Gay or Nah?

[MisterB]

I don’t think anyone is telling you whom to sleep or not sleep with.

Me talking about my sex life was also to make the point that it's not anyone's business who someone chooses to sleep with and why. It's just not.

The discussion seems to be about honest labeling.

Not my take with what this discussion is about.

This thread seems to be more about gatekeeping. Worrying about other people's attractions and who they find appealing to sleep with.

As far as honest labeling? No such thing.

Labels are attempts by others to classify how they think a person should label him/her/themself. That's bullshit.

You are not qualified to foist your labels on me or anyone else. You don't know us. It's smacks of judmental bullying. It's up to me and anyone else to identify or "label" themselves as they deem appropriate. Period.

For instance is a “proud, 100% gay man” who craves pussy really gay(homosexual? Instead of changing the definition of established labels (e.g.: it’s still gay if a gay man loves having penis-in-vagina sex) perhaps more updated labels should be considered (e.g.: trans-attracted)

You and some others seem more focused genitals. When it comes to transsexual folks, genitals are NOT what necessarily defines how they've chosen to identify. Or label themselves if you will.

It's ridiculous for you and others to try and tell others how "gay" they are. Or aren't.

Not your business. Doesn't affect you.

You are not them. And the assigning of labels is simply an attempt to make sense of something you and others don't understand. Because your attractions, like others, are inherent.

Labels are just arbitrary tools used by some folks to perpetuate their ignorance about that which they don't know.

#nolabels!

 

[patrixk12]

@aheidla po co zakładać wątek z tym pytaniem, skoro wszyscy jesteście pewni, co o tym myślicie? Wygląda na to, że jest to przynęta, aby dać sobie możliwość wyrażenia tego, w co wierzysz.

Prośba ta powinna być obustronna.

Kwalifikowanie tego, czy gej jest "złotą gwiazdą", czy nie, jest dla mnie bardzo męczące.

For me, what you've written is like I'm a bit bi but more homo-romantic. I haven't had sex with a trans man, but I have had sex with a woman and bisexual sex, which I enjoyed the most because I was having sex with both a woman and a man. I also think trans men can be attractive, and I would probably have sex with one, but I would likely not be in a relationship with one because I am romantically attracted to men. Even if I felt sexual and romantic attraction to a trans man for a while, I feel that this attraction would fade over time because I am more drawn to cis men due to their body, stature, and behavior. It’s no accident that on gay Pornhub the most popular category is "straight guy". And why I think when people, especially gay men, say that pussy is amazing because it is, at the end of the day, I prefer the male energy that I can't get from a woman, and I feel I wouldn't get it from a trans man either.

We can say who cares who someone has sex with and who they form a relationship with, and what may surprise you, it even concerns trans men. On Reddit, several trans men have described how hard it is to find a bi guy, gay guy, or pan guy who not only wants to have sex with them but also be in a relationship with them. Now I’ve noticed that if you are a trans man and look like a handsome, hot guy, they are convinced that some gay or bi guy will want to build a relationship with them. Unfortunately, there is an entire thread on Reddit showing how tragic and strange it is to tell these people that what counts is who you consider yourself to be and who you are, not your biological sex and genitals. Then on Reddit, you read the story of a trans man who was with a gay man for 3 years. They had an open relationship because the gay guy wanted to have sex with gay cis men. Towards the end of their relationship, even though he felt they were a good match, the cis gay man had less and less sex with the trans man, and the sex became rougher and less romantic. He felt he was not as attracted as at the beginning of the relationship, and the gay guy decided to end the relationship, saying he prefers cis men, which was quite devastating for that trans man. A similar situation happened with a bi guy, but he said he wanted to end it because he wanted to be with a biological woman.

