| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Like I said, it's about normalcy (or the illusion thereof). Raise people into thinking a behaviour is normal, and you can ensure that behaviour will be perpetuated and normalised in a self-reinforcing cycle. That's why our battle as LGBT folk is to challenge that perception of normalcy, and highlight that it's just one of the myriad possibilities for normalcy.
That unfortunately does tend to make people react very emotionally, as shaking up their perceptions tends to evoke irrational reactions. So tread with care.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Combat on the battlefield of ideas is primarily a spectator sport. It's not generally about convincing the particular person you're arguing with, but those witnessing the argument.Not really.
First, I don't know that we need to "properly combat" homophobes on the "battlefield of ideas." I mean, what's the point? They've already lost everyone younger than the Boomers, and debate doesn't change people's minds. In fact, presenting people with facts that contradict a closely held belief actually makes them double down on the original belief.
I'm aware of that. It's the only reason I bother debating anti-LGBTQ people -- well, not even primarily to convince those witnessing the argument, but to signal to them that if they're LGBTQ or allies, they're not alone in whatever space we're in.
And if you don't understand and impute untrue motives to the people you debate, you lose legitimacy even among those who otherwise agree with your major points.
There's an argument to be made, however, that by actually seriously arguing with them, you're legitimizing their viewpoint.
I also think you're overly optimistic about 'anyone younger than baby boomers' being accepting. I'm under 30 and have met plenty of people my own age or younger who are pretty homophobic.
Probably should have clarified -- I'm speaking demographically, not about every last individual.
I think you may be making unfounded assumptions about the opinions of everyone due to living in a primarily liberal community. I'd likely do the same, as I live in one as well...but I've lived in conservative communities as well. They're a very different place. I still remember being the only person in the room at a college event who believed in evolution...
No, I'm making assumptions founded on demographic data. 74% of millennials support gay marriage, and that support has been climbing as more and more hit adulthood. Political attitudes of teenagers match those of their parents' more closely (71%). Which is to say that, on an overall basis, once millennials leave their parents' homes, if they were raised by parents who opposed gay marriage, they're still likely to change their mind and support it. There's zero reason to believe that Generation Z won't follow the same pattern as they leave their Gen X parents' homes.
There are absolutely pockets of the population that are behind the curve on accepting LGBTQ people. And there are absolutely individual millennials who are homophobic. But by and large, the culture has shifted, and all signs point to it continuing to shift.
There will be millennial holdouts 20 years from now. There will be Gen Z holdouts, too. But unlike now, when the Boomers still largely control politics, entertainment, religion, and other opinion-shapers, they're going to be seen as fringe cases, not people with normal opinions. There are still people who believe interracial marriage is wrong, but you don't see them getting airtime as anything but villains or embarrassing grandpas.
There's certainly a majority support for LGBT rights in the younger generations, but it's not anywhere close to a consensus,
Politically speaking, 74% is a consensus. Since they started tracking approval ratings in the 40s, for example, the highest average a US president has ever had while in office is 70.1%, and that was Kennedy, our most popular president (retroactive approval ratings, of course, are higher).
And the future is in the hands of people who are at 74% approval, and climbing. 59% of Republicans under 50 support gay marriage, so even there, it's a majority. 57% of Southerners support it.
Perhaps most remarkably, in the past ten years, support from people over the age of 65 went from 18% to 46%. That's a landslide shift among the demographic least likely to change their minds on issues.
There's a lot of work to be done on the details, and it's not like everything is magically okay now, but on a national level, the fight over whether it's okay to love someone of the same gender is over, even if it takes a few more decades for the holdouts to realize their side is a lost cause.
and given the tendency of people of particular political ideologies to cluster, there are whole states where it's likely the minority.
See above. Yes, there are still states where it's the minority. (But even in the states most opposed to it, 1 in 3 people support it.) They're not only getting squeezed out generationally, they're even getting squeezed out geographically.
And such clustering is actually part of the problem. If you and others casually dismiss one whole side of the argument as lying when it's clearly not as simple as all that, that actually increases that side's perceived legitimacy in the eyes of those who have dealt with it previously, and only widens the cultural divides between the different sides of the issue, which causes real problems in the long term, such as with the children of those people. Even if you hate your father and disagree with him utterly, if you know him to be honest as the day is long, it's hard to side with people who say he's not only wrong, but lying. Especially if the implication is that he's lying with a sinister agenda.
Show me data. Because I've never found that saying, "I don't see that there's anything to discuss: gay people deserve equal rights. End of story," has resulted in less support from onlookers than letting opponents of gay rights bog you down in minutiae and other derailing tactics.
it's clearly not as simple as all that
Yeah, it is. The only case where it isn't is religious arguments; pretty much every non-religious argument against gay marriage has been proven, over and over again, to be based on false data.
