all 26 comments

[–][deleted] 34 insightful - 10 fun34 insightful - 9 fun35 insightful - 10 fun -  (0 children)

"Because of this cisgender fragility"

Oh shut the fuck up

[–]zephyranthes 28 insightful - 9 fun28 insightful - 8 fun29 insightful - 9 fun -  (10 children)

Celibacy? She's female and looks female. There will always be men who'll play along for as long as it takes to finish.

[–]MarkTwainiac[S] 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Yeah, you're probably right . But she'll no doubt drive a lot of potential partners away with her superiority and hectoring tone. Even horny guys don't want to be lectured to from on high the way she does. They can probably find another female person to fuck.

[–]hfxB0oyA 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

-- <I posted something shitty here, so I've rethought myself and deleted it. Sorry folks.. --

[–]MarkTwainiac[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Thanks for removing your comment with the ugly, shitty, anti-woman saying. But please repost without that part. Coz your central point - that as a male you can confirm that even het guys who are hot to have sex with women will be repelled by the author's tone and 'tude - was of merit.

There seems to be a widespread assumption amongst some (especially young?) women today that het guys are all so horny and pathetically and desperately needy of sex with women that they'll put up with just about anything for the chance to get some action with a female person. This might be true of some segment of the het male population, such as incels and sex addicts, but I don't believe it to be true for the majority of men.

Most men - like most women - don't see the sort of preachy finger-wagging that the author of this article displays as a sexual turn-on or an appealing quality in any other way. Most people in their right minds would not want to sit through a lunch with a person who has such an insufferably superior, condescending attitude towards others as this writer displays. And very few of any inclination or identity are gonna want to jump in the sack and shag him/her/they/zir/xe!

[–]hfxB0oyA 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Fair enough. For the record, I can be an asshole as often as not (especially on the internet). But in person when I'm not being a dick, I actually want to hang around with people who aren't being dicks as well. I think that generally goes for most of humanity, and at least for the other guys I know well, we are actually discerning with who we want to consider sleeping with; i.e. someone who we at least feel we can share some sort of common ground with that'll spark an emotional connection. I know very few guys who fit the stereotype of collecting notches on the headboard. They are out there, but I think even in this case, the "players" would probably look elsewhere to women who don't require you to read an instructional pamphlet about their pronouns before going forward.

[–]MarkTwainiac[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I agree. Also, in my long life I've learnt that a sense of humor, including the ability to laugh at one's self, is one of the traits most people of both sexes regard as a most desirable characteristic in a sexual partner, whether it be just for hooking up or for a more meaningful relationship.

[–]hfxB0oyA 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh yes. Nothing's worse than being in a relationship where you're penalized for having a laugh.

[–]redditbegay 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Most men - like most women - don't see the sort of preachy finger-wagging that the author of this article displays as a sexual turn-on or an appealing quality in any other way. Most people in their right minds would not want to sit through a lunch with a person who has such an insufferably superior, condescending attitude towards others as this writer displays. And very few of any inclination or identity are gonna want to jump in the sack and shag him/her/they/zir/xe!

ITs a habit of the people who have weekly 'hookups' via trindr, twitter, etc. Those kinds of people who sleep around are trashy people should go unsaid to everyone, really.

[–]MonstrousRegiment 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That is one of the ugliest quotes I've ever seen. Thanks for uglying up my day.

[–]uroborosjohnson 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Love seeing this on a feminist board.

[–]TurtleFuzz 25 insightful - 1 fun25 insightful - 0 fun26 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

As a trans, nonbinary, agender person, navigating sex and pleasure is often challenging. That’s in large part a reflection of the lacking sex education young people get (if they get any at all) and patriarchal perspectives about sex and dating that center the cisgender, heterosexual experience.

Do people forget that the most common reason people date is to find a mate? It's our instinct to find mating partners and procreate.

