The whole debate over sexual fluidity in gay porn is a race to the bottom. Why doesn't anyone ever go after the straight porn stars?

[Smallteaplant]

You're missing the point. Sexuality being fluid isn't and doesn't refer to ALL people. It's mostly referring to a subset of people. The subset of people who experience their sexuality not being as fixed as they thought. The average person isn't fluid. The average person won't experience this.

It's a total misunderstanding of the concept. One which states that sexuality sometimes shifts naturally in some individuals vs the idea that anyone's sexuality is therefore malleable and can be changed (by pressures or coercion).

These are not the same position. People like Andrew Rodriguez and other conversion therapy proponents don't understand this distinction.

They don't care as their goal is to shape the culture to their values. They even admit that conversion therapy has its limits. My frustration is that homosexuality is not even on the table for the cultural war. The fact that queer theorists are even talking about deconstructing the concept of sexual orientation is concerning as it puts homosexuals in danger.

They love to spread the idea that homosexuality is some form of social contagion. Do you want to go back to a world where gays are some bizarre fringe?

 

[Koalaroo]

APA Dictionary of Psychology

gay​

Share button
Updated on 11/15/2023

1. adj. denoting individuals who have physical, romantic, and/or emotional attraction to people of the same gender.
2. n. a gay individual. See also homosexuality and lesbianism.

Note that they use gender, not sex.

lesbianism​

Share button
Updated on 11/15/2023
n. physical, romantic, and/or emotional attraction or behavior between women. The name is derived from Lesbos, an Aegean island where the poet Sappho (c. 600 bce) wrote glowing accounts of erotic activities between women. Formerly called Sapphism. See also homosexuality. —lesbian adj., n.

They were probably referring to this

Johns Hopkins pulls 'lesbian' definition after uproar over use of 'non-men' instead of 'women'

 

[Jjsurp99]

They don't care as their goal is to shape the culture to their values. They even admit that conversion therapy has its limits. My frustration is that homosexuality is not even on the table for the cultural war. The fact that queer theorists are even talking about deconstructing the concept of sexual orientation is concerning as it puts homosexuals in danger.

They love to spread the idea that homosexuality is some form of social contagion. Do you want to go back to a world where gays are some bizarre fringe?

Never seen people really caring about what you do in bed

 

[rimster42]

I couldn't care less. It is porn. I am there for a shag and a squirt. No more. No less.

Shag n Squirt should be a great name for a gay bar.

 

[Acratopotes]

Have a look before into the future.

Dr Lisa Diamond was making a very similar point to me on the born this way argument. She examined this in more detail than I, spoke very clearly and has better credentials.

With regard to Robin Dembroff's point about referring to sexual orientation based only on the person attracted to and not the person experiencing the attraction, I can see a point there. As long as everyone is cis-gendered the terms straight, bisexual and gay seem to have a very obvious meaning. As soon as trans-gender people are included it gets a bit more complicated. Until I did some reading I didn't know whether a MTF trans-sexual attracted to me would be called gay or straight. It also invites argument as to how complete the M to F transition needs to be to be considered straight. It is the persons internal identity and no external changes are needed? Does external gender expression need to be involved? Or do we only call that person straight after surgery? With Robin Dembroff's suggestion we ditch that whole thing and say "Here is someone who fancies men". The issue I can see with it, is that "a person who fancies men" has to have a different name than either gay or straight otherwise it would only add to the confusion rather than resolve it.

I didn't really identify with the man presenting the longer video, the one with the cross in the background. I don't agree that somehow the tables have turned so that, rather than being seen as pathological, being LGBT is now seen as trendy and superior and, while I also don't know Dr Lisa Diamond any more than he does, I would be very surprised indeed if she favoured any programme to promote same sex attraction in people for whom it did not naturally occur.

It is also worth pointing out the expression of someone's orientation changing naturally over time is something that happens to some people only. You could reasonably argue that these people are actually a form of bisexual in that the neurological mechanism to support both attractions must be there, but different attractions have been activated at different times in their lives.

And, as I said before, I can see that, especially in the USA, there will always be those trying to make a case as to why hetronormity should be promoted and even enforced but, while that is a reason to be ready to fight against it, it isn't a reason to deny what scientists are saying.

The fundamental, for me, is that a society does not need to be intolerant of people's identity, attractions and their sexual behaviour, as long as it is consenting adults. Americans talk about freedom and about living in the land of the free. This is one important aspect of freedom and that should always be part of the argument.