Which means the only arguments that aren't straight-up lies (and thus not worth engaging other than to point out that the data's false) are religious arguments (since they're not fact-based). And the only way those are worth having--since, again, you're not going to change the mind of the person you're debating with--are if there are onlookers who both accept the idea that the Bible should have any say in how they live their lives and are either pro-gay-marriage or on the fence about it. Those people certainly exist, but you have to have fairly thorough knowledge to debate on those terms--whereas most pro-LGBTQ religious people and non-religious pro-LGBTQ people find the "it's not the government's place to enforce religious belief" argument compelling, and it's simpler.
So except in highly specific circumstances, yes, it is that simple.
And refusing to understand the other side of the issue is a great way to 'Other' them and stop thinking of them as complex people with both good and bad points, which leads to all sorts of badness on a grand scale.
No it's not. It's a great way to think that their viewpoint on this issue isn't complex and that they don't have anything to say worth listening to on it.
I have friends and relatives who oppose gay marriage. They're complex people, like everyone else, with the capacity to be both good and bad.
On this individual issue, however, they have nothing worthwhile, new, or nuanced to say, and it's not worth discussing with them.
As a complex person myself, I'm capable of recognizing that people have many facets. And I'm confident in labeling a few individual facets as "straight up wrong/bad." Thankfully, I don't have any white supremacist relatives--at least not beyond the sense of, "they're in their 90s and occasionally make embarrassing assumptions"--but if I did, it'd be pretty similar. Disgust fuels most opposition to gay marriage, and disgust in this case isn't rational. If you want more on why that opposition isn't rational and we shouldn't be humoring the idea that it is, I highly recommend Martha Nussbaum's From Disgust to Humanity: Sexual Orientation and Constitutional Law.
I'm sure you personally wouldn't do this, but it's one of the major consequences of widely accepting the idea of not needing to understand the opposition.
Again, I don't grant you that premise, and moreover, I don't think my opinion is based on a lack of understanding.
I'm capable of understanding the idea that a moral source one accepts as authoritative tells you it's wrong for two people of the same gender to have sex. And I'm capable of understanding the position that morality is absolute and shouldn't be judged on whether or not a particular action does harm. I disagree with it, but I am capable of understanding the position.
But I believe that arguments against gay marriage, whether they attempt to cite reason or religion as their basis, are largely what people use to justify their opposition to gay marriage and their desire to see being gay treated as something shameful, rather than the source of those opinions. (The fact that there are significant numbers of Jews and Christians out there who either don't view homosexuality as wrong, or don't view it as a wrong that requires legal intervention, and the fact that most gay marriage opponents admit that there are plenty of other sins in the world but don't feel compelled to lobby for legal action against those suggests that the opposition doesn't stem from religious doctrine, even if religious doctrine has given articulation to, or helped shape, the attitudes underlying it.)
And given that whether the person espousing those opinions is fully conscious of it or not, they're arguing a cover rather than what they really feel, they're not arguing in good faith.
And one I'm really concerned about in our culture as a whole, and thus feel the need to argue against. I believe that it's vital we not lose sight of the basic humanity of our opponents and dismissing them as pointlessly malevolent without considering how and why they believe as they do is a great way to lose sight of that.
I think you can dismiss someone's beliefs on an individual subject as pointless, petty, and harmful, even if they're not consciously malevolent, without losing site of their humanity.
The "if you don't treat my feelings about how gay people should be treated as less than human as legitimate, you're treating me as less than human" argument has never moved me.
Those debates are certainly more productive, yes. Debates with people with really abhorrent views are more preventative than anything. Their purpose is to prevent people from believing that the abhorrent view is normal or acceptable, and to single out reasons why it isn't legitimate. In short, to keep people who observe the debate for falling for the aforementioned propaganda.
That's not progress as much as it is damage control, but it's still a good idea.
And again, I disagree. We don't generally debate people who insist that our political leaders have been replaced by reptilians. Most people don't bother debating open white supremacists, either. They give them horrified looks and walk away--literally or figuratively.
I think that it's worth debating things like whether representation is pop culture is important, how to respect religious boundaries while ensuring that gay people aren't disadvantaged in their access to the same opportunities straight people have, and the role of law in reaching and maintaining equal treatment, and I believe productive conversations can be had between people with widely differing opinions on those issues.
I don't think it's worth debating someone who thinks same-sex romantic/sexual relationships should be illegal.