So, we can say that we are not attracted to a certain sex, genitals, specific behavior, and gender roles, but in the end, I’m afraid that most hetero, bi, or gay people will choose a cis man or cis woman as a long-term partner. Although there are lasting relationships of trans men with gays and trans women with hetero men, they are unfortunately in a significant minority and end in divorce and, worse, in the suicide of the transgender person because they feel that no one will love them. Another problem for trans men on Reddit I’ve noticed is that younger trans men, aged 18-20, are often harassed more by older men aged 40-60, which sounds to me like a typical predator.

I have a question: are you a bottom, top, or versatile, and do you like to give oral sex or not? Do you prefer to dominate in a relationship or not?

 

[dreambridger]

I have a question: are you a bottom, top, or versatile, and do you like to give oral sex or not? Do you prefer to dominate in a relationship or not?

I'm a true vers and an ideal relationship to me is reciprocal. Though if the specific connection involved calls for me to take on one role or the other, I'm fine with that too, I can adapt and have a good time.

I don't specifically fetishize "straight men" and never really understood the draw to that.

I don't claim to know the general feelings of trans men or anything like that. I've never had an LTR with a trans man and couldn't tell you how it would play out, but I can only imagine that it would depend on the specific person and the specific connection. That being said, I don't like Reddit, and I don't think it's a balanced data pool to analyze the real world. I'm pretty resistant to any statement that feels like a generalization.

Sexuality orientation, to me, is simply preference. So call me a "bit bi" if you like, i suppose that I do have flexible edges, but since I have no doubt that my preference is for men, it's more appropriate that I identify as gay. Calling myself bi would probably lead to disappointment and confusion for some.

 

[006]

Below is from the initial post by the creator of this thread defining the discussion:

Are gay men who sleep with and/or desire to sleep with transmen 100% gay or do they fall somewhere else on the Kinsey scale?

So I don’t think mentioning labels is irrelevant here.

And the assigning of labels is simply an attempt to make sense of something you and others don't understand.

Exactly correct, what is wrong with trying to make sense of something not understood?

Incidentally, I have had sex with a trans man.

 

[MisterB]

Below is from the initial post by the creator of this thread defining the discussion:

Appears I'm not the only Member who believes this thread to be questionable:

@aheidla why start a thread asking this question if you all ready are so sure how you feel about it? Seems like baiting to give yourself the opportunity to express what you believe.

this request should be mutual.

qualifying whether or not a gay is "gold-star" is very tiresome to me.

^^^He's exactly right; thread set up with OP's preconceived beliefs.

Which seems to make it more of an affirmation "who agrees with me" thread rather than one designed for open discussion.

Which is why I've weighed into this thread with my posts.

So I don’t think mentioning labels is irrelevant here.

We'll then agree to disagree. Assigning labels about that which one is ignorant makes such labels irrelevant. And unnecessary.

Exactly correct, what is wrong with trying to make sense of something not understood?

Nothing wrong with trying to make sense of something one does not understand. Rather than assign labels, wouldn't it be best to ask about that which one does not know before assigning said labels?

Incidentally, I have had sex with a trans man.

I am aware from having read your posts about it.

But does not give you nor the OP any right to assign labels to or about people. Let those people label themselves. The judgment is what I don't understand. That somehow your thought process is somehow justification for labeling people you don't know.

Instead of sweeping with a general broad brush as this thread seems to want to do, focus on the individual. And how he/she/they wish to identify and label themselves.

Recognize and respect the individual. And their right to "label" themselves as they choose. Not what you or others may think that person should be.

Let me close by saying that I consider myself a work in progress. I've had the wonderful opportunity to have been on the transition journeys of many male to female human beings I've known. Who shared their deepest fears and hopes. And one common thread was to be treated as an individual.

And be referred to and treated as a woman. Just as I would suspect a FTM would want.

I too am a "gold star gay" as you and others wish to label those of us who have not had sexual relations with a cis female.

Before partnering, I was very busy! And I don't not recall one time me seeing a sexual partner's genitals prior to getting busy. It was my attraction to them. Their maleness if you will.

Which leads me to believe if I were single and met a FTM and found him attractive, I would be interested in becoming intimate. In spite of his genitals. Because as a "gold star gay" I'm attracted to men. Male energy.

