I stand by my post and believe your replies reinforced the accepted narrative I challenged. So far, no one has argued fluidity can flow from homosexual to heterosexual. It's only one-way and that way always leads ultimately to a homosexual identity. That is the reason I question the validity of the fluidity concept.That is *a* definition.
You either don’t understand what I wrote, or didn’t read it.
That remains to be seen, since there is no ‘accepted narrative’ regarding this subject. As @bigboaster and I were discussing.
Erm …
Is my straight friend actually straight?
- Thread starter El2024
- Start date
Yep, you don’t understand what @bigboaster and I wrote.
No matter how often you repeat yourself - it still doesn’t make it true. I wholeheartedly invite you to reference a mainstream source outside this forum that establishes a ‘accepted narrative’.
I literally wrote:
And for the third time: there is no concept. There’s terminology haphazardly thrown around but that does not make it a defined concept.
In several posts on this subject, I ended with a statement that
Or to rephrase: I don’t believe that fluidity exists. Perhaps in a few people, and I’m actually thinking of scenarios where underlying pathologies come into play. But generally: behaviour well-explained by current theories on interhuman sexual attraction.
Ah I guess I wasn't paying enough attention, do you think being Kinsey 6 is quite common or quite rare?Actually, I’m surprised you never picked up on my own sexual orientation. Because I am, very much, a Kinsey 6
That is very sweet of you.
I was actually considering writing a little personal addendum:
Your profile states that you self-identify as pansexual. Now we’re not getting into the debate about terminology (I would say bisexual because pansexual combines multiple factors), but many people would consider that ‘sexually fluid’, even more so if you had been in a relationship with one type of person and a completely different one, thereafte - which is of course complete nonsense.
If there is no clear preference for a particular ‘type’ of person, then bedding one on one occasion, and another on another occasion, is not ‘fluid’. The EXPRESSION of your sexuality may look fluid to the outside world - although they just see the one facet of a multi-faceted sexuality.
Regarding this comment I would like to clarify something:
I am not really a huge fan of the word pansexual funnily enough. I simply used that on here because it's a convenient enough alternative since there is no flat "Bisexual" tag otherwise, just this arbitrary percentage thing? Which I don't care for. I simply identify as bisexual, that's it.
Some would argue with me (about my own label choice) being wrong of course, since I do also find transmen/women attractive and that makes me "pan" apparently? Smh. IDC enough tbh. It's over-complicating things imho
Firstly, let me say that I love this post, the overall tone of it
Because I know that this view will trigger a *lot* of people
(The reason I mentioned my own sexual orientation is because there is also this opinion that ‘real’ (full, whatever) gays like myself actively bi-erase, and additionally have this tendency to see ‘gayness’ everywhere. Gaiety - yes. Gayness - not necessarily.
Since you are bisexual, it is logical to find men and women attractive, no matter what their medical history is. (I have some additional thoughts at the end)
———-
This is not a response to you, just some musings on the subject you touched. As said: since you are attracted to men and women, obviously you’d also be attracted to men and women who have undergone medical treatments to remedy their gender dysphoria/dissonance.
It’s a complicated matter. I’m a Kinsey 6. If my ‘boyfriend’ (it’s a bit complicated in a good way, but let’s go with that) were to lose his penis for some dreadful reason, wouldn’t I still love him? Obviously not. But I WOULD be less attracted to him. I have a friend that I find incredibly attractive as a man, but he does (goes in? What;s the parlance?) drag from time to time and although I appreciate the effort, that attraction is gone (even if it’s immediately apparent he’s a guy when you look under his crinoline)
There are men with a transgender history who are very attractive (although I never quite understand why they are always completely plastered in tattoos) to me, both faces and body. But for me, them not having a penis - having a vulva - would be a dealbreaker. To engage in sex with, I mean.
But it’s complicated. A friend of mine dated a girl who has clitoral hypertrophy to the point where it is permanently exposed and dimension-wise, in the region of a microphallus. I obviously didn’t handle or measure it, but I saw it - due to circumstances - on multiple occasions.
Her anatomy (I am wont to use ‘condition’ but there is obviously nothing wrong with her) makes it impossible for her to wear trousers or tights, and hyperorgasmic, although she does not suffer from persistent arousal disorder because it is caused by a demonstrable trigger.
At any rate, friends of him questioned his ‘straightness’ because he had a girlfriend “with a penis”
who actively and repeatedly sought relief.
The point I am trying to make is that the fact that his partner’s anatomy and responses were not common, had no reflection whatsoever on his sexual orientation. And I found their jokes deeply distasteful.
(In the end they broke up because he felt inadequate, sadly - and wrongly - enough.)
Erm, I think it’s much more common that current figures indicate, but compared to the entire spectrum, relatively rare - on a par with Kinsey 0 (and if you want a more extensive answer, I’ll gladly send you a DM.