That's...not how the term 'disingenuous' is used in general discourse. It's used almost exclusively for intentional dishonesty, not merely lying to yourself. I mean, I agree that a whole lot of the attitude taken by most homophobes is pure rationalization, but that doesn't make it disingenuous in that term's normal usage.
One of the nice things about language is that sometimes you can use a word in a way it's not usually used to make a point that things that aren't usually compared are actually similar.
In fact, that's sort of how language works, otherwise we'd communicate entirely through preset phrases.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Kadir beneath Mo Moteh.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh that's going to be a legal firestorm.
Awesome news though. Interesting to see if it holds up to review.
I don't think it will pass the higher courts. I can see them saying that sex =/= sexual orientation. I also agree with that interpretation. My sex does not determine my orientation. I can see them saying that the language needs to be clearer. I also want the language to specifically state that you cannot be fired for your sexual orientation. We can't have the law be that vague.
One thing that would certainly help is if someone was fired for being straight. That would be amazing. It would send the message that LGBT folks have been saying all along: it isn't right to be fired based on your orientation.
I can see the law protecting transgender folks. I can see the courts saying that, for the purposes of the law, gender identity and sex are the same thing.
The argument, as I understand it, isn't that "sex==sexual orientation", but that such discrimination is inherently based on sex, because you are punishing a man for being interested in men where you would not punish a woman for being interested in men (or vice versa).
It's an interesting bit of legal ju-jitsu. More logical than I initially thought. I'm not at all sure the courts will buy it.I do agree we need more, but more isn't coming out of any Congress we're likely to have soon, so this will help in the meantime.
One can hope that if the courts were to question this ruling, it would draw attention to the lack of explicit protections in a way that is sorely lacking today.
69% of Americans thought employment discrimination against LGBT people was already legal. If this ruling were to get tied up in court, perhaps it would be the impetus to actually make that a reality.
Though there seems to be a LOT of support for Transwomen at Paizo, I thought this was an interesting article for the other side of the equation.
Something of interest (though this article is only about ONE option of several and their difficulties in dealing with it) that I think could help increase awareness of the difficulties that some Trans suffer with and through.
As I said, there are some other options, but it does touch upon the perception that in many instances Transwomen are favored in many ways and hence the progress in that avenue has progressed far faster and in greater ability than that for Transmen (not that this makes life any easier or the situation any better for them, just that medically speaking the idea is that currently the process favors those who are Transwomen, at least from some viewpoints).
PS: Don't read the comments to the article, at least at this time. All you'll find is a lot of stuff you probably don't want to...seriously. Ironically, in some ways it validates and reinforces exactly what the article is talking about though.
On a slightly different note, this is another article by the same author (who is also Trans) and their advice, or at least observations, on things that are affected when you decide to under go transition.
|
System Administrator
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Transmen have always had a really hard time in the sex part of transition, but I don't think I've ever met a transman that a year or two after testosterone and a double mastectomy didn't sound and look 100% male as long as shorts were maintained. Transwomen tend to have a harder time in the day to day, as estrogen can't reverse the damage done by Testosterone. Woe betide the few who weren't actually trans to begin with. They do have a surgery but it's 3 times as expensive as mtf bottom surgery and isn't nearly as good. They have to take skin from some other part, there's very little sensation, it's always flacid. Just not a good substitute and so a lot of transmen just do without.
By 'shorts were maintained' you mean as long as he kept his shorts on, or was that a typo for 'shots'?
Since we've now had a successful penile transplant, I wonder if there will be transwomen donating theirs to transmen. I think this opens up a new era in (re)constructive surgery.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since we've now had a successful penile transplant, I wonder if there will be transwomen donating theirs to transmen. I think this opens up a new era in (re)constructive surgery.
IIRC the description of the mtf surgery posted in this thread many pages ago, parts of penis are used to construct vagina so probably not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We also have created vaginas in the lab, successfully implanted them in women, and they work too. We are in a new era. Sure it's going to still take another 5, 10, 15 years but we're going to have so many more options in the very near future.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah. The custom grown organs are the way to go anyway. No Cyberpunk scare of mass organ thieves, no issues with tissue compatibility.
Yeah. The custom grown organs are the way to go anyway. No Cyberpunk scare of mass organ thieves, no issues with tissue compatibility.Organ-legging!
Organ-legging gang that specializes in reproductive and sexual parts? Ouch.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've tried. Really. I did. In the end, this thread is just too long. Intimidatingly so, even. I tried to read it all. The whole thing. There is just too much of it to fit inside. Its just too hard. Maybe I should have read it in stages, take it all in more slowly. Maybe. I just wanted it so much, you know?! So, I had to stop it in the end. I'm not giving up on it. Not just yet. I like this thread too much to do that. I'm going to reverse positions. Post some myself first. I'll read after that. I'm sure it'll be great.