Obviously, not everyone wants to have children, or even get married, and that's fine. But that seemingly disgusting, normie "cisgender heterosexual experience" is how the majority of people are born.

[–]c3ll0 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Most WLW don't need to be told that sex is other things than PIV. :rolleye: So obviously this young woman isn't aiming this at other women. Sounds like she's a straight girl who's had some inconsiderate partners, not much of experience, let alone knowledge about sex.

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

I noticed that as well and thought, let’s be honest about who you really mean. It’s men. Welcome to a common struggle women have with men as sexual partners and, which is often a result of or exacerbated by porn. That’s why I don’t understand why this article was written, and also why I’m concerned about distortion of language that confounds the issues up for discussion and obscures the causes, and, therefore, results in bullshit solutions. Speaking of, I couldn’t get through this article but since it sounds like from comments she’s suggesting people check out “queer porn” as a solution. Um no, so much of exactly what she’s complaining about is perpetuated I’m so called “queer porn” between women and “trans women.” In fact that shit often looks just like run of the mill hetero porn where there is no pretense that the guy is a woman.

None of this is about “cis” vs “not cis” (what even does “cis” mean currently and what is it’s opposite? This lady clearly isn’t trans in any meaningful sense so it sounds wrong to call her such) and adding “gender identity” into the discussion just confounds the obvious.

[–]MarkTwainiac[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Most WLW don't need to be told that sex is other things than PIV. :rolleye: So obviously this young woman isn't aiming this at other women.

Yes, But MLM know that sex is other things than PIV too, obviously LOL.

As for the idea that she isn't aiming this at other women, now that I've thought about it a bit, I've concluded that she is aiming this at other women. Specifically women who, unlike her, don't look upon porn as the best way to learn about sex.

Although I don't watch porn myself, my understanding is that nowadays much of it shows and glorifies hetero sex that doesn't involve PIV, such as anal and blow jobs. As a result, anyone who watches porn presumably already has seen evidence with their own eyes that there's plenty more to sex, even heterosex, than PIV - which as a porn-watcher herself, the author must realize.

Now who is it that watches porn? Boys and men are the biggest porn users, and in many countries today the majority of males - 98% - are said to watch porn. These boys and men come from across the age spectrum as well from all sexual orientations, although the median age of male porn watchers in the US, for example, tends to skew young - median age is 29 to mid-30s. What's more, the research on the subject shows that the majority of males watch porn regardless of their relationship status.

But the situation is very different for girls and women. Yes, today an increasing number of girls and women do watch porn too. But female porn-watching isn't evenly distributed amongst all age groups - it's primarily something younger women and teen girls do, not something middle-aged and older women are into. What's more, the research show that even today amidst porn mania, the majority of women still do not watch porn.

Looking at het "cis" women in particular, it seems the majority of women who are likely to have RL sexual contact with men - meaning women who date men, whether casually or seriously, are engaged or married to or living with men - do not watch porn. And the older a woman is, the less likely she is to be in the habit of watching porn - not necessarily coz she's any less interested in sex than younger women, but coz porn watching has only become normalized and routine since the internet, and unless a girl or woman gets in the habit of watching it young, it's not a custom she's likely to pick up later in life. Also, since most older women have jobs, families, household chores, errands to do, bills to pay, hobbies, political interests, volunteering, social lives and so on filling up all the hours of their busy days, most would be be hard-pressed to find free moments to devote to watching porn even if they were so inclined.

With all this in mind, the only logical conclusion I can come to is that the "cis" people this writer assumes needs to be informed of the (non) earth shattering "news" she so superciliously delivers are hets who don't watch porn. Meaning het women specifically - especially older women as well as women of her own age and younger who are actively dating or in a committed live-in relationship with men.

But funny thing, I'd wager good money that most such women - including the writer's mother, aunts and grans - probably are far more knowledgable about sex than this schoolmarmish writer is. And their knowledge is probably more "valid" and authentic than this writer's coz it comes not from watching porn - queer or any other kind - but from their personal "lived experience" of actually having sex in the flesh with another human being.

