Super straight on tiktok

[Dreiko]

So, to recap: if you're attracted to femme presenting people that you assume identify as female, it isn't gay just because they end up having a dick. If you're attracted to femme presenting people that you know identify as male, that's gay.

Seems pretty cut and dry, dunno why you thought to add the other two paragraphs of nonsense (and insult good ol' Cags in the process)

Nope nothing to do with what they identify as actually. Just what they are.

It's not what they look like and what they identify as but what they are, what they identify as is irrelevant. That was my point with the original rhetorical question. Even if the woman identifies as a dude that's still not gay cause she's still just an attractive woman physically. If someone is a man but presents as a woman and they also identify as a woman but you know they're a man and you're into them, that's also gay too.


The other paragraphs were in response to your remark about trans people not liking the term, I was explaining why such a stance doesn't make sense since this is about cross-dressers and boys raised with girly mannerisms through some contrivance or other but which don't identify as anything other than boys.

And I don't know how describing Cag's mechanism for obtaining immortality which is to put his soul in cute female clones he made with alchemy an insult. They don't call him uncle Cag by accident lol.

 

[Revnak]

Doing some big gender phrenology so I can get cancelled in six years. Screaming about the immortal truths of the 20xx Webster definition of gender, knowing in my heart of hearts it will never change. Absolutely certain I am the gender understander.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Nope nothing to do with what they identify as actually. Just what they are.

It's not what they look like and what they identify as but what they are, what they identify as is irrelevant. That was my point with the original rhetorical question. Even if the woman identifies as a dude that's still not gay cause she's still just an attractive woman physically. If someone is a man but presents as a woman and they also identify as a woman but you know they're a man and you're into them, that's also gay too.


The other paragraphs were in response to your remark about trans people not liking the term, I was explaining why such a stance doesn't make sense since this is about cross-dressers and boys raised with girly mannerisms through some contrivance or other but which don't identify as anything other than boys.

And I don't know how describing Cag's mechanism for obtaining immortality which is to put his soul in cute female clones he made with alchemy an insult. They don't call him uncle Cag by accident lol.

Oh, I see. Being attracted to a femme presenting person has zero sexuality attached to it until you know, for certain, what plumbing they have. That's a statement that makes sense.

Sorry, but being transphobic isn't a sexuality, it's just being transphobic. At its least stupid, being super straight like claiming being into natural blondes is a sexuality.

And they don't call Cagliostro "uncle Cag" at all. Because that was a shitty joke based entirely around Clarisse being dense when they made it years ago and they do much better by their trans characters these days. Like, congratulations, you're somehow weirder about this than a Japanese fan-service gatcha game.

 

[Breakdown]

Oh, I see. Being attracted to a femme presenting person has zero sexuality attached to it until you know, for certain, what plumbing they have. That's a statement that makes sense.

Sorry, but being transphobic isn't a sexuality, it's just being transphobic. At its least stupid, being super straight like claiming being into natural blondes is a sexuality.

Respecting other people's gender identify is important, but not at the expense of your own sexuality. And does anybody have the right to instruct others on how their sexuality should work?

 

[Dreiko]

Oh, I see. Being attracted to a femme presenting person has zero sexuality attached to it until you know, for certain, what plumbing they have. That's a statement that makes sense.

Sorry, but being transphobic isn't a sexuality, it's just being transphobic. At its least stupid, being super straight like claiming being into natural blondes is a sexuality.

And they don't call Cagliostro "uncle Cag" at all. Because that was a shitty joke based entirely around Clarisse being dense when they made it years ago and they do much better by their trans characters these days. Like, congratulations, you're somehow weirder about this than a Japanese fan-service gatcha game.

I don't know why you're trying so hard to not get this.


People don't see this thing you call "presenting" or "femme", that's made up bullshit people came up with and convoluted this simple thing to allow people to not get it.

People just see these features and identify them as composing what is a woman. Not someone who wishes to present themselves as a woman, but just an actual woman. That's what they see, so that's what they're attracted to. People DO feel that they know for certain what plumbing they have, merely out of being womanlike on the outside.