Contrived and forced innuendo aside, the above is (almost) completely true when taken literally. I'm sorry if this comes off as flippant but I just don't have the energy to engage in the current topics discussed right now, especially considering how involved it already is. I just don't want it to keep me away completely. I do want to become involved in future conversations from this point forward. I hope you're all cool with that.
Now that that is out of the way I guess I should introduce myself. I'm ArcaneAddict (I cannot get enough of arcane casters. I pretty much play them exclusively), I'm 29 and live in the Netherlands as an unemployed librarian (my choice of career is dubious in hindsight), caregiver to my deaf and mentally challenged parents and hopefully going back to school in 2016 studying history (potentially dubious choice again. I cannot help it, I'm a romantic!).
I'm gay. Sort of. To be honest I find it frustrating and tedious to explain the exact details of my sexuality to people (even if it really isn't that complicated. To me anyway.) so I opt for the convenient, easy to understand and closest to true label instead. I think thats ok mostly because I really don't want my sexual identity to be confused too much with my actual, total picture identity. Not that it really works too well, I'm still the only gay guy in my circle of friends. We like ribbing eachother and more often than not the jokes that come my way are about me being gay. I don't mind the jokes themselves, hell, I actually think they're funny, I just think it gets tiresome that they keep drawing from the same well so much. Its uninspired. I tell them all the time. It doesn't help. We all like ourselves too much to adapt for one another and have to much respect for each other's individuality to demand changes. Really, we're one of those incestuous, tightknit groups of iconoclastic friends that are somehow too disconnected from the world to allow it to affect us, often forgetting that fact and so our collective dysfunctionality causes hilariously chaotic situations. You know those groups, they show up in tv-shows all the freaking time.
I'm rambling. Moving on! I've been out since 18 or 19, maybe 20, I don't exactly recall, shortly after finally realizing it and coming to terms with it. I sort of suspected it earlier, around 15 or so, but somehow it took me forever to actually get it.
The worst reaction I've had coming out was my dad's. "I don't like it, but you make your own decisions." Since then the topic has been sort of a taboo in our house, but I'm ok with that. My family has a lot of those. Its nice to be included in that rich tradition. Every other reaction I've come across has been positive, though, at times, I could tell it was a little bit of a shock and people needed time to process it. I'm ok with that, too. I've also had "Well duh, you moron!", "Hey! Dave! Pay up, he's gay!" and "I told you that three years ago!". My favorite is "Really?! I couldn't tell." without a hint of sarcasm (or maybe I'm just too oblivious to have noticed). Or maybe my mom blankly staring at the tv.
Somehow sexuality has never been a factor in our games. We're too busy saving the multiverse for that. Oddly enough most other aspects of our characters' identities is welldeveloped and often plays a role in our games. Sexuality is seemingly left out by accident, not by conscious choice. I wonder why that is as we otherwise have no trouble discussing it. Its curious, really.
I suffer from a curse. I'm almost always attracted to straight guys. Obviously that never works out to my advantage. They always find out after we both get terribly drunk and I kiss the guy, to our mutual surprise. Luckily, so far, thats always been ok. I'm still good friends with all four of my victims. Continued exposure to the object of my unrequited affection makes for a very long, very frustrating time to get over the crush. I've been pining over the same guy for slightly over two years now, ever since I've met him, and I don't see that changing anytime soon. At the same time I'm ok with it. And, hey, I did get at least one kiss out of it!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey! Thanks :D
Its a huge relief, really. I can get pretty anxious over even the most trivial things sometimes. Its really nice when the doomscenarios playing out in my head are dispelled. Especially so quickly! I really appreciate it :)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah. The custom grown organs are the way to go anyway. No Cyberpunk scare of mass organ thieves, no issues with tissue compatibility.Organ-legging!
my crime of choice once the dragons come back and magic returns and the 6th age begins.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Welcome, friend!
Please do not worry about my organ legging, as we are still in the 5th age and it is impossible currently.
I must be missing something because I don't see a quote button. Really, these forums are a little different from those I'm used to, I'm still trying to figure stuff out. Anyway, I wanted to quote Freehold DM's 'crime of choice in the 6th age comment'.