Because I know that this view will trigger a *lot* of people (The reason I mentioned my own sexual orientation is because there is also this opinion that ‘real’ (full, whatever) gays like myself actively bi-erase, and additionally have this tendency to see ‘gayness’ everywhere.
Gaiety - yes. Gayness - not necessarily.Love the simplicity of it. Succinct, to the point: chef’s kiss!
These people don’t realise that that statement alone, exposes their transphobia. People who go under the burden of being transgender, need our love, understanding, and support: not our rejection, our scorn, our scrutiny. And of course, it’s a complicated matter, but it’s the trans person who decides what their journey is, and where it ends.
Since you are bisexual, it is logical to find men and women attractive, no matter what their medical history is. (I have some additional thoughts at the end)
Could not agree more!Smh. IDC enough tbh. It's over-complicating things imho
———-
This is not a response to you, just some musings on the subject you touched. As said: since you are attracted to men and women, obviously you’d also be attracted to men and women who have undergone medical treatments to remedy their gender dysphoria/dissonance.
It’s a complicated matter. I’m a Kinsey 6. If my ‘boyfriend’ (it’s a bit complicated in a good way, but let’s go with that) were to lose his penis for some dreadful reason, wouldn’t I still love him? Obviously not. But I WOULD be less attracted to him. I have a friend that I find incredibly attractive as a man, but he does (goes in? What;s the parlance?) drag from time to time and although I appreciate the effort, that attraction is gone (even if it’s immediately apparent he’s a guy when you look under his crinoline)
There are men with a transgender history who are very attractive (although I never quite understand why they are always completely plastered in tattoos) to me, both faces and body. But for me, them not having a penis - having a vulva - would be a dealbreaker. To engage in sex with, I mean.
But it’s complicated. A friend of mine dated a girl who has clitoral hypertrophy to the point where it is permanently exposed and dimension-wise, in the region of a microphallus. I obviously didn’t handle or measure it, but I saw it - due to circumstances - on multiple occasions.
Her anatomy (I am wont to use ‘condition’ but there is obviously nothing wrong with her) makes it impossible for her to wear trousers or tights, and hyperorgasmic, although she does not suffer from persistent arousal disorder because it is caused by a demonstrable trigger.
At any rate, friends of him questioned his ‘straightness’ because he had a girlfriend “with a penis”
who actively and repeatedly sought relief.The point I am trying to make is that the fact that his partner’s anatomy and responses were not common, had no reflection whatsoever on his sexual orientation. And I found their jokes deeply distasteful.
(In the end they broke up because he felt inadequate, sadly - and wrongly - enough.)
I also question the concept of fluidity. I characterize it as a concept because I don't think it exists in reality. We disagree on the existence of an acceptable narrative regarding fluidity; to wit, it is directional only one way. I think such a narrative does exist. You do not. It is okay to have such disagreements. Perhaps you are not accustomed to people disagreeing with you and you find it triggering. I do not. That may be another difference between us, but, again, that's okay.
And to reiterate once again: I invite you to include a reputable outside source to corroborate your statement. The paper @bigboaster referenced, for instance, centred on some type of fluidity, but explicitly mentioned it going in either direction.
You’ve also used the term ‘triggering’ multiple times, but that has a specific connotation which is not relevant in this. I don’t mind a disagreement, provided both parties back up their statements with facts, rather than uncorroborated opinions. That’s how we work.
I'm glad my tone came across well thenFirstly, let me say that I love this post, the overall tone of it
Erm, I think it’s much more common that current figures indicate, but compared to the entire spectrum, relatively rare - on a par with Kinsey 0 (and if you want a more extensive answer, I’ll gladly send you a DM.
Ah I see, I was leaning to that idea that it is probably quite common myself (purely based on personal experience admittedly) so that's an interesting take. And that's fine haha, I think anything discussed here would be valuable to anyone reading.
I think as a whole, most gays kinsey 6 or otherwise don't bi-erase tbh. I think LPSG as a microcosm does seem to attract some very binary minded individuals (again, just in my experience) but this doesn't represent the broader "gay community".(The reason I mentioned my own sexual orientation is because there is also this opinion that ‘real’ (full, whatever) gays like myself actively bi-erase, and additionally have this tendency to see ‘gayness’ everywhere.
Yeah I think that idea does subtly communicate that you think transpeople are some type of other than just a man/woman. You're right on the money with your logic here (Which is often the same defense that "pro Bisexual label" folks will employ to counter the idea of "calling yourself Pan just to indicate transgender attraction." crowd.
While not directed to me, this is a very thoughtful and profound perspective on that conversation, which can get very messy at times. Some of what you mentioned here is quite compelling and brings new light to the often simplistic conversation regarding genital attractions.
I also think it's still very important your aversion to that though, and those who would rather not indulge in sex with pre-OP trans people for these genital preference reasons. I think that is valid too. At the end of the day, who you choose to sleep with should be a free choice and fully consensual. I don't think that's too controversial. But also at the end of the day it isn't anyone's place to dictate what others get to do and police their identity simply because you don't agree with it.