 

[gayny84]

Not all of us who have grown up 'LGBT' who fought for equality, acceptance and the desire to integrate into society are on board with what this has turned into. It's now an aggressive push with an ideology that's not grounded in anything the LGBT movement was fighting for. Equality & acceptance

Why am I now supposed to accept terms like calling me 'queer', it's a revolting word and it was used hate speech for many gay men and kids particularly. I personally suffered physical violence in the 90s with that word used by the perpetrators. People who faced no repercussions since apparently being assaulted at school or on your way home weren't criminal enough since f@gs like me deserved it, or I should try to be less 'homo'.

I, and many others I know personally along with a growing voice online do not accept anything past the T being attached to our sexuality. Gender identity and fluidity are their own thing and also have no basis in reality. T being part of the LGB I understand even though this isn't a sexuality, since they were always part of our movement and many died and experienced violence fighting for rights with us. Traditional transexuals are not the same as people now self-IDing as non-binary who all claim to be 'transgender'. So many older trans-people worked their butts of with an acute desire to transition to the opposite sex, of which there are 2 sexes. Not scales of gender. Also there's a medical basis for transsexual people who are diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Kids now walk into a gender affirming clinic, say they feel like a boy/girl and get handed puberty blockers, hormone treatments and have been able to get breasts cut off.

This doesn't mean we have to accept random girls claiming they identify as NB or men with lipstick and a wig with full facial hair jerking off in a women's bathroom as part of LGBT. There's plenty of science and medical basis behind LGBT people and the fact that we are genetically different (mentally for T).

Why are 1/4 youth in US now identifying as 'LGBTQ'? (queer/trans grew here)

View attachment 131484761
Source

This is a huge topic that warrants plenty of discussion and debate on really important issues that aren't just ideas and beliefs, but have real-world consequences particularly with kids. 'Gender affirming care' allowing children under 18 to permanently remove organs and become infertile along with becoming medicalised for the rest of their lives is a not acceptable. There's also plenty of new research coming out to support that any medical intervention shouldn't be tolerated until someone's an adult. Lots of new research has come out to show people on a new perspective on old narratives and non-scientific surveys that were pushed by places like GLAAD. Cass Review everyone should know about already from last month, and this one done in Netherlands https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1359104510378303

Also this is the point where having literally any difference of opinion from 'LGBTQAI+' causes you to be deemed transphobic, homophobic, bigoted etc. If you don't fall in line with every talking point and idea that the activists and LGBTQ media promote than you're branded with any of these labels. Individual thought and expression isn't promoted - instead you're forced to accept that gay porn now includes FTM content even when the performer hasn't had bottom surgery. I should be okay that there's examples of teachers teaching about gender identity and pronouns, and that there's also books created for this age with cartoon depictions of gay fetish kinks. LGBT was never about pushing this stuff onto them which this new monstrosity formed from the old LGBT movement has demanded. This just brands your average gay man as a creep since we're 'part of the same group' even though I have nothing to do with what's currently being pushed.

I'm not transphobic for not getting hard looking a vagina. I'm a gay man, when I want to watch gay porn I only want to seen men and their wonderous cocks and loads. When I date, I only want a biological male. I have 3 friends who are traditional transexuals who also share similar views, they don't expect a straight or gay person to be attracted to them. And they get plenty of dick since their have their own community and people are are specifically into what they have going on (trans porn is pretty huge).

I'm sure the Marxists here who don't believe gays like me have a right to being ideologically different are allowed to have these views, apparently because I'm a man who's attracted to other men means I have to share all the same beliefs and world-views.

Also stop using cis, who likes to be called cis? At a minimum, 99% of the world's population is 'cis' and we don't need an ugly label to differentiate ourselves from trans-people. Add this the laundry list of concepts being pushed onto the larger non-LGBT population which is now being pushed back against, understandably, causing LGBT acceptance in the US to go backwards for the first time in over a decade.

This!

 

[gayny84]

Never seen people really caring about what you do in bed

Then you must not get out much

 

[Smallteaplant]

The fundamental, for me, is that a society does not need to be intolerant of people's identity, attractions and their sexual behaviour, as long as it is consenting adults. Americans talk about freedom and about living in the land of the free. This is one important aspect of freedom and that should always be part of the argument.

The problem is that sex is always regulated even in heterosexual spaces. As a black man, I find the sentiment that Americans have the freedom to be misleading. Sex has always been regulated, especially heterosexual sex. Black men, Asians men, and Latinos were hanged for even being in the proximity of a white woman. Despite being in 2024, interracial relationships are still taboo for heterosexual couples.

 

[Acratopotes]

The problem is that sex is always regulated even in heterosexual spaces. As a black man, I find the sentiment that Americans have the freedom to be misleading. Sex has always been regulated, especially heterosexual sex. Black men, Asians men, and Latinos were hanged for even being in the proximity of a white woman. Despite being in 2024, interracial relationships are still taboo for heterosexual couples.

