all 30 comments

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I feel like you are a bisexual person projecting your experiences on to everyone else. I know I didn’t choose to be homosexual. If it was that way, then I feel like more heterosexual people would choose to be homosexual. I’ve always been friends with girls and women and don’t have any really male friends, so like why wouldn’t I have chosen to be with women. Female bodies repulsive to me that way though and that is just how I’m made.

[–]MarkTwainiac 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (5 children)

Female bodies repulsive to me that way though and that is just how I’m made.

I'm sorry, what? From your posts & our exchanges I got the impression you have gone to great lengths to alter your body to appear female, using hormones, surgeries, cosmetics, grooming methods, clothing & accessories to assist you. If female bodies are repulsive to you, sexually or in any other way, why have you taken steps to appear to have one?

I understand you - and others- not being sexually attracted to women. But finding the bodies of female people "repulsive" is a whole other matter. That means female bodies cause you intense distaste or disgust.

Synonyms for repulsive from Oxford: revolting, disgusting, abhorrent, repellent, repugnant, offensive, objectionable, vile, foul, nasty, loathsome, sickening, nauseating, stomach-churning, stomach-turning, hateful, detestable, execrable, abominable, monstrous, appalling, reprehensible, deplorable, insufferable, intolerable, despicable, contemptible, beyond the pale, unspeakable, noxious, horrendous, heinous, atrocious, awful, terrible, dreadful, frightful, obnoxious, unsavory, unpleasant, disagreeable, distasteful, dislikeable, off-putting, uninviting, displeasing; ugly, as ugly as sin, hideous, grotesque, gruesome, unsightly, reptilian; North American vomitous; informal ghastly, horrible, horrid, godawful, gross, putrid, sick-making, sick, yucky, icky, fugly; British informal beastly; Northern Irish informal bogging; North American informal skanky; New Zealand informal huckery; literary noisome; archaic disgustful, scurvy, loathly; rare rebarbative.

I have never, ever heard women who are solely sexually attracted to men say that they find female bodies sexually repulsive. None of my gay male friends find female bodies repulsive.

[–]strictly 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But finding the bodies of female people "repulsive" is a whole other matter.

Peakingatthemonoment said that way, referring to sexually, not in general. I feel the same way about men. It doesn’t mean I think all men are objectively ugly, there are horses, cats and dogs who look cute to me too, yet I, like most people, find non-human animals sexually repulsive regardless of their cuteness.

Synonyms for repulsive from Oxford: revolting, disgusting, abhorrent, repellent, repugnant, offensive, objectionable, vile, foul, nasty, loathsome, sickening, nauseating, stomach-churning, stomach-turning, hateful, detestable, execrable, abominable, monstrous, appalling, reprehensible, deplorable, insufferable, intolerable, despicable, contemptible, beyond the pale, unspeakable, noxious, horrendous, heinous, atrocious, awful, terrible, dreadful, frightful, obnoxious, unsavory, unpleasant, disagreeable, distasteful, dislikeable, off-putting, uninviting, displeasing; ugly, as ugly as sin, hideous, grotesque, gruesome, unsightly, reptilian; North American vomitous; informal ghastly, horrible, horrid, godawful, gross, putrid, sick-making, sick, yucky, icky, fugly; British informal beastly; Northern Irish informal bogging; North American informal skanky; New Zealand informal huckery; literary noisome; archaic disgustful, scurvy, loathly; rare rebarbative.

I think all those things are natural things to feel regarding the idea of having unwanted sex with someone one isn’t attracted to. Usually I don’t think about of how it would be like to have unwanted sex, but if the topic comes up, I would say it would be repulsive. It’s not a criticism of the person, I imagine most women, as most women straight, would find it repulsive to be with me sexually, I don’t see that as a sign of disrespect.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I was worried it might come out wrong... I mean repulsive sexually. I don’t mean that in any other way whatsoever. If I imagine myself doing something sexual with a woman, that is disgusting to me. It’s not because female bodies are disgusting though and I like female beauty and fashion. I will admit being a little squeamish about vulvas (and my surgical one too, although fortunately I can’t see it without a mirror). Strictly mentions finding males revolting sexually so I don’t think I’m the only person who feels this way.

[–]worried19 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I feel the same. Repulsive is maybe too strong a word, but I'd go with intensely uninteresting in a sexual context. And in particular, performing oral sex on a woman would be more than just unarousing. I don't think I could do it.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

And in particular, performing oral sex on a woman would be more than just unarousing. I don't think I could do it.