Really?! Organ-legging?! I have to wonder why. I mean... Come on, there's magic! Conveniently also the reason why I wouldn't be too concerned with your seemingly eccentric hobby. Also dragons.
thejeff, yeah, I remember! Well, sort of. I'm guessing you're emphasizing the 'weird' part. I'm thinking of Back to the Future 2. As a kid I actually believed the picture it painted of the future was accurate, simultaneously recognising that a timetravelling car was impossible. I was a brilliant kid, really, just... Out of touch. Just a smidge. Not much has changed.
my crime of choice once the dragons come back and magic returns and the 6th age begins.Yeah. The custom grown organs are the way to go anyway. No Cyberpunk scare of mass organ thieves, no issues with tissue compatibility.Organ-legging!Sadly (or not, because the Sixth World is pretty nasty), we're already past the date we were supposed to see metahumans and dragons.
Edit: Remember when 2015 was far enough off to set weird science fiction in?
*cough* 2001.
Also, around 1997 we were supposed to be at war with another species. Multiple times.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Judging from the way this thread goes, we're not only queer, we're ADD. WOOO, WE'LL TALK ABOUT EVERYTHING.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sadly (or not, because the Sixth World is pretty nasty), we're already past the date we were supposed to see metahumans and Dragons.my crime of choice once the dragons come back and magic returns and the 6th age begins.Yeah. The custom grown organs are the way to go anyway. No Cyberpunk scare of mass organ thieves, no issues with tissue compatibility.Organ-legging!
I don't know what you're talking about. The 6th age is awesome. Now please surrender your left kidney and at least one of your lungs and/or eyes. I am on a tight schedule.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I must be missing something because I don't see a quote button. Really, these forums are a little different from those I'm used to, I'm still trying to figure stuff out.The "reply" button is at the upper-right of any post. ^_^
Also there's a little button below the text box that shows you all the stuff you can do to format your text.
Post here often enough and you'll find yourself having to edit those out of your word documents....
Not that this happens to me on a regular basis or anything.... ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I must be missing something because I don't see a quote button. Really, these forums are a little different from those I'm used to, I'm still trying to figure stuff out.The "reply" button is at the upper-right of any post. ^_^
Well would you look at that! 'Reply' isn't really an intuitive choice of words for such a function, if you ask me. In hindsight it makes perfect sense though. Thanks for the help, Kalindlara!
Judging from the way this thread goes, we're not only queer, we're ADD. WOOO, WE'LL TALK ABOUT EVERYTHING.
Thats actually one of the reasons I like this thread so much. It proves we're not one-dimensional individuals completely obsessed with our sexuality. You know, people.
Edit: Thanks lynora! That button is near invisible to me!
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since we've now had a successful penile transplant, I wonder if there will be transwomen donating theirs to transmen. I think this opens up a new era in (re)constructive surgery.
While we've performed penile and uterine/vaginal transplants, so far they've only (to my knowledge) been performed on cisgender persons. This is key, because the human brain maps out afferent and efferent nervous connections to and from body parts in a rather specific manner. For transplants in which you didn't develop in-utero with those particular parts, the mapping is going to be different and that may cause issues in how the brain interprets information from the new organs and how it attempts to respond.
We genuinely have no idea at this point what would happen with regards to integration of exogenous transplanted genitals and reproductive organs. Is the brain adaptable enough to over time accommodate? I don't know. There's also a question regarding how a transgender person's brain responds to sexual stimuli (the process of sexual stimulation and climax in the brain is different between cis males and females, and to my knowledge no study has looked to see if this is different for transgender persons).
That said, this topic is $%^&^$& fascinating and the technology is awesome. Hopefully we won't see people in the "it isn't natural" camp or the "it's playing God" camp disrupt its progress. Science is awesome.
I suspect that we're going to be seeing less use of transplants from donors than we'll see custom grown organs simply to avoid immune rejection issues for the new tissue.
I've done work in regenerative medicine/lab grown replacement organs and tissues (livers in my case).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I suffer from a curse. I'm almost always attracted to straight guys. Obviously that never works out to my advantage.
I'm sure that's actually just called "dating". :)
Hi, Arcane Addict! Hope you feel welcome!
I suffer from a curse. I'm almost always attracted to straight guys.
My best friend is just like that, and so is one of my online friends. They've provided endless material for my eye-rolling practice. :P
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
my crime of choice once the dragons come back and magic returns and the 6th age begins.Yeah. The custom grown organs are the way to go anyway. No Cyberpunk scare of mass organ thieves, no issues with tissue compatibility.Organ-legging!Sadly (or not, because the Sixth World is pretty nasty), we're already past the date we were supposed to see metahumans and dragons.
Edit: Remember when 2015 was far enough off to set weird science fiction in?
*cough* 2001.
Also, around 1997 we were supposed to be at war with another species. Multiple times.
