Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 08-25-2010, 03:21 PM
SourGirl's Avatar
SourGirl SourGirl is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: South of an Igloo, North of a Desert.
Posts: 885
Default

SC : good question.

I can sum it up easily, in the sense that 'Attraction" is based on multiple points to me. It is the sight of someone, hearing them, smelling them, the meeting of the minds, how they touch,..who they are, it`s everything. It all has to come together, to be part of my attraction to them.

When one of those things is absent, or vanishes, then the attraction disappears.

'Genitalia" would be a part of that. I can say without question, that the various physical aspects of being transgendered, is not physically attractive to me. That would be part of the 'sight', or the physical attraction.

Since I see no shame in anyone being transgendered, I would not suddenly recoil if I thought someone was of one sex, and they turned out to be transgendered.

Then, it would be much like any other type of initial attraction, then ends up dissipating. Not all the parts of attraction are there for me to follow through with.
For example, If I met a straight male, thought he was initially cute, but then some other aspect caused the attraction to diminish, ..
Well, a shrug of the shoulders would occur, and onward I would carry.

Since I have dealt with someone who was post-op having a interest in me, I can say without a doubt, that the attraction wasn`t there for me, though we continued to be good friends until I moved out West.

Could I guarantee it would always be this way ? Of course not. I can say that past behaviour is the greatest indicator of future behaviour, so most likely not. Who knows how I`ll feel when I am 40 ? 50 ? etc,...I can only be true to my personal laws of attraction as they stand right now.

This is protocol for all areas of my attraction to someone, and I imagine for most people. You start with interest, and based on what you find out, the interest grows, or dissipates.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 08-25-2010, 03:29 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SchrodingersCat View Post
I don't see where the psychobabble part supposedly comes in.

This is why I said it was "psychobabble":

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonKaos View Post
So, what you guys are saying is that people think that when someone says that they're "bisexual", as opposed to "pansexual", it must mean they want to have sex with everyone they meet, just because they are male or female?

That's the silliest thing I ever heard. It would seem to follow that heterosexuals want to have sex with every person of the opposite sex, and homosexuals want to have sex with every person of the same sex. We're ALL attracted to "people not genders". I have never met a single person that was attracted to others JUST because they were a certain gender. That's like saying you're attracted to people just because they are a certain race. I know there are folks who date only people of certain races, but that still doesn't mean that someone who dates, say, only African Pygmies is attracted to every African Pygmie they happen to meet.


Get real.

But, this wasn't the first time you didn't read the entire conversation before responding, and i do not expect it to be the last, either. On this forum, it's fairly common for people to take things out of context and run with it.

Last edited by NeonKaos; 08-25-2010 at 03:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 08-25-2010, 03:45 PM
Ariakas Ariakas is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,830
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SchrodingersCat View Post
I'm especially curious since you identify as bisexual, meaning you don't have an aversion to either penises or vaginas. I can see how a straight woman could be attracted to men and men dressed as women but not men with their penises cut off, because the penis is tied to her attraction... but if that's not the case for you, then what gives?
I think you may be reading into the language too much and not the context. When I read that I read "she has never been attracted to a transexual"

It doesn't say she can't be, just that she never has.

It would be like me saying I have never been attracted to short girls. When I was...oh 18 I had never dated anyone under 5'9. I had never been attracted to, and didn't believe it was possible for me, to be attracted to short girls. Boy was I wrong...

Thats my take on her posts anyways. Also if you read her post...#12, she does say she realized she wasn't likely pan and likely bi-sexual. So two vs all applies ...

Ari
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 08-25-2010, 06:16 PM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,632
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magdlyn View Post
Ive met and spoken with lesbians who were partnered with a butch lesbian, then this butch realizes she is actually male, and transitions. The relationship may or may not survive. The nontrans partner, if she stays with the other, now male, person, may still cling to her dyke ID, even tho she now seems heteronormative when walking down the street with her transman or boi.

And now she's stuck with dealing with all that testosterone... just like straight women. God bless her heart.
Thanks for writing this. This is how I came into accepting pansexual as my definition of my sexuality. I was lesbian idenetified for about ten years and around age 30 there was suddenly more talk about trans and a bunch of my friends decided they were trans or genderless. I had been interested in a few of them and the thought of them changing genders or being genderless didn't change that. In fact it actually was more attractive as they were more confident. To me confidence in someone is very attractive, regardless of gender. In some cases I either sat up and noticed them more or was attracted more.