Totally agree

[–][deleted] 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Compelled, impelled, repelled -- they're the dynamics of attraction. We don't really have many (any?) better words for it in commonly used English. I hear you.

[–]strictly 15 insightful - 3 fun15 insightful - 2 fun16 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I am homosexual and I cannot choose to be attracted to men just as I cannot choose to be attracted to horses or my siblings. It would be sexually revolting, and I don’t have anything against men/horses or my siblings platonically. I have met more men than women who share my hobbies etc, I have more male friends than female friends, and it doesn’t change the fact that it would be disgusting for me to be sexual/romantic with a man. That is the reason I don’t, I don’t want to rape myself, I just don't like men that way and it has nothing to do with how much in common I think I have with men platonically. I imagine heterosexual feel the same way as I do about the idea of being with the wrong sex, it just feels unnatural to them.

[–]Penultimate_Penance 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Eh, sexuality isn't a choice. I suspect a lot of bisexual people make the mistake in thinking their ability to be attracted to both sexes can be extrapolated onto everyone else. Tastes aren't a choice. You're either into something or you aren't. Some people love licorice, some people hate it. Some people are only attracted to the opposite sex, others are attracted to both sexes in varying degrees.

Heterosexuality and homosexuality are both natural. Having blonde, brown, red or black hair is also natural. Humans come in quite a few varieties.

[–]SexualityCritical[S] 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (6 children)

I hear this sentiment over and over again. It appears everyone's replying with the same general statement, 'You can't choose your sexuality. Yes, bisexual people exist, but they're still attracted to both sexes.'

See, I don't understand what's being said here. There are a variety of sexual things which a person can do, which are all actions. If one sits still, and never moves, they won't experience sexuality. If one grows up in an isolated chamber, and has no contact with anyone else, they'll never develop any kind of sexual feelings. Sexuality exists solely in a social context.

Having sex with another person of any sex requires a social environment. Sexual intercourse, after all, is a social act, not a private one. It involves two or more individuals in order to commence. If sexual intercourse is not a choice, it is rape. That's the only possible thing it can be. Masturbation is, however, a private act, as it almost always involves just one person. But, it is, too, a choice. If not, it is rape as well. Sexual fantasies, since they are internal, inside oneself, and not external, outside of oneself, are a private act, and can, unlike masturbation and sex, exist only as a private act. Anyone can fantasize about whichever sex they want. All their sexual fantasies could be about men, or all of them could be about women. And, as for consumption of erotica or pornography, it can be a social act, but also a private act. Regardless, unless one is being forced to look at sexual imagery, which is a form of sexual abuse, it is a choice.

So, how is sexuality not a choice? Well, according to those criticising political lesbianism and its familiarities, it's because people claiming they can be attracted to both sexes are, in fact, bisexual, and that, as a fact also, not everyone is bisexual. Now, I disagree with this notion. I don't consider sexuality to be real, a scientific phenomenon, but something society has made up. However, putting that aside for now, anyway, citing bisexuality here is a logical fallacy.

There is a difference between potentiality and actuality. Potentiality refers to the possibility of something occurring, that it might occur, and not that it has occurred (it hasn't occurred, at least yet). Actuality, in contrast, refers to something which is either happening currently, ongoing, or has happened, that it has, indeed, been actualised. My claim is that anyone can be sexually attracted exclusively to either one. Anyone can. Their love of a sex, in romantic and sexual terms, exists due to ideology. Clearly, no one thinks, 'Through an objective analysis, I find this sex repulsive, but nonetheless can't help myself from being attracted to them.' That makes no sense, and is a clear-cut contradiction. It is saying one's mind has been made up, that a sex is unattractive to them, but, simultaneously, they can't help being sexually attracted to them.

Just because someone can be sexually attracted to both sexes doesn't mean they are. They can still choose to be exclusively interested in one sex. Anyone can do this. It's not just something 'bisexual' people can do.

[–]emptiedriver 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Just because someone can be sexually attracted to both sexes doesn't mean they are. They can still choose to be exclusively interested in one sex. Anyone can do this. It's not just something 'bisexual' people can do.

You realize you are making the same claim that people used to make against gay people, before the gay liberation movement, right? Think about it. Obviously there are people who have no choice. How else can you explain the gay rights movement, the need to live in the closet, the attempts at conversion, the underground movement and all the rest?? Why would so many people have suffered exile and social strife if they could have just chosen to be straight?

