• DarkCloud@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    I went and read the article so much more ridiculous than I thought:

    The article its self is so stupid. Saying the dumbest shit:

    Although men with such interests are usually stereotyped as being gay, this could not be further from the truth. In fact, research has found that the vast majority (73%) of men who have sex with male-to-female transsexuals identify as straight or bisexual

    Although men with such interests are usually stereotyped as being gay, this could not be further from the truth.

    Okay, so now we’re ignoring bi people as being a little same sex attracted? Wtf do these people think being gay means??? This is lala land stupid shit.

    Likewise, persons who run trans porn sites have reported that most of their clients are straight men and that they have next to no gay audience at all [3].

    Leading into quotes from consumers of said websites:

    “An exoticness, a uniqueness, something that can’t be obtained elsewhere. They’re just totally unique in their sexuality in that they’re both…men and women and at the same time, neither men nor women. To me that’s my fascination.” [2]

    “I like the girls with a little something extra, you know what I mean.” [2]

    Yeah, if you’re jerking off to someone’s male aspects or that “something extra” that’s same sex attracted - aka in common parlance: ghheeeey.

    Like the “something extra” is a penis. That’s gay. I can’t believe these ridiculous people who would claim otherwise.

    Yeah, sex is a subtle and diverse spectrum and all - but same sex attraction is same sex attraction. If we’re going to stop saying what we mean, or going to pretend things are what they aren’t…then we can’t communicate on any of this, and shouldn’t talk.

    Bi is a little gay. Looking at trans porn involving penises, is pretty gay. Pretty same sex attracted. Which means gay.

    …and then so much of what you complained about wasn’t even in the article. Like hell dawg, what’s up with that?

    • orioler25@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Wow, you wrote all of this and then talked about a bunch of pseudoscience in the other comment, and you didn’t even read my fucking comment, I seriously can not with you people anymore. I specifically mentioned in my comment that the article was outdated, and you wrote this.

      All of this and it’s obvious you haven’t so much as read Gender Trouble, let alone anything relevant to this topic besides some obviously liberal assimilationist talk that ignores both queer history and queer scholarship that explores the cultural production and reproduction of gender and sex.

      Why pretend to care if you don’t? Unreal.

      • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        “You people”

        I’m not a fan of Judith Butler’s hyper specificity, no, and I don’t pretend Gender Trouble (which is also a bit dated) is the be all and end all of queer studies. Also no one said anything about assimilation - I said communication… Which ultimately everyone has to do.

        Anyways, uptight leftist with a quick temper when disagreed with (reproducing a culture much?), I’ll leave you to it.

        P.S Do Liberals often complain to you about Capitalism forcing people into porn? Really - try to be a bit more coherent with your insults next time.