Unless you deal with this fact and realize it is, in fact, a fact, you will keep failing to understand where they're coming from.

 

[Revnak]

You can stop. You can always stop. It is always an option.

 

[Silvanus]

People just see these features and identify them as composing what is a woman. Not someone who wishes to present themselves as a woman, but just an actual woman. That's what they see, so that's what they're attracted to. People DO feel that they know for certain what plumbing they have, merely out of being womanlike on the outside.

This is called presumptuousness. Is presumptuousness a sexuality? I don't think it is.

 

[Agema]

This is called presumptuousness. Is presumptuousness a sexuality? I don't think it is.

I don't know: but if presumptiousness is applied to sexuality the wrong way, it might see you arrested.

 

[Terminal Blue]

As for why it exists that would be a wide ranging question which basically boils down to "So why don't we just add more boxes?"

These aren't boxes. It's not a multiple choice.

You can be both heterosexual and gynosexual. Those aren't mutually exclusive. It's literally just a descriptive vocabulary to help people more accurately understand and describe themselves.

So that's interesting because that is close enough to a thought experiment I had, I called it the Ranma experiment. So I imagined if someone I already loved got Ranma'd somehow and they looked more or less the same but grew a dick, would I stop loving them all of a sudden? And the answer was a pretty easy no. But at the same time, I wouldn't love them because of the dick, I'd love them despite it, which I think is what you're describing there.

Pretty close actually.

You can love someone and even want to have sex with them even if you don't love everything about them. That's an entirely normal thing. Sometimes you compromise on something you want because you know that person can give you something else you want, sometimes your feelings for that particular person are so strong that you overlook things about them that you aren't necessarily into. Sometimes you're just bored or horny and you don't really care in that moment. None of these things actually change who you are, none of them are deserving of any kind of shame or personal anxiety.

If the genitals of your partner are important to you, if they're something you can't compromise on and still feel true to yourself, then that's fine. But if the genitals of your partner are important to you because you fear the loss of your heterosexuality, then I think you have to ask yourself whether that's really about desire, or whether it's just about maintaining some arbitrary standard of heterosexual purity.

But to get to that stage you first would have had to engage in things that the dick kinda puts a block on instantly.

What does this mean?

And see, I'm fine with agreeing it's not coherent but if we do that you can't have any rules any more. If no sexuality is coherent then we can't have sexuality-specific things that we need to follow since it's all an incoherent subjective mess. No more cliques and no more protected groups can exist.

I don't see how that follows.

Sexuality is incoherent. It's a weird perverse mess which none of us are really capable of fully understanding, let alone controlling. It drives and moves us partly against our will, and often in ways that are contradictory to who we think we are. Thus, for many people, it's a source of enormous guilt, shame and anxiety.

But what's important about sexuality (and gender, for that matter) is not coming to some kind of perfect and complete understanding of our every impulse and desire, that's not possible and sounds really boring. What's important is coming to an understanding of how we fit into this world we live in, and that's a world where sexuality really matters. That's the thing which is important, and that's the thing that anyone who isn't straight has always had to figure out somehow.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

These aren't boxes. It's not a multiple choice.

You can be both heterosexual and gynosexual. Those aren't mutually exclusive. It's literally just a descriptive vocabulary to help people more accurately understand and describe themselves.

It really is, it's just more boxes and because of their being more boxes made it can and does sometimes mean they overlap with existing one in a number of ways.

 

[Terminal Blue]

It really is.

No, it's not.

Stop and think about what words mean for a moment.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Respecting other people's gender identify is important, but not at the expense of your own sexuality. And does anybody have the right to instruct others on how their sexuality should work?

No? And acknowledging a trans person as the gender as they identify has jack and shit to do with your sexuality. How could their identity have any effect whatsoever on your sexuality, that doesn't make sense.

Like, a straight man isn't obligated to find every single woman sexually desirable, cis or trans. That'd be crazy.