I am also bisexual, and at first I vaguely assumed that everyone must feel variations of attraction for people of different sexes, and have a fair share of flexibility in the sort of relationships they want to have. But you have to listen to what people tell you. Your experience is not universal. I think the idea of the Kinsey scale is sensible - for some people it's possible to make a choice even if their first instinct is clear, for some people the choice is wide open, but there are people who really are tied to one side.

There may be more people these days who could be convinced to choose to be homosexual and only choose hetero due to tradition. The percentage of people who are bisexual may be higher than has been presumed in the past. Plenty of guys have been known to find "romance" in situations of convenience (prison etc), and it seems like more young women "experiment" in college or whatever every generation, so I don't think what you're trying to say is completely uninteresting. But, it doesn't apply to everyone and it's not cool to make that claim when a lot of people have dealt with personal pain and social injustice to make that explicit that for the last 50+ years.

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If one grows up in an isolated chamber, and has no contact with anyone else, they'll never develop any kind of sexual feelings. Sexuality exists solely in a social context.

No, sexuality is not social, but biological. If heterosexual man was in an isolated chamber since birth for 30 years and then released into the world, that man will be attracted to women and will be aroused by women. If same will happen with homosexual man - he will be attracted to men and will be aroused by men. You can't learn sexuality and you can't chose who you are attracted to. The only way to "overcome" sexuality is strong mental disorders, a lot of sexual abuse and/or strong paraphilias.

So, how is sexuality not a choice?

At first you said that "sexual act is a choice" and then equated sexual act with sexuality. Those are different things. Your sexuality exist even without any sexual acts. If you are a man who is attracted to women, but had no sex you are not "asexual", you are still heterosexual man. If lesbian was "correctivelly raped" by men, and it is her only sexual experience - with men, she is not becoming heterosexual, she is still homosexual, she is still lesbian, even thought she only had sex with men. Sexual act is not sexuality.

I don't consider sexuality to be real, a scientific phenomenon, but something society has made up.

It is not stopping to exist because someone believes in it or not. Sexuality exist for all humans and animals.

Post-modernism is just a philosophy, not a reality. You can't change reality by renaming something or thinking about something in a different way.

Just because someone can be sexually attracted to both sexes doesn't mean they are. They can still choose to be exclusively interested in one sex.

If bisexual marries someone and spend whole life with them, they are still bisexual, even thought they only had sex with their partner whole life. However, they still can be attracted to both sexes - when heterosexual and homosexual people can't. Even if gay man or lesbian will want to be with opposite sex, will really like that person and will want to spend life together - they will not be able to get sexually attracted and aroused by that person anyways. They just can't to chose to like opposite sex, regardless of how they personally want - their body will not listen. And it is not possible at all to start liking opposite sex sexually for homosexual people. Same for heterosexual people but about their own sex. If it was possible, I'd most likely would be heterosexual already, same as gay men and lesbians in Iran, who are murdered because they just can't love opposite sex, even after tortures and even in fear of death. It is just not possible to change your sexuality.

You are failing to understand that other people have different experience and that if you are bisexual that does not mean everyone is bisexual.

[–]strictly 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If one grows up in an isolated chamber, and has no contact with anyone else, they'll never develop any kind of sexual feelings.

I think most would still have a libido as that seems to be the case for non-human animals who grow up isolated from other members of their species, they still seem to have a libido and hump things. Also, humans’ natural state is to be in contact with other humans so looking at humans growing up in total isolation wouldn’t reveal anything natural about humans.

Anyone can fantasize about whichever sex they want.

Sure, I could force myself to sexually picture people I’m not attracted to and the result would be that I would be turned off instead of turned on. I could technically force myself to imagine sex with corpses too, and it would be disgusting. People can choose to imagine sexually disgusting things but they can’t choose to be into it. It would be like imagining drinking pee, sure, I can visualize that, but I can’t force myself to see pee as an appealing thing to drink.

Well, according to those criticising political lesbianism and its familiarities, it's because people claiming they can be attracted to both sexes are, in fact, bisexual, and that, as a fact also, not everyone is bisexual. Now, I disagree with this notion.

You are projecting your own capacity to be attracted to both sexes to people who are wired differently from you.

I find this sex repulsive, but nonetheless can't help myself from being attracted to them.

I don’t think people generally claim to be sexually repulsed by those they are sexually attracted to.

Just because someone can be sexually attracted to both sexes doesn't mean they are.