And if I hooked up with a FTM, I would still consider myself a "gold star gay". Because I slept with a man. Period.

 

[006]

Appears I'm not the only Member who believes this thread to be questionable:

^^^He's exactly right; thread set up with OP's preconceived beliefs.

Which seems to make it more of an affirmation "who agrees with me" thread rather than one designed for open discussion.

Which is why I've weighed into this thread with my posts.


We'll then agree to disagree. Assigning labels about that which one is ignorant makes such labels irrelevant. And unnecessary.


Nothing wrong with trying to make sense of something one does not understand. Rather than assign labels, wouldn't it be best to ask about that which one does not know before assigning said labels?


I am aware from having read your posts about it.

But does not give you nor the OP any right to assign labels to or about people. Let those people label themselves. The judgment is what I don't understand. That somehow your thought process is somehow justification for labeling people you don't know.

Instead of sweeping with a general broad brush as this thread seems to want to do, focus on the individual. And how he/she/they wish to identify and label themselves.

Recognize and respect the individual. And their right to "label" themselves as they choose. Not what you or others may think that person should be.

Let me close by saying that I consider myself a work in progress. I've had the wonderful opportunity to have been on the transition journeys of many male to female human beings I've known. Who shared their deepest fears and hopes. And one common thread was to be treated as an individual.

And be referred to and treated as a woman. Just as I would suspect a FTM would want.

I too am a "gold star gay" as you and others wish to label those of us who have not had sexual relations with a cis female.

Before partnering, I was very busy! And I don't not recall one time me seeing a sexual partner's genitals prior to getting busy. It was my attraction to them. Their maleness if you will.

Which leads me to believe if I were single and met a FTM and found him attractive, I would be interested in becoming intimate. In spite of his genitals. Because as a "gold star gay" I'm attracted to men. Male energy.

And if I hooked up with a FTM, I would still consider myself a "gold star gay". Because I slept with a man. Period.

You’re correct that we should agree to disagree.

 

[Chiballana]

It can be. If one continues to keep dying their hair the same color, it can essentially be permanent. Similarly, transitioning involves a constant regimen of taking cross-sex exogenous hormones.

Just as one can stop dying their hair and allow their natural hair to return, transitioning can, in many ways, also be reversed.

But, of course, we don't want to talk about them. They're not allowed to speak.

transitioning isn`t always reversable, you should know that

 

[AllieHeidi]

But does not give you nor the OP any right to assign labels to or about people. Let those people label themselves. The judgment is what I don't understand. That somehow your thought process is somehow justification for labeling people you don't know.

It seems to me that this rule of thinking is only applied in one direction. For example, I, personally, don't like being labeled "cis" because it implies that I am "identifying" as a woman when I'm not. I just am one. It's coded into my DNA.

The push back is usually "Well, that's what you are." In other words, it's okay for me to be labeled by others based upon their beliefs and ideologies, but those same individuals consider a like response to be "hateful" or offensive. Do you not find that somewhat contradictory or hypocritical?

 

[MisterB]

It seems to me that this rule of thinking is only applied in one direction. For example, I, personally, don't like being labeled "cis" because it implies that I am "identifying" as a woman when I'm not. I just am one. It's coded into my DNA.

No disagreement from me.

In fact, I'd say we don't need to "label" anyone who identifies as a woman, whether she is born one or transitions.

Because I've known many women who did transition from male to female, I know personally how each of them felt. They were women. Just their exterior didn't match. After transitioning, they felt complete. Whole. A woman.

The push back is usually "Well, that's what you are." In other words, it's okay for me to be labeled by others based upon their beliefs and ideologies, but those same individuals consider a like response to be "hateful" or offensive. Do you not find that somewhat contradictory or hypocritical?

I find it unnecessary because the push back is uncalled for. Not their business.

And that's really the gist of what I'm saying here and elsewhere in similar LPSG-themed threads.

