undefinedValue

First of all, yes someone is comparing them, namely the person I responded to who said:

It’s like telling a black man to go pick cotton

Secondly, you’re wildly out of touch and in deep in your trans bubble if you think this is appropriate or comparable in anyway.

Black people were tortured, sold and the women were raped by the house master. They were starved, beaten and had their freedom literally owned by another person whose motivation was to work them to the bone.

You think getting called she when you really want to be a he is even in the same universe of suffering?

Did your autism prevent you from anticipating he would have countered your move by completing his down escalator and moving over to the one that goes up?

Ya kid I’m sorry but you don’t get to take the high road after using a chatgpt quote to take a cheap shot ad hominem during a discussion.

Your continual implications that I must be a repressed homosexual if I’m not into sucking every last drop of semen from a trans woman’s nut sac because she identifies as a woman and I’m an ally is …. wait for it… binary thinking.

I don't think it's gay or straight. Some bi people are exclusively interested in cis partner. Some bi people are pan. Some trans people are exclusively interested in other trans people. Someone maybe desires cis people and trans men. I think it's a failure of vocabulary, combined with a great deal of emotional charge and taboo.

Agreed.

Now consider my partner, who is non-binary. Traditional labels of sexuality risks misgendering when applied to non-binary people. I find the terms "androphile" and "gynophile" to be pretty useful, since they don't encode the gender of the person having the attraction, but even those are pretty limited.

Sure. There’s a double edged sword to creating new words or terms or reaching further into jargon to communicate your identity. By going this route you end up only being able to communicate to others who understand your jargon, and conversely to your goals communicate less effectively to the average person.

However, there are fundamentally two kinds of sexuality: queer and repressed.

What does this mean?

Well, I appreciate you for holding a civil discussion from a position of good faith nonetheless. This is quite rare on the internet and unique among the commenters replying to my original post.

So you disagree that I’m not allowed to be attracted to chicks with dicks? Are you that far gone? Imagine the brainrot required to tag in chatgpt into your discussion and quote it like some ancient philosopher. I bet you thought that was checkmate for me and this discussion?

You’re just out here throwing around generalizations about genders and people’s sexual identities, you should know better. These generalization's and stereotypes are the same feminist women have worked so hard to shirk off.

Your neo stereotype “that sucking dick ain’t gay if she identifies as a woman” is truly something to behold and reveals that you don’t really think about what you’re saying so much as repeat talking points from your ideology.

Ya, being with a trans man would be a lot less gay than a trans woman. Confusing, and probably worthy of the label queer but certainly not nearly as gay as actually sucking dick.

I agree being in a relationship with either of them would be confusing but the simple fact is I don’t like dick... I also don’t like pussy with a beard and chest hair, but I’m not in a place where I have to pick.

Trans women have dicks. Enjoying dick is a strong indicator you’re gay.

I would say it is gay to be attracted to a trans woman. Is this really a spicy take? And for context I do not think it’s gay to be into a muscular woman…