It wouldn’t matter how many sexual fantasizes I would force myself to have about men, it wouldn’t make men more attractive, it would just reinforce that it would be very sexually unappealing to be with a man.

[–]Porcelain_QuetzalTabby without Ears 9 insightful - 5 fun9 insightful - 4 fun10 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

That's in interesting perspective and your reasoning is sound, but your premise that sexuality is mainly a social act is fallacious. Sex is a basic function of mammals and mainly instinct driven. This makes sex and sexuality a real phenomenon - wether you consider it one or not does not really matter. So unless you're willing to ascribe many other animals the mental ability to make the same choice your point fails at the premise.

[–][deleted] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

See, I don't understand what's being said here.

Sexual orientation is innate. (That doesn't have to translate into "genetic" -- we just don't have adequate understanding of the mechanism, other than the fact that it innately exists.)

Sexual arousal is primarily somatic, and mostly operates below the level of conscious thought. It usually tracks with orientation.

Sexual attraction is a little fuzzier -- it can occasionally and specifically operate outside of orientation, for reasons unknown. It doesn't make or break innate orientation.

Sexual activity (outside of abuse) can be driven by reason; it may track with orientation, arousal, or attraction, or it may override any or all of them.

I think what you're arguing for is the fourth category, where sexual choices are guided primarily by conscious reason, e.g.:

Anyone can. Their love of a sex, in romantic and sexual terms, exists due to ideology.

I've encountered very few people who function that way (and I don't know for sure that any of that functioning was a default setting).

(clarity edit)

[–]usehername 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You don't understand what orientation is. Sexual orientation isn't based on physical acts. If a gay man is celibate for his whole life because homosexuality is punishable by death in his country, what is he, asexual? No, he is a man who exclusively feels sexual attraction to other men. That's what a homosexual is. It doesn't matter whether they engage in homosexual acts or not, it's his internal drive to have sex with the same sex, and lack of drive to have sex with the opposite sex that defines his homosexuality. I'm sure all the homosexuals being executed right now would love to hear this drivel. I feel like you're trolling because you're acting like a fucking muppet. This has been explained to you several times.

[–]worried19 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think sexual orientation is a choice, and while the number of bisexual people who are comfortable acknowledging same-sex attraction may be higher in a non-homophobic society, I don't believe it would ever reach 100%. Or even 50%, for that matter.

All I know is that my sexuality seems hard-wired. I've had lots of time to think about it. When I was 11, other kids started calling me a lesbian. I figured that must be what I was. Even though I hadn't experienced any crushes or sexual attractions, I assumed the other kids were right and that I would end up being gay. This was not upsetting to me. Even at that age, I did not get what the big deal was about being gay.

But then I turned 12 and started puberty, and all of a sudden my urges and attractions developed, and they were not towards girls or women. I didn't even realize what I felt was sexual attraction at first. And then after a few weeks it hit me. I was confused, but rolled with it. I already knew I liked boys as friends. Having one for a boyfriend seemed like a natural next step. As I got older, I realized it wasn't going to be as simple for me as it was for non-GNC girls. But that didn't change my orientation. I could have faked being a lesbian, I suppose, but I wouldn't have enjoyed it.

[–]yousaythosethings 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Just about every actual lesbian (aka female with exclusive attraction to other females) is going to laugh at the absurdity of the premise because no way are lesbian relationships some blissful paradigm devoid of sexism, misogyny, and unrest. We’re with women because women alone make us hot and wet. I think it is true that if I didn’t live in an society where I saw exclusively heterosexual couples growing up it wouldn’t occur to me to try to be with a man romantically and sexually. But not because we’re so different we can’t get along. The family members I’m closest to are men, as are a lot of my close friends.

I had one relationship with a man who I married and we were compatible in so many ways and remain close friends. The relationship was much easier overall. But I wasn’t attracted to him and I had to suppress a huge part of myself to remain in that relationship and leave myself unfulfilled. Leaving that relationship was hard and I can’t say my life is necessarily better now. I just feel more right with myself, in touch with my body, and have a fulfilling sex life. I’m in a relationship with another woman and there is a lot of mutual understanding because we’re both women, but there are also tensions too, and that’s not just because same-sex relationships are not fully accepted in society.

Sometimes you need more yin to your yang. I don’t think any sexual orientation is more natural than another and I hate ascribing more value toward any sexual orientation.