I've hooked my son on Transformers, both new and G1, and there's nothing quite like the opening to the movie where the announcer states "It is the year 2005..."
|
|
I suffer from a curse. I'm almost always attracted to straight guys. Obviously that never works out to my advantage. They always find out after we both get terribly drunk and I kiss the guy, to our mutual surprise. Luckily, so far, thats always been ok. I'm still good friends with all four of my victims. Continued exposure to the object of my unrequited affection makes for a very long, very frustrating time to get over the crush. I've been pining over the same guy for slightly over two years now, ever since I've met him, and I don't see that changing anytime soon. At the same time I'm ok with it. And, hey, I did get at least one kiss out of it!
Getting drunk and kissing someone that isn't that into you is pretty darn close to a cultural universal...
I'm sure I'm ruining the joke by asking but I'm going to need you to explain it. Sorry :/ I mean, I can interpret it in several funny ways, I just don't know which one you mean or if I'm overlooking a possibility.I suffer from a curse. I'm almost always attracted to straight guys. Obviously that never works out to my advantage.I'm sure that's actually just called "dating". :)
Hi, Arcane Addict! Hope you feel welcome!
I do! Thanks!
I suffer from a curse. I'm almost always attracted to straight guys.My best friend is just like that, and so is one of my online friends. They've provided endless material for my eye-rolling practice. :P
I completely understand that! Even if it is torture I cannot help but think its funny. Sort of. A little. Yeah, no, its torture. I'm going to go with torture. Mildly funny torture.
Its just that I don't like the effeminate, flamboyant types I can recognize easily. I like 'regular' guys and I just don't recognize if they are gay or not, information I kind of need in order to have the courage to approach a stranger with romantic intentions. I realize there are plenty of options to find these guys where that particular barrier is removed but they all pose a different barrier to me: I loathe them. Sooo... I get drunk instead.I suffer from a curse. I'm almost always attracted to straight guys. Obviously that never works out to my advantage. They always find out after we both get terribly drunk and I kiss the guy, to our mutual surprise. Luckily, so far, thats always been ok. I'm still good friends with all four of my victims. Continued exposure to the object of my unrequited affection makes for a very long, very frustrating time to get over the crush. I've been pining over the same guy for slightly over two years now, ever since I've met him, and I don't see that changing anytime soon. At the same time I'm ok with it. And, hey, I did get at least one kiss out of it!Getting drunk and kissing someone that isn't that into you is pretty darn close to a cultural universal...
Yeeeeaah... I'd rather be special ;)
I completely understand that! Even if it is torture I cannot help but think its funny. Sort of. A little. Yeah, no, its torture. I'm going to go with torture. Mildly funny torture.
Its just that I don't like the effeminate, flamboyant types I can recognize easily. I like 'regular' guys and I just don't recognize if they are gay or not, information I kind of need in order to have the courage to approach a stranger with romantic intentions. I realize there are plenty of options to find these guys where that particular barrier is removed but they all pose a different barrier to me: I loathe them. Sooo... I get drunk instead.
It's not you, really, I think our community in general fetishises straightness, which is why I roll my eyes at it. It's a bit frustrating too, that we can't escape the hegemony of heterosexuality even in our own community.
I don't think we'd have this issue if stereotypes weren't pushed onto us (and were reinforced by the community itself). It'd be good if "regular guys" wasn't exclusively a synonym for "straight guys".
I'm sure I'm ruining the joke by asking but I'm going to need you to explain it. Sorry :/ I mean, I can interpret it in several funny ways, I just don't know which one you mean or if I'm overlooking a possibility.
There's no particular joke other than the inevitability of hitting on someone and being told/finding out that they're simply not into your sex. It's a running joke that if I like a girl, she is inevitably going to be gay, and of course any chap is guaranteed to be straight. It's what's otherwise known as Sod's Law. :p
I completely understand that! Even if it is torture I cannot help but think its funny. Sort of. A little. Yeah, no, its torture. I'm going to go with torture. Mildly funny torture.
Its just that I don't like the effeminate, flamboyant types I can recognize easily. I like 'regular' guys and I just don't recognize if they are gay or not, information I kind of need in order to have the courage to approach a stranger with romantic intentions. I realize there are plenty of options to find these guys where that particular barrier is removed but they all pose a different barrier to me: I loathe them. Sooo... I get drunk instead.It's not you, really, I think our community in general fetishises straightness, which is why I roll my eyes at it. It's a bit frustrating too, that we can't escape the hegemony of heterosexuality even in our own community.
