What is the gender of nationstates

[Mefpan]

Two-dimensionally straight male.

I noticed that I am a lot less attracted to three-dimensional females than to slightly less realistic drawn depictions of women in a two-dimensional fashion.

Does that make me an Asexually Straight Guy in Real Life Terms?

[Miopic]

straight male

[Republique Francaise]

In all honesty, why should it matter? It's just another useless label...


I am a homosexual male.

[Obrenovacia]

Male to Female transsexual. Post-op to boot.

I'm now straight

Yeah, screw the rest of us who can't/don't want surgery! Sexuality is about genitals, nothing more!

Good lord.

I'm also amazed if you think I was referring JUST to genitals... having lived transgendered for years I've finally made the next stage to becoming a woman.

But hey, let's just condescend to people.

[Ostroeuropa]

Yeah, screw the rest of us who can't/don't want surgery! Sexuality is about genitals, nothing more!

Good lord.

I'm also amazed if you think I was referring JUST to genitals... having lived transgendered for years I've finally made the next stage to becoming a woman.

But hey, let's just condescend to people.

You mean having the body and appearance of a woman to reflect who you actually are, right?

[Esternial]

Hmm...could you elaborate?

In a universe where the divisions went down along equipment lines, the "Majority" would probably be people who do not use equipment. They'd go around extoling the virtues of "Natural" sex, saying using add-ons is "Unnatural", the usual shit.
People who enjoy having sex and using equipment get divided into various categories based on the type they use, and oppressed for it.
In addition to this, homosexuals and lesbians receive discrimination against them even if they don't use equipment.
Then along comes an equipment pride parade that explicitly tells homosexuals and lesbians they cannot be a part of the parade, because
"fucking males and fucking females is not a type of equipment, it's just a gender preference. That's completely different." or some shit.

When the ACTUAL problem is people facing discrimination for the type of sex they take part in. NOT the type of equipment they use, etc.
Ofcourse fucking males and fucking females isn't a type of equipment, but thats not the point.
If you're going to fight for sexual equality and you just shun people because they don't fit YOUR particular dividing lines, then thats a shitty thing to do

You left out some important nuances there, which I can't illustrate using your alternative world - thus emphasizing both can not be simply exchanged to use as an example.

Homosexuals and bisexuals can't put away the things that reveal their sexuality to the outside world. It's not just limited to the bedroom, it involves their ENTIRE social standing. If you're dating and having sex with a man, it's obvious that others will see this, whereas BDSM and furries can easily take of their gimp or furry suit and walk outside with their significant other and people would be none the wiser.

Marriage is a major issue here. Heterosexual furries and BDSMers can restrict their sexual indulgence to their bedroom, which homosexual/bisexuals cannot. They can get married and still have kinky leathery sex in the bedroom without anyone stopping them. There are points the parade stands for that don't apply to furries and BDSM'ers.

[Ostroeuropa]

In a universe where the divisions went down along equipment lines, the "Majority" would probably be people who do not use equipment. They'd go around extoling the virtues of "Natural" sex, saying using add-ons is "Unnatural", the usual shit.
People who enjoy having sex and using equipment get divided into various categories based on the type they use, and oppressed for it.
In addition to this, homosexuals and lesbians receive discrimination against them even if they don't use equipment.
Then along comes an equipment pride parade that explicitly tells homosexuals and lesbians they cannot be a part of the parade, because
"fucking males and fucking females is not a type of equipment, it's just a gender preference. That's completely different." or some shit.

When the ACTUAL problem is people facing discrimination for the type of sex they take part in. NOT the type of equipment they use, etc.
Ofcourse fucking males and fucking females isn't a type of equipment, but thats not the point.
If you're going to fight for sexual equality and you just shun people because they don't fit YOUR particular dividing lines, then thats a shitty thing to do

You left out some important nuances there, which I can't illustrate using your alternative world - thus emphasizing both can not be simply exchanged to use as an example.

Homosexuals and bisexuals can't put away the things that reveal their sexuality to the outside world. It's not just limited to the bedroom, it involves their ENTIRE social standing. If you're dating and having sex with a man, it's obvious that others will see this, whereas BDSM and furries can easily take of their gimp or furry suit and walk outside with their significant other and people would be none the wiser.

Marriage is a major issue here. Heterosexual furries and BDSMers can restrict their sexual indulgence to their bedroom, which homosexual/bisexuals cannot. They can get married and still have kinky leathery sex in the bedroom without anyone stopping them. There are points the parade stands for that don't apply to furries and BDSM'ers.