[–]Fleurista💐 Transsexual 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I feel like you may have missed the point of the video you shared. It was showing how absurd and harmful it was to put one sexual orientation as being superior to others or more natural. Heterosexuality shouldn't be held in higher regard than homosexuality or bisexuality, but that doesn't mean that either of those should be held in higher esteem than heterosexuality. As someone trying to shake my own long-standing heteronormative views, I don't believe that the opposite extreme is a good thing, either.

Also, many trans people wouldn't have transitioned if our sexualities could have been changed.

[–]FlanJam 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't think people can choose to be gay. There is something to be said about how patriarchy negatively influences hetero relationships, but imo "going gay" isn't a solution, its not even an option on the table.

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

All those stupid masochistic gays in Iran are chosing to be tortured and murdered! They could just chose to like women, but nope, they are so stupid that chosing death instead.

[–]grixitperson 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Personally i think that that argument is a distrsction from the real issue. Because whether you were "born this way", "always knew you were different", came to a gradual realization", "came to a sudden realization", or "tried it and liked it", the question is, should someone who is known to be in any of those categories have their rights restricted compared to those who aren't? And the answer is no.

[–]SexualityCritical[S] 2 insightful - 6 fun2 insightful - 5 fun3 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

Of course the answer is no. I never argued for that.

I'm saying that since people do indeed have the choice, opposite-sex sexual and romantic relationships don't appear to make as much sense as same-sex alternatives. People would be better searching for partnerships with those sharing their genotype.

[–]grixitperson 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I believe some people have the choice. I believe that a large portion of the population is potentially slightly bi. But most people are sure and do not have the choice.

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

As a man who only likes men, I can tell you that, like any man or woman who exists, and has ever existed, I could've chosen to be heterosexual. But, such things known as reason and sense exist, and it wouldn't be right.

If only my own reason and sense had such a superpower-like ability to eclipse my instinct and sensibility. (I'm guessing most people have a sense v. sensibility thing going on. There are things we choose, and there are things we're compelled towards, and often as not it's a combustible mix.)

[–]Porcelain_QuetzalTabby without Ears 8 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I'm curious what you mean by "choose to be heterosexual" . If you mean that anyone can choose to cave to social pressure and play a heterosexual in the theater we call live - regardless of their own happiness or costs to their mental health, then I agree. You may also try to say, that sexuality is an actual choice. Then I disagree. I'm a sexual blob somewhere between ace and bi, so I don't get a lot of things about this kind of stuff, but talking to a few friends with more expressed sexualities I'm quite certain that sexuality is not a choice for most people.

[–]anxietyaccount8 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I understand your logic, it does seem like a lot of men and women don't even like each other. Gay couples and lesbian couples may have more in common with each other.

I knew I was straight when I was around 10/11. I see other women as being "too similar" to myself, which is a turn off. I have all their same parts. Most hetero people agree with this. That's why we're hetero. It's not "just conditioning".

I don't think the ideal relationship has to be gay, I can imagine a hetero relationship which is equal and very satisfactory. But it's hard to come by. And the mass media and porn have made things even worse. Many straight people just see "that's the man and that's the woman" instead of two human beings.

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I appreciate that you are on a profoundly different page than the "why do women orgasm" camp. But I think you've mostly demonstrated how tortured it is to argue that any sexual orientation is more "natural" and thus superior.

You can literally, being a man, just masturbate onto a leaf and then hand the leaf to a woman for her to pour it inside her vagina.

Right, I think it's useful to examine our assumptions, such as about the primacy of PIV sex. It can be decoupled from reproduction. But that doesn't tell us anything about the innateness of any sexual orientation. And you can go further . . .

living together appears to be the worst possible thing for them, especially as that arrives with its own set of issues which have, for thousands of years

. . . and also decouple heterosexuality from the nuclear family. In cultures where the family structure is comprised of matrilineal clans, a traditional form of marriage is walking marriage. A husband visits his wife for the night, but then returns to his clan by morning; it may even be taboo for him to be seen by anyone come morning. Marriages are easily dissolved, so sexual relationships come and go but the clan always remains intact.

Heterosexuality doesn't come with a patriarchal family structure attached. You're assuming too much.

Radical feminism has been trying to change things forever.

We don't change things by shaming or trying to change anyone's sexuality. The nuclear family is antithetical to feminism, but attraction to men is not.

[–][deleted] 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Hey I think content warnings are overused, but this video warrants one. Would you consider editing your post to mention that it includes graphic depiction of child cutting and suicide? "Horrendous acting, but at least with a good message" didn't prepare me for that.

[–]SexualityCritical[S] 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Done! Thank you for asking.