What do you think more people should experience as part of their journey of exploring their sexuality that, in your opinion, not enough people have tried?
What do you think more people should experience as part of their journey of exploring their sexuality that, in your opinion, not enough people have tried?
I mean you don’t have to have a penis anymore to be a dude, so…
I chose my words carefully. I was intentionally hardware agnostic.
Then you should understand how concepts can change and being gay doesn’t require dudes at all.
Oh get a hobby.
Not all dudes have penises. Big deal. You know what they meant.
Being gay doesn’t require dudes, yeah, because lesbians are a thing.
Either you’re an ally or you’re not. Spit it out but don’t beat around the bush. OP meant no disrespect, but when you act ambiguous like that it makes you look like you mean disrespect.
For real, imagine thinking it’s not gay to be a dude and get fucked by Buck Angel hahaha
“but his… he doesn’t… wait…”
I genuinely don’t. Y’all have played around with language and concepts to the point it isn’t clear what lots of stuff means, especially if one’s hobby isn’t ally studies. Since, apparently, I don’t have hobbies, I guess it isn’t.
See what happens when you use arbitrary labels for things that are more complicated than previously thought?
Is it “gay” for a cis man to be attracted to trans women? Is it straight? What about a cis man being attracted to trans men? Is he gay or straight? I gave my answer to that but because other people have different interpretations, so labels like “gay” and “straight” should be reserved for self-identification and not as ways to identify an outgroup. That’s why those labels are unhelpful in these contexts: It makes talking about the physical acts confusing.
My original intention was to make fun of people who call things they don’t think are manly enough “gay”. Just because the word can have different definitions depending on who’s using it doesn’t mean it’s acceptable to use it derogatorily or as a shorthand for a perceived social negative.
It is very confusing. It was not so confusing until the existing words were all changed to not mean what they did. Now nobody can even tell me if there are words for the concepts that the words once meant, even though the concepts still exist but now don’t have words. Almost like it’s an effort to erase the very concepts. Which wont work as long as ppl find meaning in those concepts and the distinctions they make.
Am I just crazy to consider groups of humans with the same reproductive organs to be meaningful things to have a words for?
We do have names for them because the way science works is you update the way you talk about things when you learn more information about how they truly work. We used to think sickness was caused by an imbalance of the four humors, but now we know that there are tons of different causes for different diseases and they all work in different, complex ways. I’ll reiterate the other reply.
To refer to someone by the genitals they were born with, you use AMAB and AFAB, if you’re discussing solely biological sex and not gender identity. You can call someone presenting masculine male regardless of their reproductive organs, or you can call someone with a penis male if you don’t know their gender identity but they either apparently present masculine after they understand the concept of gender, or they don’t present a gender identity at all before their concept of gender identity forms. That’s why in most discourse now we don’t use “male” and “female” to describe humans since it’s reductive and bioessentialist language, and reserve it for animals since they don’t have a concept of gender identity. We instead use “man” and “woman” for people who identify as either binary gender regardless of biological sex, and AMAB and AFAB for biological sex regardless of gender identity.
Why didn’t we keep the old words for the old concepts and make new ones for the new concepts? Who is deciding all this? In another thread they said male and female aren’t used for reproductive systems differences anymore, are they right or are you?
The way I see it: If you’re a guy, cis or trans, and you exclusively have sex with a guy, cis or trans, you’re gay. If you’re a guy and you exclusively have sex with women, cis or trans, you’re straight. But different people might classify those labels under what physical body types you’re attracted to instead of gender identity, so I prefer to use body-specific language when talking about sexual activities rather than gender identity and sexual orientation, because the latter two can make talking about sex more confusing than it needs to be.
What’s a guy, in this context?
An adult human who identifies as male due to their male brain chemistry, independent of assigned birth sex based on genitals, secondary sex characteristics, or sex chromosomes.
Is male not an assigned birth sex based on reproductive organs? What do we call everyone who has an inny and everyone who has an outy genitals?
AMAB and AFAB, if you’re discussing solely biological sex and not gender identity. You can call someone presenting masculine male regardless of their reproductive organs, or you can call someone with a penis male if you don’t know their gender identity but they either apparently present masculine after they understand the concept of gender, or they don’t present a gender identity at all before their concept of gender identity forms. That’s why in most discourse now we don’t use “male” and “female” to describe humans since it’s reductive and bioessentialist language, and reserve it for animals since they don’t have a concept of gender identity. We instead use “man” and “woman” for people who identify as either binary gender regardless of biological sex, and AMAB and AFAB for biological sex regardless of gender identity.
Who decided all this? I’ve never heard anyone use Aman or afab at all. Do doctors and scientists confirm to this?