These nuances make it easier to oppress homosexuals and bisexuals, but don't justify the importance based on the division.
Yes, it's easier to hide the equipment you prefer than it is to hide the gender you prefer. But that doesn't justify the gender being important. it just means it's harder to hide.
The overemphasis on Gender being some kind of massive deal is what I put a lot of sexism and such down to. It isn't a massive deal. It's just a minor variation. Just like equipment. It's a minor variation.
Some variations may be harder to hide than others, but it doesn't make the variation suddenly a huge deal.
It does make it more public, which might explain why people THINK it's a huge deal, or treat it like one.
The way I see it, it's just another persons preferences. It's not really that much different from any other persons preferences. Unless mine happens to line up with theirs, i'm unlikely to give a shit about it and just leave them to it.
Some people do it with men, some do it in barns, some do it hanging upside down. Doesn't matter. It's just that if the people who do it hanging upside down decided to have some kind of comaradery and make a massive deal about it and make out it's an "identity" i'd be skeptical, because among them there would be all kinds of subtle variations.
it's like taking half the human race and saying "These guys have this in common, and use it as an identity badge." it's immediately suspect, since we know that way, way more than just them being "Northern hemispherians" makes up who they are, and that every single one of them is divided down to being an individual, but they've chosen one PARTICULAR trait about themselves and used it to form identity around. That rarely ends well.
I'm aware that gays/lesbians probably had this done TO them rather than as an active choice.
(I'm betting straight people decided "Our particular trait to rally around is that we fuck the opposite sex. Oppress those who don't.)
But then why did the gays/lesbians decide to do the exact same thing and rally around one trait instead of saying
"Well, theres plenty of traits that make you a minority too. Stfu."

[Starkindler]

I think it's amusing that according to this poll nearly 70% of females here are LGB (I'm not getting into Ts here), while less than 25% of males are...

And, of course, both numbers are freakin' massive compared with even the most liberal (not political either, Cosara) poll estimates.

What is it with the internet and bisexuality, in particular?

It's socially acceptable for women to be LGB, and to crossdress (wearing pants & masculine clothes). Thank you Madonna, Thank you Internet, thank you 18+ sites!

However the same is not socially acceptable for males, as gay and bi males are bullied, if they are open about it, and Goddess help them if they cross-dress.

And yes, for values, they are extremely off in terms of what it should be. I think, firstly that from the low sample size, transgenders can easily skew the rates depending on what they select. (The poll asked for sex, so transgenders should select their physical sex.) Especially when you consider what transgenders select as their sexuality (relative to the physical or logical gender).

And Autism, from the current results:

	Male	Female	Total
Straight	391 (70.32%)	16 (24.61%)	407 (65.54%)
Gay/Les	47 (8.45%)	14 (21.54%)	61 (9.82%)
Bi	81 (14.57%)	19 (29.23%)	100 (16.1%)
Trans	3 (0.54%)	12 (18.46%)	15 (2.42%)
Asexual	34 (6.12%)	4 (6.15%)	38 (6.12%)
Total	556 (89.53%)	65 (10.47%)	621 (100.00%)

From statistical data, LGBT population should be around 10%. From this test, it shows that the total LGB people (inclusive of any non-straight transgendered) is 161 people, or a total of 25.93%. This shows that here LGB people are 2.5x more than the norm, thus 150% over-represented. That means straight people under-represented.

From statisctical data, GID affects 1 in 30,000 people. That's less than .01% (.0033%). It means that the ratio of transpeople here is 726% of waht it should be, making them 626% over-represented.

Furthermore, the ratio of asexual people (6.12%), which is consistent among the sexes, and in the total population is a notable and interesting thing.

Due to internet norms, 90-10 distribution of males to females is way over what's represented.

The statistical errors are due to large sample size, gender issues in the selection of transpeople, the over-representation of transpeople, especially in a board dealing with politics. Due to gender and sexuality theories, however, I conclude that these results should be correctly deterined by a more complex (3-question) survey in stead of the 1-question PHPBB surveys.

[Esternial]

You left out some important nuances there, which I can't illustrate using your alternative world - thus emphasizing both can not be simply exchanged to use as an example.

Homosexuals and bisexuals can't put away the things that reveal their sexuality to the outside world. It's not just limited to the bedroom, it involves their ENTIRE social standing. If you're dating and having sex with a man, it's obvious that others will see this, whereas BDSM and furries can easily take of their gimp or furry suit and walk outside with their significant other and people would be none the wiser.

Marriage is a major issue here. Heterosexual furries and BDSMers can restrict their sexual indulgence to their bedroom, which homosexual/bisexuals cannot. They can get married and still have kinky leathery sex in the bedroom without anyone stopping them. There are points the parade stands for that don't apply to furries and BDSM'ers.