People don't see this thing you call "presenting" or "femme", that's made up bullshit people came up with and convoluted this simple thing to allow people to not get it.

People just see these features and identify them as composing what is a woman. Not someone who wishes to present themselves as a woman, but just an actual woman.

That's a difference without distinction. It's like saying "people don't see vertices or interior angles, they just see triangles"

That's what they see, so that's what they're attracted to. People DO feel that they know for certain what plumbing they have, merely out of being womanlike on the outside.

And, occasionally, those people have superficial sexual attraction to trans women or feminine men. If they weren't so uptight about gender, this wouldn't be an issue.
Funny truck stop story: around 3am one morning, this Arab dude comes in mildly drunk to tell me his woes, and I, the only cashier and occupant of the store, was obligated to listen. He was having a grand ol' time at the strip club in the parking lot and had managed to seduce one of the dancers to come to his truck for an encounter. She was hot, she was funny, she was into him and he was into her and it was going to be great. Then he deflated slightly as he told me she had a penis, and that just wasn't the kind of encounter he was looking for.

And that story sticks with me for a couple reasons: there was no disgust in his voice. There was no misgendering. There was the bizarre reasoning on why he felt the need to commiserate with me, random cashier. (I've heard or been witness to more than a few wild conversations at that job) It's like he wasn't even surprised, just disappointed. Which makes sense: you're horny for a thing, your partner won't or can't accommodate the thing, you move on no harm no foul.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

No, it's not.

Stop and think about what words mean for a moment.

yeh I have, they're still just more boxes

 

[Breakdown]

No? And acknowledging a trans person as the gender as they identify has jack and shit to do with your sexuality. How could their identity have any effect whatsoever on your sexuality, that doesn't make sense.

Like, a straight man isn't obligated to find every single woman sexually desirable, cis or trans. That'd be crazy.

You seem to be making the argument that straight men should be open to the possibility of finding transwomen sexually attractive though, and labelling anybody that isn't open to that possibility as transphobic. Which carries the implication that sexual attraction is based on gender identity rather than biological sex.

I'm sure some people would agree with that statement, but others won't, and being judgemental about it is infringing on their own understanding of their sexuality.

 

[McElroy]

Which carries the implication that sexual attraction is based on gender identity rather than biological sex.

It would be easier to say that it hinges on a bunch of things that we have little control over. This is assuming that sexual attraction is a feeling that's separate from loving someone, wanting to date them, live with them, marry them, or even wanting to have sex with them and the list goes on. It's clear that communicating sexual attraction is much more difficult when it's also tightly tied to the rest of those.

All in all, I'm sympathetic to the idea of further sexual liberation, but it wouldn't personally benefit me at all -- I fear it would be the opposite -- so it makes sense to be rather conservative.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

You seem to be making the argument that straight men should be open to the possibility of finding transwomen sexually attractive though, and labelling anybody that isn't open to that possibility as transphobic. Which carries the implication that sexual attraction is based on gender identity rather than biological sex.

If a straight man doesn't clock a trans woman and finds said person sexually attractive in the moment, then that straight man *was*, at least superficially, sexually attracted to a trans woman. What's transphobic is the assumption that you aren't really actually straight if that momentary sexual attraction happens.

There's lots of reasons to lose sexual interest in somebody the more you know about them, from plumbing to personal hygiene to tattoos, etc, etc, etc, but that didn't stop them from being sexually attractive in the moment, and it doesn't make a straight man less straight.

 

[Kae]

I could explain this myself but I'm pretty bad at communicating these kinds of things, so I'm just going to leave this video here because I feel like a lot of people on this thread need to hear this perspective.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Just sitting here never ever being attracted to women unless camel toe is clearly visible along with a notarized certificate of birth gender assignment.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

I could explain this myself but I'm pretty bad at communicating these kinds of things, so I'm just going to leave this video here because I feel like a lot of people on this thread need to hear this perspective.

Okay, so I listened to 10 minutes of it and they just won't get to the point. Can you give a summary of what it is they're saying.