I don't think we'd have this issue if stereotypes weren't pushed onto us (and were reinforced by the community itself). It'd be good if "regular guys" wasn't exclusively a synonym for "straight guys".
There is a slight chance you're misinterpreting me. I don't 'target' straight guys. Its just unfortunate coincidence that it keeps happening. So... No fetish. I do want them to be gay! It wouldn't diminish the attraction at all if they are. Its just that they aren't -_-...
There is also a slight chance I'm misinterpreting you! In that case, sorry :/ Please clarify if this is the case!I diagnosed myself with a condition I made up called Internet Communication Anxiety causing me to doubt whether either or both parties accurately understand one another in turn causing annoying requests for clarification ad nauseum. I think its a real thing. Watch it show up in the DSM some day!
Possible misinterpretation aside, I do think you're right in a general sense (which you DID allude to, I'll admit). I don't really agree on the synonym-bit but I cannot yet put my finger on why so obviously I cannot articulate my grievance with it. It might be a reactionary response. I hope to get back to you on that. I might just get over it or forget about it before that happens though...
Edit: I now know to use the preview button before posting, so I don't skip over posts made while I was still busy!
I'm sure I'm ruining the joke by asking but I'm going to need you to explain it. Sorry :/ I mean, I can interpret it in several funny ways, I just don't know which one you mean or if I'm overlooking a possibility.There's no particular joke other than the inevitability of hitting on someone and being told/finding out that they're simply not into your sex. It's a running joke that if I like a girl, she is inevitably going to be gay, and of course any chap is guaranteed to be straight. It's what's otherwise known as Sod's Law. :p
Ooooh, ok! See, I didn't think of that! Also, who keeps making all these laws of universal asshattery?! Isn't karma enough?!
Krensky, there's an obvious solution to that particular problem though! It will likely get you thrown out of the store but thats an entirely different problem!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Welcome, Arcane Addict. :)
Sadly (or not, because the Sixth World is pretty nasty), we're already past the date we were supposed to see metahumans and dragons.my crime of choice once the dragons come back and magic returns and the 6th age begins.Yeah. The custom grown organs are the way to go anyway. No Cyberpunk scare of mass organ thieves, no issues with tissue compatibility.Organ-legging!
There is a slight chance you're misinterpreting me. I don't 'target' straight guys. Its just unfortunate coincidence that it keeps happening. So... No fetish. I do want them to be gay! It wouldn't diminish the attraction at all if they are. Its just that they aren't -_-...
There is also a slight chance I'm misinterpreting you! In that case, sorry :/ Please clarify if this is the case!
I diagnosed myself with a condition I made up called Internet Communication Anxiety causing me to doubt whether either or both parties accurately understand one another in turn causing annoying requests for clarification ad nauseum. I think its a real thing. Watch it show up in the DSM some day!Possible misinterpretation aside, I do think you're right in a general sense (which you DID allude to, I'll admit). I don't really agree on the synonym-bit but I cannot yet put my finger on why so obviously I cannot articulate my grievance with it. It might be a reactionary response. I hope to get back to you on that. I might just get over it or forget about it before that happens though...
Oh, my bad. Well, to be fair, I've known of several cases where people are genuinely like "it'd be a turn-off if he was gay", which makes me go "????? how does that even work????", so at this point nothing surprises me.
Don't worry, I just like to go on about things I rarely see brought up, feel free to ignore me and move on. xP
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since we've now had a successful penile transplant, I wonder if there will be transwomen donating theirs to transmen. I think this opens up a new era in (re)constructive surgery.
That wouldn't work, because they use some penile tissue during SRS for the construction of the neovagina. Part of what you are trying to do is preserve as many nerve connections as possible so that you can remain sensate.
Part of it of course is simply the odds. There's a lot more straight guys out there than gay ones. If I'm a straight guy and 5 out of 5 women I hit on are gay, I'm doing something wrong. If you're a gay guy and 5 out of 5 guys you hit on are straight, that's really pretty likely.
I honestly only consider that to be relevant during teenage years. Once you're an adult, you have entire venues of potential ways of meeting people who are of a compatible sexual orientation. And most people by that point are able to read body language and pick up on cues that denote attraction, so they're able to find people who find them attractive even outside those venues.
I honestly only consider that to be relevant during teenage years. Once you're an adult, you have entire venues of potential ways of meeting people who are of a compatible sexual orientation. And most people by that point are able to read body language and pick up on cues that denote attraction, so they're able to find people who find them attractive even outside those venues.Part of it of course is simply the odds. There's a lot more straight guys out there than gay ones. If I'm a straight guy and 5 out of 5 women I hit on are gay, I'm doing something wrong. If you're a gay guy and 5 out of 5 guys you hit on are straight, that's really pretty likely.