These nuances make it easier to oppress homosexuals and bisexuals, but don't justify the importance based on the division.
Yes, it's easier to hide the equipment you prefer than it is to hide the gender you prefer. But that doesn't justify the gender being important. it just means it's harder to hide.
The overemphasis on Gender being some kind of massive deal is what I put a lot of sexism and such down to. It isn't a massive deal. It's just a minor variation. Just like equipment. It's a minor variation.
Some variations may be harder to hide than others, but it doesn't make the variation suddenly a huge deal.
It does make it more public, which might explain why people THINK it's a huge deal, or treat it like one.
The way I see it, it's just another persons preferences. It's not really that much different from any other persons preferences. Unless mine happens to line up with theirs, i'm unlikely to give a shit about it and just leave them to it.
Some people do it with men, some do it in barns, some do it hanging upside down. Doesn't matter. It's just that if the people who do it hanging upside down decided to have some kind of comaradery and make a massive deal about it and make out it's an "identity" i'd be skeptical, because among them there would be all kinds of subtle variations.
it's like taking half the human race and saying "These guys have this in common, and use it as an identity badge." it's immediately suspect, since we know that way, way more than just them being "Northern hemispherians" makes up who they are, and that every single one of them is divided down to being an individual.

It's pretty big fucking variation.

Literally a fucking variation.

You're over-simplifying this. These parades also advocate allowing gay marriage and such, things that furries and BDSM have nothing to with DIRECTLY. Sure, gay furries will have an interest in this, but they participate because they're gay.

It is more public, which is why it IS a big deal, and thus we treat it like one. Before we can move on to making people sensible about furries and BDSM, we first have to make progress on a field as basic as GENDER. If we can't pass that first barrier, we'll get nowhere.

You want to toss everything in a single pot and go with it already, but you fail to realize that many people are still trying to get used to people being gay. How do you think they'll react when then people start saying

"Oh, I also like to shag people while wearing a furry suit"

You don't force it all in at once, be a gentle lover, brother.

[Ostroeuropa]

These nuances make it easier to oppress homosexuals and bisexuals, but don't justify the importance based on the division.
Yes, it's easier to hide the equipment you prefer than it is to hide the gender you prefer. But that doesn't justify the gender being important. it just means it's harder to hide.
The overemphasis on Gender being some kind of massive deal is what I put a lot of sexism and such down to. It isn't a massive deal. It's just a minor variation. Just like equipment. It's a minor variation.
Some variations may be harder to hide than others, but it doesn't make the variation suddenly a huge deal.
It does make it more public, which might explain why people THINK it's a huge deal, or treat it like one.
The way I see it, it's just another persons preferences. It's not really that much different from any other persons preferences. Unless mine happens to line up with theirs, i'm unlikely to give a shit about it and just leave them to it.
Some people do it with men, some do it in barns, some do it hanging upside down. Doesn't matter. It's just that if the people who do it hanging upside down decided to have some kind of comaradery and make a massive deal about it and make out it's an "identity" i'd be skeptical, because among them there would be all kinds of subtle variations.
it's like taking half the human race and saying "These guys have this in common, and use it as an identity badge." it's immediately suspect, since we know that way, way more than just them being "Northern hemispherians" makes up who they are, and that every single one of them is divided down to being an individual.

It's pretty big fucking variation.

Literally a fucking variation.

You're over-simplifying this. These parades also advocate allowing gay marriage and such, things that furries and BDSM have nothing to with DIRECTLY. Sure, gay furries will have an interest in this, but they participate because they're gay.

It is more public, which is why it IS a big deal, and thus we treat it like one. Before we can move on to making people sensible about furries and BDSM, we first have to make progress on a field as basic as GENDER. If we can't pass that first barrier, we'll get nowhere.

You want to toss everything in a single pot and go with it already, but you fail to realize that many people are still trying to get used to people being gay. How do you think they'll react when then people start saying

"Oh, I also like to shag people while wearing a furry suit"

You don't force it all in at once, be a gentle lover, brother.

Well, then it comes down to a disagreement in terms of strategy then.
You think it'd be forcing people to take on too much.
I think it'd gain us massive support since we've suddenly appealed to practically everyone's self-interest.
I'm of the opinion that, given the choice, people will begrudgingly allow others to be free if they are also allowed to be free.