Mind your business. Unless you've been invited to share your opinion. Which is usually NOT the case, eh?

 

[006]

No disagreement from me.

In fact, I'd say we don't need to "label" anyone who identifies as a woman, whether she is born one or transitions.

Because I've known many women who did transition from male to female, I know personally how each of them felt. They were women. Just their exterior didn't match. After transitioning, they felt complete. Whole. A woman.


I find it unnecessary because the push back is uncalled for. Not their business.

And that's really the gist of what I'm saying here and elsewhere in similar LPSG-themed threads.

Mind your business. Unless you've been invited to share your opinion. Which is usually NOT the case, eh?

I came to this thread for the purpose of having this discussion. It doesn’t sound like you approve so now that you’ve made your point you can move on.

Your opinion doesn’t allow you to stop the rest of us from continuing this discussion.

 

[MisterB]

I came to this thread for the purpose of having this discussion.

As did I. Which is what you and I and others here have been doing, eh? At least that's my understanding given the definition of discussion:

The action or process of talking about something in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas. A conversation or debate about a certain topic.

It doesn’t sound like you approve so now that you’ve made your point you can move on.

Seems like a flawed premise: Where in the definition of discussion is the requirement that one must approve to engage in discussion?

Your opinion doesn’t allow you to stop the rest of us from continuing this discussion.

Point out where in this thread I've done so.

Like you and others, I bring my life experiences to this discussion. They frame the basis for my thoughts and opinions that I, along with others, like you, have freely shared.

 

[dreambridger]

You're more patient than me @MisterB. I gave up when I realized the unyielding agenda here.

 

[AllieHeidi]

You're more patient than me @MisterB. I gave up when I realized the unyielding agenda here.

There is no "agenda" and I don't exactly appreciate the insinuation. I created this thread because this topic kept derailing the "Gay Men having sex with FTM" threads due to the debates peppered throughout. Obviously, many forum members have opinions about this topic, myself included, and this thread was created as a space for it to be discussed without causing a negative experience in those threads for others who just wanted to enjoy videos and pics.

I responded to you explaining this but the entire post was deleted because I, apparently, said something offensive and was reported. It is quite difficult to discuss this topic candidly on here (or anywhere) because people are quick to shutdown opinions and thoughts they disagree with as hateful. Ironically, this only serves to further alienate people as opposed to educate.

 

[006]

As did I. Which is what you and I and others here have been doing, eh? At least that's my understanding given the definition of discussion:

The action or process of talking about something in order to reach a decision or to exchange ideas. A conversation or debate about a certain topic.


Seems like a flawed premise: Where in the definition of discussion is the requirement that one must approve to engage in discussion?


Point out where in this thread I've done so.

Like you and others, I bring my life experiences to this discussion. They frame the basis for my thoughts and opinions that I, along with others, like you, have freely shared.

Look, we agree to disagree, I don’t think by we are judging others by using labels in our discussion for clarity.

Aheidla- We know where Mister B stands and I hope we can continue the discussion. I’m curious about what you said about androphilia. I believed myself to be a gay man with an aversion to vagina but it somehow must have been mitigated with my trans friend by his general masculine appearance.

 

[MisterB]

Look, we agree to disagree, I don’t think by we are judging others by using labels in our discussion for clarity.

Agreeing to disagree means just that.

While I don't agree with a lot of the judgmental comments that have been espoused in this thread, I do agree with anyone's right to state their opinions. Doesn't mean I have to or will agree.

Again, discussion of what it a rather hot button issue is how I see it.

And an opportunity for me to consider those comments disparate from my thought process.

Aheidla- We know where Mister B stands and I hope we can continue the discussion.

I would appreciate it if you would not continue to make such comments; where I stand is quite evident to anyone who wishes to read the thread. There is no need for you to reiterate such. Please and thanks!

 

[AllieHeidi]

I’m curious about what you said about androphilia. I believed myself to be a gay man with an aversion to vagina but it somehow must have been mitigated with my trans friend by his general masculine appearance.