There are literally websites, clubs, organizations, and a whole slew of other things to try to help one meet their compatible match these days. Of course some people prefer to still go out and pick people out by wild dart toss, but there are methods other than going to the nearest bar/club/sports club...etc....and simply hoping you meet someone.
Of course, some don't view the computer matchup, or other items all that romantic either, but each has it's draw backs and advantages.
On another note, I really like the Netherlands...nice place...
There is a slight chance you're misinterpreting me. I don't 'target' straight guys. Its just unfortunate coincidence that it keeps happening. So... No fetish. I do want them to be gay! It wouldn't diminish the attraction at all if they are. Its just that they aren't -_-...
There is also a slight chance I'm misinterpreting you! In that case, sorry :/ Please clarify if this is the case!
I diagnosed myself with a condition I made up called Internet Communication Anxiety causing me to doubt whether either or both parties accurately understand one another in turn causing annoying requests for clarification ad nauseum. I think its a real thing. Watch it show up in the DSM some day!Possible misinterpretation aside, I do think you're right in a general sense (which you DID allude to, I'll admit). I don't really agree on the synonym-bit but I cannot yet put my finger on why so obviously I cannot articulate my grievance with it. It might be a reactionary response. I hope to get back to you on that. I might just get over it or forget about it before that happens though...
Oh, my bad. Well, to be fair, I've known of several cases where people are genuinely like "it'd be a turn-off if he was gay", which makes me go "????? how does that even work????", so at this point nothing surprises me.
Don't worry, I just like to go on about things I rarely see brought up, feel free to ignore me and move on. xP
Its ok. I'm glad its cleared up now. On the subject itself, it doesn't surprise me either and I also don't get it. To be fair, I'm a guy with simple tastes and don't get most fetishes at all anyway.
I have a similar problem, really. I like to talk about most anything, at length, and will find the barest little hint to launch into a new conversation. Its a trait my friends value even if I also tend to exhaust them with it. Sometimes you just don't want to invest much energy into a deep conversation and just keep it mellow. Other times you lack the information, insight or reason to engage in a topic (which is why I'm content to read about the penile transplants rather than participate) and thats what happened regarding the synonym bit. I just felt it warranted acknowledgement at the very least. Speaking of which, there's no progress but I still feel a little put off by it, so there's hope yet!
Part of it of course is simply the odds. There's a lot more straight guys out there than gay ones. If I'm a straight guy and 5 out of 5 women I hit on are gay, I'm doing something wrong. If you're a gay guy and 5 out of 5 guys you hit on are straight, that's really pretty likely.
Considering the rate at which I hit on people over time in relation to those odds I'm probably finally going to get lucky in some 20 years or so. Considering my track record that relationship will last just over half a year (while we both knew it was doomed 3 months ago). I really should adjust my strategy...
I honestly only consider that to be relevant during teenage years. Once you're an adult, you have entire venues of potential ways of meeting people who are of a compatible sexual orientation. And most people by that point are able to read body language and pick up on cues that denote attraction, so they're able to find people who find them attractive even outside those venues.
I really should reconsider these alternatives, its just that they're all so... Eulgh! I'm not sure where I sit on the 'most people scale'. I mean I can tell when a woman is attracted to me from a distance, I can only tell with a guy once a conversation has already been struck up. I also don't consciously look for such signs, I tend to be too busy having fun with my friends instead.
On another note, I really like the Netherlands...nice place...
Enh, I don't really think so to be honest. Of course, I've lived here my entire life so I have a very different perspective compared to visitors (I dislike the term tourist). A native is far more likely to be at least somewhat knowledgeable and concerned with intangibles such as the political climate than a visitor would. A visitor is more likely to be concerned with tangibles such as architecture, food and entertainment, history and culture (which in the case of visitors is tangible, you consciously look at the physical evidence of such things) which natives take for granted. Its understandable, really. I have the same thing whenever I visit, well, anywhere else.
If I'm a straight guy and 5 out of 5 women I hit on are gay, I'm doing something wrong.
I find that to be untrue, as noone wears signs on their head.
Since we've now had a successful penile transplant, I wonder if there will be transwomen donating theirs to transmen. I think this opens up a new era in (re)constructive surgery.That wouldn't work, because they use some penile tissue during SRS for the construction of the neovagina. Part of what you are trying to do is preserve as many nerve connections as possible so that you can remain sensate.
Maybe not right now but with the successes they've had I can certainly see this being just the beginning of they can accomplish. We've had successful transplants that we never thought possible. We're getting better and better each time.