice graphic scenarios of that too."

Hmmm