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

Sometimes it feels like I’m reading satire.

[–]Tikiri 14 insightful - 2 fun14 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

She’s lucky she’s an attractive young white woman, that’s all I have to say. Bullshit like this will only work with people like her, and honestly I think it’ll make sexual prospects worse for any NBs who don’t look anything like her (since she’s giving this ‘advice’ as a set of rules applicable to all T/NB folx).

[–]artetolife 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

If you take the gender nonsense out of it, it seems quite reasonable. But xe has probably never considered that most of what xe says applies to nearly everyone.

[–]MarkTwainiac[S] 27 insightful - 2 fun27 insightful - 1 fun28 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Yes, the gist of what she says seems quite reasonable, but the way she presents it is not.

She acts like she and gender speshuls like her are the only people on earth who have the faintest clue about sex. She assumes that everyone "cis" ascribes to a simplistic, Victorian-era view of sex that defines sex as het PIV only.

Her viewpoint overlooks, ignores and erases the history of sex, sex research, sex education and the various sexual liberation movements of the 20th century, including gay and lesbian liberation. It's like she's never heard of Masters & Johnson, Alfred Kinsey, Mary Calderone & SIECUS, "The Joy of Sex," Eve's Garden, Shere Hite and "The Hite Report" or has any idea of what happened in the 1960s, 70s and 80s. Or the 1920s and 30s.

While she's holding herself out as an expert about sex, and "cis" ideas about sex specifically, I suspect she's spent zero time finding out what people in the demographic categories she so disdains actually do believe by interviewing and listening to them. Coz she clearly sees "cis" people as a bunch of ignoramuses who are far beneath her.

She also seems to assume that all sex involves "dominant and submissive roles" - there's no room for the mutuality that was championed and considered the norm for earlier generations.

And her preachy, finger-wagging tone is very off-putting. This is what she says:

So, here’s what I want cis people to understand:

Sex doesn’t always equal penetration.

People can fulfill different dominant and submissive roles, no matter their gender identity.

Orgasm from one partner doesn’t mark the end of sex, and not everyone has to orgasm to have a good time.

To help cis people unlearn these damaging scripts, I’d suggest watching queer porn. Some of my favorites that feature trans and nonbinary bodies and voices are Crashpad Series, Bellesa, and AORTA Films

Sorry, people have known the supposed "secret truths" about sex that she "reveals" in her piece for generations. Her own presumably "cis" parents probably knew this before they conceived her. And they/we somehow managed to learn this without watching "queer porn" - or, in many cases, any porn at all!

[–]Thatstealthygal 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, this is like "so, according to you I must not be cis then since me and my heterosexual lovers have done all of these things for ever".

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

I find the recommendation that people "unlearn" their preferences by watching porn extremely disturbing though. It's like conversion therapy.

[–]redditbegay 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's part of the millennial+ generations' 'everything is new again' philosophy, which they gained from not reading their history at all when they were growing up.

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

This was so annoying to read.

Basically what she's pretending to say can be summed up by saying sexual partners should communicate about and respect each other's sexual boundaries and needs. That's it. Every single human being alive will have needs and wants and preferences that their partner won't be able to guess. On-going communication and consent is important. Yes. For everyone.

What this person seems to want to say is that because she's trans/nonbinary, her sexual boundaries and needs are extra special and the entire focus of an encounter should be on her because she's extra special, and she's using the trans label is a way to ensure she gets to do that.

[–]hfxB0oyA 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

She's "trans nonbinary, and agender". Transgender literally means you're switching sides, so that's obviously just silly bullshit. What she's really saying is, "I'm so boring as an individual that I need this label to make anybody to take notice of me".

This is what happens when you abandon the effort of self-improvement to become attractive to others.

[–]radmoon 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

what kind of self-indulgent b.s. is this, seriously