Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Heterosexual

215 (62.7%)

Bisexual/pansexual

66 (19.2%)

Homosexual

16 (4.7%)

Asexual

37 (10.8%)

I'm 12 and what is this?

9 (2.6%)

Total Members Voted: 338

[LordSlowpoke]

Unless I know the person very well, I find hugging to be undesirable touching.

well

damn.

that's one more person to remove from the "potentially tacklepounceable bay12ers" list

[MaximumZero]

Unless I know the person very well, I find hugging to be undesirable touching.

well

damn.

that's one more person to remove from the "potentially tacklepounceable bay12ers" list

Take me off the list, too, please. I have such a bad back.

[Max White]

What's the sexuality of a cisman that is attracted to only ciswomen and transwomen, if it's not heterosexual?

Heterosexual, just not turned off by transsexualism.

Yeah, this is actually a thing. I've been accused of both "just trying to be trendy/greedy/immoral/etc" and being "afraid of coming all the way out of the closet." Neither are the case, I assure you.

Wow... I now imagine that out there are a ton of homosexual guys that complain it is sooo hard to find a partner, and at the same time refuse bisexuals out of stigma.

[misko27]

A "Cisheterosexual male" will only feel properly attracted (and not repulsed or betrayed) toward a female, female from birth, who is into men who are male from birth.

Hey hey hey, that's quite a generalization from someone who professes to find physical attraction an alien concept.

FALLACY TIME
As a cis-het etc etc etc, I would have no problem with it. In fact, in a recent poll, 100% of misko27's were handsome and thought dating a transwoman would raise no problems. Why don't you? Is it because you're ugly?
Proper response:

Red Mage: That's enough logical fallacies to convince me.

[Max White]

The other mistake he made was the assertion that cis/hetro men are only attracted to women who are into men.
Based on the sheer amount of lesbian porn out there, hoo boy is this not true! Still, arguing with wierd isn't always worth the effort.

[Ogdibus]

I knew a guy that was infatuated with a lesbian.  It really messed with his head, not being able to get over her.  He was like that for two or three years, I think.

[LordSlowpoke]

by the way, this thread proves to me in a tangible manner that we need to dump our biological forms in a ditch somewhere and turn into machines, be it via virtual reality or however else

shit'd get real easy

Take me off the list, too, please. I have such a bad back.

these italics are making me goddamn suspicious but since you're asking nicely

seriously though, it's not a big deal. i have excluded what, a dozen people out of... hundreds, thousands maybe, some of them on the upper boards and of course since i won't be taking up toady's time with actively asking i don't think there'll be an occasion to take him off the list

a more polite solution would be starting with an empty list and asking people if they'd like to join it, but fuck that noise

[Max White]

I knew a guy that was infatuated with a lesbian.  It really messed with his head, not being able to get over her.  He was like that for two or three years, I think.

Sounds just like every crush a guy has ever had on a girl ever.

[wierd]

Meh--

To me, purposefully ascribing "No, I am REALLY straight" like that, to place such a prefix on the more general term, indicates that the person holds more exclusive views on what is and is not attractive.  Then again, I am basically an outsider to the whole "Games involving whatever gross things you people do with your bodies when nobody is looking (and sometimes even when they are!)" thing.   Some misconception is bound to be inevitable. (lol)


In regards to lesbians-- I find them fascinating in many respects. Sadly, such fascination is often misidentified by the lesbian, if detected at all. It is my personal opinion that women in general have much to learn from lesbians in relation to escaping "the dreaded pedestal" of gender roles.  The backlash that seems to form in some portions of the female gender identity over this is a topic of considerable curiosity to me. In some cases, I may even find myself flirting with the idea of outright loving their personalities. The impossibility of a sexual relationship is both tantalizingly desirable, and systematically impossible, due to the prevailing circumstances. (EG, in one side, the impossibility of sexual desire is GREAT-- the fact that she is grossed out by men makes even a more platonic romantic relationship impossible.)

I am not quite so fascinated by homosexual men for some reason though.

[Tylui]

Look at cisheterosexual. Heterosexual; meaning "Hey this dude's straight", and then the prefix: "No seriously, he's actually straight!"

I thought about this for a moment and I realized something...

and then [cis]: "No seriously, he's actually straight!"

So what you're saying is, being a guy who is attracted to a trans woman makes you somehow not really straight? As if trans women aren't actually women?

What? I didn't make any assumptions about whether someone is attracted to trans*(amidoinitrite?) or not. Just that they're not attracted to those of the same sex. You're grasping at straws here, methinks. Pickin' a fight; stirring the pot; itching for a bitching; not happy 'til you're not happy.

Who are you, my mom? *dun dun tsh*

Personally though(and I hope, with all this open-mindedness towards sexuality here in this thread, this won't come across as offensive), I don't think I could be in a relationship with someone whose gender identity and sexuality both weren't female. I would even say that they would have to match from birth, especially for anything long term.

Then again, I could see dating a lesbian so long as A) she didn't mind my dangly bits and B) she didn't force me to call her "him"... I don't see B happening that often, because then the term would be trans man and not lesbian. I think. Nor A, cuz... Well duh, and/or hello.

To me, purposefully ascribing "No, I am REALLY straight" like that, to place such a prefix on the more general term, indicates that the person holds more exclusive views on what is and is not attractive.

I didn't mean to ascribe any exclusivity to the term, just that it's silly(IMO) to add a prefix to something without it adding any additional information to the term. It's completely redundant. Like irregardless. Means the same as regardless, so why add the "ir"?

[Ogdibus]

Your definition of cisheterosexual was inaccurate and nonsensical.  You provided it in the spirit of ridicule.  The term is necessary for civil rights discourse that is relevant to the well being of the trans people.  Questioning your claim in that context is perfectly reasonable and understandable.  It is not picking a fight.

Your use of trans* is probably incorrect.  It's more inclusive than it sounds.

[Yoink]

Let's rename the thread to Sexuality: The Pollenating.

'Cause that would be funny. Tackle hugs are fine by me BTW.

[Max White]

Sexuality 2: Poll harder.

Anyway I'm fine with hugs from pretty much anybody, with the exception is children aged five to twelve. Little jerks are walking louse infestations! 

[Yoink]

...That is a very good point. Or overbearing relatives, their hugs can be a bit of a pain, as well.
The general principle of a hug is okay, though. Just don't make me be more specific!

[Fniff]

You know, the thread title sounds like a World of Darkness book dealing with sex.