I did say "Americans", rather than we, as I live in the UK. But is what the people of the world so often hear from Americans. "We cannot give up guns because it is an important part of freedom enshrined as a right in a constitutional amendment". In the early days of the Internet there way as a very strong message about freedom of speech from many of those who had access by way of being part of American academia. Then it is even there in the lyrics of the American National Anthem.

But, people can be hypocrites about freedom. They can be all for having freedom themselves, for the things they want to do, while at the same time supporting restrictions on other people's freedom.

Fortunately, in the UK, we never had the segregation that happened in the USA. Some people can be racist and this was much worse in the past than it is now. There are still some issues, like a black man who drives a BMW or Mercedes more likely to be stopped by the police (on suspicion of funding it from drugs), than a white man. That would almost certainly annoy by wife's gynecologist. But we haven't had any legal restriction on mixed race sex or taught white women to fear black men.

But, back to freedom, I do think there is a certain amount of fear about how powerful the sex drive is. All the Abranhamic religions have a strong anti-adultery theme. The Bible has several passages devoted to it in both testaments. It gets addressed several times because it is something people struggle with. If we try to make laws that restrict people's sexual behavior, for the most part they ignore them.

My view is that if a society comes to the conclusion it must place limits of people's freedom, it should be because there is some identifiable harm from not doing so. "I don't like the idea of people doing that" or "my religion holds that doing that is a sin" are not sufficient reason.

 

[Kill4555]

Dr Lisa Diamond was making a very similar point to me on the born this way argument. She examined this in more detail than I, spoke very clearly and has better credentials.

With regard to Robin Dembroff's point about referring to sexual orientation based only on the person attracted to and not the person experiencing the attraction, I can see a point there. As long as everyone is cis-gendered the terms straight, bisexual and gay seem to have a very obvious meaning. As soon as trans-gender people are included it gets a bit more complicated. Until I did some reading I didn't know whether a MTF trans-sexual attracted to me would be called gay or straight. It also invites argument as to how complete the M to F transition needs to be to be considered straight. It is the persons internal identity and no external changes are needed? Does external gender expression need to be involved? Or do we only call that person straight after surgery? With Robin Dembroff's suggestion we ditch that whole thing and say "Here is someone who fancies men". The issue I can see with it, is that "a person who fancies men" has to have a different name than either gay or straight otherwise it would only add to the confusion rather than resolve it.

I didn't really identify with the man presenting the longer video, the one with the cross in the background. I don't agree that somehow the tables have turned so that, rather than being seen as pathological, being LGBT is now seen as trendy and superior and, while I also don't know Dr Lisa Diamond any more than he does, I would be very surprised indeed if she favoured any programme to promote same sex attraction in people for whom it did not naturally occur.

It is also worth pointing out the expression of someone's orientation changing naturally over time is something that happens to some people only. You could reasonably argue that these people are actually a form of bisexual in that the neurological mechanism to support both attractions must be there, but different attractions have been activated at different times in their lives.

And, as I said before, I can see that, especially in the USA, there will always be those trying to make a case as to why hetronormity should be promoted and even enforced but, while that is a reason to be ready to fight against it, it isn't a reason to deny what scientists are saying.

The fundamental, for me, is that a society does not need to be intolerant of people's identity, attractions and their sexual behaviour, as long as it is consenting adults. Americans talk about freedom and about living in the land of the free. This is one important aspect of freedom and that should always be part of the argument.

That heck first of all, she don’t even talk about it anymore. Now she speak out against it because her research is being used against the gay community and not only that she was literally with on a Mormon podcast teaching them how to do a conversion therapy the right way, and she post to be a lesbian And lots of lesbian women warned her about doing that research and that is going to be used against the gay community but she didn’t listen to them When Sexual Fluidity Is Turned Against Us

 

[Kill4555]

I don't think "protected characteristics" are based on how you are born though. They are alternatively referred to as "immutable" characteristics. Aka things that you cannot change.

Gays not being literally "born gay" doesn't actually contradict this principle. It's been well established that one's sexuality cannot "change". Conversion therapy and such practices make that veye clear as well.

Of course, you saying being gay is a choice you support that homophobic sexual fluidity conversion therapy bullshit no wonder why people don’t take pansexual seriously they believe everybody sexual orientation is a choice

 

[deleted23661881]

I agree that trans people are a very small minority, something that easy to forget given how much fuss is being made, but there is utility in having a word (prefix) which means the opposite of trans and, linguistically, cis is exactly that. People may say "What's wrong with normal?". How would gay people react if straight people were referred to as normal? It would imply that being gay was abnormal. So we need a different word.