I was debating whether I’d post a little follow-up because it’s well (actually, FAR) beyond the scope of this thread, but maybe I can reuse the text somewhere else, at some point. And maybe, it may help someone gain insight into themself
I should also add that this is only about MALE same-sex attraction, because I am not entirely convinced that FEMALE same-sex attraction ‘works in the same way’, so to speak.
If all confounding factors were removed, my guesstimate is that the incidence of Kinsey 0 and 6 in fully developed men - ie, over the age of 26-ish - is roughly equal: around 8 - 10 %.
There are TWO normal distibutions, one around Kinsey ‘1 ½’ and one around ‘4 ½’ (numbers used for theoretical purposes only, obviously) Because both overlap, you get a relatively higher incidence of 3, but lower than either norm [I hope you can still follow me ] It’s basically a camel with a higher ‘seat’ in the middle.
And as for the personal experiences: I fully agree with you on that, too, because I have similar experiences. [also here a little side note and even more controversial: I honestly think that male genitalia have an additional function besides sex and urination] I find that in men where ‘private’ parts are no longer ‘verboten’/‘dirty’ etc, the line between intimacy and sexuality tends to blur. Even more so when a Kinsey 6 is otherwise similar to them, but also equally open in his sexuality, as they are (eg, crude example ‘I love your cock’)
We helped a patient of us on their journey, and he started on hormone replacement therapy fairly early in life. I actually suggested an off-label use of pre-operative tretonin and together with silicone gel afterwards, his chest looks amazing! I must say, his therapy adherence is exemplary so in the end, the end result is to his own credit, but still - great. Undetectable scars!
The testosterone took extremely well and he’s undergone metoidioplasty (a new approach) and I must say, that has also gone extremely well. Of course his neophallus looks circumcised, there is nothing that can be done about it, but because he’s a short lad, it looks very proportionate (even biggish!), and it’s extremely sensitive to the point where even check-ups are … let’s say … embarrassingly pleasant
The reason I tell all this is that he’s become a cute blonde little twink, abs and all, and although he’s not my type (I prefer my men a bit more mature), I wouldn’t hesitate because of his medical history. I actually told him what a cute guy he has become - he’s gay, and he’ll attract men like flies
(I must say, the colleagues really did an excellent job!)
It certainly did. Was a pleasure to readI'm glad my tone came across well then
One of the topics I wanted to get back to. Now, without going into all the evidence WHY I think it is, as it is - it’s a synthesis of phylogenetic taxonomy, classical history, historical sociology, esp pertaining abrahamic religions, etc etc. I didn’t come to this conclusion lightly, nor am I the only one.
I should also add that this is only about MALE same-sex attraction, because I am not entirely convinced that FEMALE same-sex attraction ‘works in the same way’, so to speak.
If all confounding factors were removed, my guesstimate is that the incidence of Kinsey 0 and 6 in fully developed men - ie, over the age of 26-ish - is roughly equal: around 8 - 10 %.
There are TWO normal distibutions, one around Kinsey ‘1 ½’ and one around ‘4 ½’ (numbers used for theoretical purposes only, obviously) Because both overlap, you get a relatively higher incidence of 3, but lower than either norm [I hope you can still follow me
] It’s basically a camel with a higher ‘seat’ in the middle.And as for the personal experiences: I fully agree with you on that, too, because I have similar experiences. [also here a little side note and even more controversial: I honestly think that male genitalia have an additional function besides sex and urination] I find that in men where ‘private’ parts are no longer ‘verboten’/‘dirty’ etc, the line between intimacy and sexuality tends to blur. Even more so when a Kinsey 6 is otherwise similar to them, but also equally open in his sexuality, as they are (eg, crude example ‘I love your cock’)
I’m glad you don’t experience erasure because I still see that old-fashioned approach where bi is seen as ‘stuck on the road to enlightenment’
Firstly I wanted to thank you for your considerate and understanding reply, and your words of consolation. I felt I could add a small detail that further emphasises that it really is the genitalia, not the medical history of the person, that matters (to me)
We helped a patient of us on their journey, and he started on hormone replacement therapy fairly early in life. I actually suggested an off-label use of pre-operative tretonin and together with silicone gel afterwards, his chest looks amazing! I must say, his therapy adherence is exemplary so in the end, the end result is to his own credit, but still - great. Undetectable scars!
The testosterone took extremely well and he’s undergone metoidioplasty (a new approach) and I must say, that has also gone extremely well. Of course his neophallus looks circumcised, there is nothing that can be done about it, but because he’s a short lad, it looks very proportionate (even biggish!), and it’s extremely sensitive to the point where even check-ups are … let’s say … embarrassingly pleasant
The reason I tell all this is that he’s become a cute blonde little twink, abs and all, and although he’s not my type (I prefer my men a bit more mature), I wouldn’t hesitate because of his medical history. I actually told him what a cute guy he has become - he’s gay, and he’ll attract men like flies
(I must say, the colleagues really did an excellent job!
)