I've genuinely found the topics of both androphilia and gynophilia particularly fascinating with how it relates to sexual orientation. Because as previously established earlier in this discussion, save for people in nudist colonies, we don't see people's genitals first, we see their secondary sex characteristics. Thus, human attraction is "pre-wired" to primarily function in an androphlic or gynophilic capacity.

Androphilia and gynophilia are, maybe, for some people more dominant when it comes to their sexual attraction compared to their homo or heterosexual leanings. That's my working theory, anyway.

 

[006]

Because as previously established earlier in this discussion, save for people in nudist colonies, we don't see people's genitals first, we see their secondary sex characteristics. Thus, human attraction is "pre-wired" to primarily function in an androphlic or gynophilic capacity.

You have a point, but I’d be lying if I said that I never imagined or thought about the cock of a guy I found sexually attractive before seeing him naked.

Just the mere thought of having sex with an attractive guy for me, anticipates he’d have a cock and balls and what I’d like to do to them. Even his ejaculation (together with my own) is part of lustful imaginings.

 

[Chiballana]

I've genuinely found the topics of both androphilia and gynophilia particularly fascinating with how it relates to sexual orientation. Because as previously established earlier in this discussion, save for people in nudist colonies, we don't see people's genitals first, we see their secondary sex characteristics. Thus, human attraction is "pre-wired" to primarily function in an androphlic or gynophilic capacity.

Androphilia and gynophilia are, maybe, for some people more dominant when it comes to their sexual attraction compared to their homo or heterosexual leanings. That's my working theory, anyway.

this thread shows that attraction to secondary sex characteristics can override attraction to genitals, it`s a complex subject

 

[AllieHeidi]

You have a point, but I’d be lying if I said that I never imagined or thought about the cock of a guy I found sexually attractive before seeing him naked.

Just the mere thought of having sex with an attractive guy for me, anticipates he’d have a cock and balls and what I’d like to do to them. Even his ejaculation (together with my own) is part of lustful imaginings.

I'm sure you have. And in 99.9% of cases, your presumption that said attractive guy has male genitalia will be correct. On the rare occasion that it's not the case, your experience with the trans guy shows that for you the androphilic components of your sexual orientation can override the homosexual components under very specific circumstances.

In other words, presence of female genitalia on a masculine/male appearing body isn't a complete turn off for you. Does that mean that you, and other guys like you, aren't otherwise 100% gay men? Not necessarily. Is a biological male having sex with a trans man homosexual sex? No. It is, technically, a heterosexual encounter between two organisms (humans) of opposite biological sexes. That's it.

Androphilia is not exclusive to male homosexual or female heterosexual and bisexual orientations. It is possible for a heterosexual male to be somewhat androphilic and attracted to masculine females. The same can be said for gynophilia with regards to heterosexual women.

Stranger things have happened. And human sexuality has many bends.

 

[Chiballana]

I'm sure you have. And in 99.9% of cases, your presumption that said attractive guy has male genitalia will be correct. On the rare occasion that it's not the case, your experience with the trans guy shows that for you the androphilic components of your sexual orientation can override the homosexual components under very specific circumstances.

In other words, presence of female genitalia on a masculine/male appearing body isn't a complete turn off for you. Does that mean that you, and other guys like you, aren't otherwise 100% gay men? Not necessarily. Is a biological male having sex with a trans man homosexual sex? No. It is, technically, a heterosexual encounter between two organisms (humans) of opposite biological sexes. That's it.

Androphilia is not exclusive to male homosexual or female heterosexual and bisexual orientations. It is possible for a heterosexual male to be somewhat androphilic and attracted to masculine females. The same can be said for gynophilia with regards to heterosexual women.

Stranger things have happened. And human sexuality has many bends.

I don't think an attraction to him could be considered gynephilic since he only has male secondary sex characteristics and viceversa for her regarding androphilia. The only feminine thing he has are feminine mannerisms and the only masculine thing she has are masculine mannerisms.