The impression I got was that the big increase is in people identifying as bi but even that seems to be controversial. There was another post on here recently commenting that there are plenty of people who have some limited sexual experience with their own sex or who talk about having at least some attraction to their own sex who nevertheless identify as straight, and making a case that these people should identify as bi. There was a YouGov poll in the UK a while back (1 in 2 young people say they are not 100% heterosexual | YouGov) and the "not completely straight" category had grown significantly, i.e. people whose attraction was mainly oriented towards the opposite sex and who were looking for a partner of the opposite sex, but who could function well enough with their own sex to get some fun out of it and reached 49% among 18-24 year olds.

Then, back to gender identity and gender dysphoria, it seems to be this is a complex area. At one level there are people who seem to have a very strong internal sense that they are male or female that completely doesn't match their genitals. One current theory as to why that should be is that there are differences in the brain that develop in the womb. The default is for an embryo to develop as female. Apart from differentiating the gonads into testicles rather than ovaries, which is driven by the SRY gene (usually found on the Y chromosome), all the other virilisation happens as a result of testosterone but different things happen at different times. A failure to virilise the relevant part of the brain in an otherwise male fetus results in someone who feels female but with male genitals and virilisation of that part of the brain in an otherwise female fetus results in someone who feels male but with female genitals. Clearly in those cases this is more than social conditioning and we really can't expect to talk someone back to identifying as the gender of their physical body.

At the other extreme we have people whose likes and dislikes and how they see themselves in society don't match the norms for their sex. To what extent these people should live as the opposite sex from the one apparent at birth is up for debate but, for me, it seems the solution may be being more flexible about our expectations of people. We can all observe, and we can read books like "Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus" but these only describe general trends. Just as, while men are, on average, taller than women yet some women are taller than some men, so there are plenty of people who don't fit the generalization and that is all part of natural variation.

If trans people can choose how they identify, so can other people. If you are calling people "cis" against their wishes, how is it different than calling a trans woman a man?

 

[006]

If trans people can choose how they identify, so can other people. If you are calling people "cis" against their wishes, how is it different than calling a trans woman a man?

Curious, I consider myself a gay man but I’ve never once insisted that my brother call himself a “straight” man.

 

[deleted23661881]

Curious, I consider myself a gay man but I’ve never once insisted that my brother call himself a “straight” man.

You are corroborating what I said. I'm against insisting on calling people cis when they don't like it.

 

[AllieHeidi]

The default is for an embryo to develop as female.

This isn't correct. Sex is determined at the genetic/chromosomal level. The moment the sperm fertilizes the egg, the resulting zygote has the blueprint for what the fetus will be, including the sex. In other words, sex is determined at the moment of conception.

A Y-carrying sperm will provide the blueprint for a male fetus. An X-carrying sperm will provide the blueprint for a female fetus. At no gestational point is a male ever "female."

Source(s): Embryos aren't female by 'default' after all, study shows

 

[006]

You are corroborating what I said. I'm against insisting on calling people cis when they don't like it.

My point is it wasn’t necessary to label them. Homosexuals are the minority so the gay label is to distinguish us from them.

 

[Smallteaplant]

The reason why I hate this whole debate is that gay men will never have the kind of power that straight women have in the dating market. Outside the world of only fans and sex work, the sexual realm is dictated by the needs and desires of straight women. There is a reason why bisexual men are closeted and that straight men hide their interest in trans women.

Take a look at the video below. This straight cis woman is trying to shame and get a reaction from a man who made out with a trans person.

x.com



This is why I think that the whole LGBT acceptance is a farce. This is why I believe that the entire debate over trans in porn is silly because if that is the only thing that gay men can defend then we lost the plot.

 

[Jjsurp99]

The reason why I hate this whole debate is that gay men will never have the kind of power that straight women have in the dating market. Outside the world of only fans and sex work, the sexual realm is dictated by the needs and desires of straight women. There is a reason why bisexual men are closeted and that straight men hide their interest in trans women.

Take a look at the video below. This straight cis woman is trying to shame and get a reaction from a man who made out with a trans person.

x.com



This is why I think that the whole LGBT acceptance is a farce. This is why I believe that the entire debate over trans in porn is silly because if that is the only thing that gay men can defend then we lost the plot.

I agree with you

 

[Smallteaplant]

For the naysayers, look what happened. How do you explain this?

 

[gayny84]

D

View attachment 135904941



For the naysayers, look what happened. How do you explain this?

Desperation