As to M to F?; this is newer to me and a bit more puzzling. While I keep my mind open, I haven't met anyone who I find attractive yet. I am open to the possibility though.
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 08-25-2010, 08:14 PM
rabbit rabbit is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 34
Default

This is interesting to read because I identify as bisexual but could potentially be attracted to transgender people (I haven't really had to make that call in real life, that I know of, but I see no reason to rule it out). I am comfortable with the term bisexual since 1) I won't have to explain a whole new term to people at the same time I explain my orientation to them and 2) I feel it can cover attraction to transgender people regardless of what gender they started as. I also understand why people like the term pansexual, but sometimes the conversation makes it sound like bisexual people are never attracted to transgender people or genderless people, when many are and just prefer to use the more common word. I don't want someone to assume that because I'm bi, I am somehow not able to be attracted to those people or less accepting of those genders than someone who prefers the word pansexual.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 08-25-2010, 08:23 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rabbit View Post
This is interesting to read because I identify as bisexual but could potentially be attracted to transgender people (I haven't really had to make that call in real life, that I know of, but I see no reason to rule it out). I am comfortable with the term bisexual since 1) I won't have to explain a whole new term to people at the same time I explain my orientation to them and 2) I feel it can cover attraction to transgender people regardless of what gender they started as. I also understand why people like the term pansexual, but sometimes the conversation makes it sound like bisexual people are never attracted to transgender people or genderless people, when many are and just prefer to use the more common word. I don't want someone to assume that because I'm bi, I am somehow not able to be attracted to those people or less accepting of those genders than someone who prefers the word pansexual.
Thank you for saying what I have been too frustrated to put into words myself.

There are only two genders, male and female. I believe that people can fall along a whole spectrum when it comes to combining the two genders, but there is no such thing as a "third" gender, so the prefix "bi", meaning "two" works just fine.

Navel-gazing semantic psychobabble. Intellectual masturbation.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 08-25-2010, 08:40 PM
redpepper's Avatar
redpepper redpepper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 7,632
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonKaos View Post
Thank you for saying what I have been too frustrated to put into words myself.

There are only two genders, male and female. I believe that people can fall along a whole spectrum when it comes to combining the two genders, but there is no such thing as a "third" gender, so the prefix "bi", meaning "two" works just fine.

Navel-gazing semantic psychobabble. Intellectual masturbation.
What of those who are identifying as genderless then?
__________________
Anyone want to be friends on Facebook?
Send me your name via PM
My blog
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 08-25-2010, 08:40 PM
Magdlyn's Avatar
Magdlyn Magdlyn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Metro West Massachusetts
Posts: 3,288
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rabbit View Post
I also understand why people like the term pansexual, but sometimes the conversation makes it sound like bisexual people are never attracted to transgender people or genderless people, when many are and just prefer to use the more common word.

I've been noticing the word genderless being used here. This is not a term I have heard used in the trans community. I think the preferred term is genderqueer, or androgynous, depending to whom you speak.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonKaos View Post
Thank you for saying what I have been too frustrated to put into words myself.

There are only two genders, male and female. I believe that people can fall along a whole spectrum when it comes to combining the two genders, but there is no such thing as a "third" gender, so the prefix "bi", meaning "two" works just fine.

Navel-gazing semantic psychobabble. Intellectual masturbation.

Actually, Neon, I respect that's your opinion, but as a genderqueer person myself, I object to it. Agree to disagree. Some traditional cultures that are accepting of transppl identify up to 30 genders. This may not be important to you as a woman firmly on your side of the spectrum, but it is important to many in the trans community, not "babble," which is a dismissive term.

For example, what would you call a person born with ambiguous genitalia? Do they have to choose sides to make you comfortable? Certainly doctors in Western culture choose a side for them at birth, assigning them one kind or another of sex organs through surgery. The doctors (our culture) are not comfortable leaving them be.
__________________
Love withers under constraint; its very essence is liberty. It is compatible neither with envy, jealousy or fear. It is there most pure, perfect and unlimited when its votaries live in confidence, equality and unreserve. -- Shelley

There's no lying in polyamory!

I'm a 58 year old woman with 2 partners:
miss pixi, my live-in gf, 36 (together since Jan '09)
Ginger, bf, 61, married, lives nearby (together since Jan '12)
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 08-25-2010, 08:55 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by redpepper View Post
What of those who are identifying as genderless then?
What ABOUT them?
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 08-25-2010, 09:01 PM
NeonKaos NeonKaos is offline
Custodian
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: new england
Posts: 3,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magdlyn View Post
I've been noticing the word genderless being used here. This is not a term I have heard used in the trans community. I think the preferred term is genderqueer, or androgynous, depending to whom you speak.




Actually, Neon, I respect that's your opinion, but as a genderqueer person myself, I object to it. Agree to disagree. Some traditional cultures that are accepting of transppl identify up to 30 genders. This may not be important to you as a woman firmly on your side of the spectrum, but it is important to many in the trans community, not "babble," which is a dismissive term.

For example, what would you call a person born with ambiguous genitalia? Do they have to choose sides to make you comfortable? Certainly doctors in Western culture choose a side for them at birth, assigning them one kind or another of sex organs through surgery. The doctors (our culture) are not comfortable leaving them be.

Listen. I read books. I watch Star Trek. I know there are hermaphrodites with representations of both genitalia and gonads. But it takes TWO, not THREE or THIRTY genders to reproduce. This isn't science-fiction. Show me a picture of a "third gender". Something with bits OTHER than a penis or vagina. Something OTHER than testes or ovaries, or a combination of the two. SHOW me a Z chromosome.

No one has to "choose sides" to "make me comfortable". Just SHOW ME an example of a "third gender", other than an abstract intellectual concept.

"Psychobabble" in this case is taking an old idea and acting like it's new just because someone thought of a cool-sounding word for it.

Last edited by NeonKaos; 08-25-2010 at 09:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:54 PM.