By broadening the issue to "Sexual liberty of all persons." we appeal to the self-interest of straight individuals who engage in sexually deviant behaviour, which nets the movement more dollars and more boots on the ground.
It also nets it more spokespersons, and makes it seem like it's much more of a large section of society being oppressed.
Remember, the civil rights movement only really started to gain speed when it started merging groups together.
Black rights as a movement had existed for centuries and not really got much done.
Throw that shit in with gay rights, womens rights, immigrant rights and worker rights and suddenly you have a broad coallition that got a lot of changes forced through.
Without the feminists, socialists, and gay rights spokespeople, MLK would have just been a particular good leader of the failed black rights attempt.
With them, he had a broad coallition that could shut down industry in solidarity with black people, could appeal to women and say it's in their self-interest to help black women, etc.

The gays got kind of shafted in that particular deal though. Admittedly it did become more acceptable to be one in public after, but as far as i'm aware legal changes didn't really happen.

[Linux and the X]

I also have a tumblr

I'm a straight male.

Not possible.

[Esternial]

I'm of the opinion that, given the choice, people will begrudgingly allow others to be free if they are also allowed to be free.

Have you been watching the news these past few years?

There are people that always butt in other people's business if it so much as grazes their own ideology.

Right now they're only advocating for homosexuals and bisexuals.

If you add furries and BDSM to that, you can bet your ass on it that you'll get more resistance. Not only that, you'll lose support because people in furry suits just goes one step too far them to still support it, because it's a bundle package.

[Lyassa and Nairoa]

I have a few questions :

Can a hetero be gay in furry persona ?
Can a furry be a crossdresser furry ?
Can a transgender person be gay, or straight, when furried ?
Can a gay or straight turn pansexual while crossdressing ?
Should BDSM for furry personas considered animal cruelty ? Do they really consent, being in furry mode ?

[Ostroeuropa]

I'm of the opinion that, given the choice, people will begrudgingly allow others to be free if they are also allowed to be free.

Have you been watching the news these past few years?

There are people that always butt in other people's business if it so much as grazes their own ideology.

Right now they're only advocating for homosexuals and bisexuals.

If you add furries and BDSM to that, you can bet your ass on it that you'll get more resistance. Not only that, you'll lose support because people in furry suits just goes one step too far them to still support it, because it's a bundle package.

I'm optimistic.

[TaQud]

I have a few questions :

Can a hetero be gay in furry persona ?
Can a furry be a crossdresser furry ?
Can a transgender person be gay, or straight, when furried ?
Can a gay or straight turn pansexual while crossdressing ?
Should BDSM for furry personas considered animal cruelty ? Do they really consent, being in furry mode ?

I have one question:

why not use google to answer this?

[Esternial]

Have you been watching the news these past few years?

There are people that always butt in other people's business if it so much as grazes their own ideology.

Right now they're only advocating for homosexuals and bisexuals.

If you add furries and BDSM to that, you can bet your ass on it that you'll get more resistance. Not only that, you'll lose support because people in furry suits just goes one step too far them to still support it, because it's a bundle package.

I'm optimistic.

A bit too optimistic, I'm afraid.

The percentage of support you'd gain wouldn't outweigh the increase in resistance.

Especially since furries and BDSM aren't really a large percentage of the population, whereas compared to the civil rights movement, women are - as far as I recall - a pretty substantial percentage of the world population.

[Mike the Progressive]

I have a few questions :

Can a hetero be gay in furry persona ?
Can a furry be a crossdresser furry ?
Can a transgender person be gay, or straight, when furried ?
Can a gay or straight turn pansexual while crossdressing ?
Should BDSM for furry personas considered animal cruelty ? Do they really consent, being in furry mode ?

I have one question:

why not use google to answer this?

Not to mention furries are evil.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Congratulations! You just answered why pride parades exist.

And yet, when asked explicitly if you'd support a straight pride parade you said no.
Despite the fact straight people also suffer oppression at the hands of prudes.


As for the poll, I recognize including all options is not feasible so i'm not mad.

I'm bisexual and do not have a gender identity.

Bullshit, bullshit, and bullshit, considering you use male pronouns.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Yeah, screw the rest of us who can't/don't want surgery! Sexuality is about genitals, nothing more!

Good lord.

So what you're saying is that it's wrong that Obrenovacia has found happiness because she's in a different situation to you and has a different sexuality/gender identity to you.

Hmm.

Not at all, I'm happy for her.

I'm less pleased, however, with the implication that sexuality is related to genitalia, and that SRS is the be all end all of gender identity.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Gay and bisexual are sexualities. Transgender is a sexual identity. Furries and BDSM are fetishes.

So there is no category then.
I'd also argue that furry can be a sexual identity.
You've proven my point by throwing Transgender into a seperate category from Gay and Bisexual.
I do not see any category that unites these things, but that doesn't also include other sexual "deviants." I note you've previously said you don't disagree with me though, so i'll wait for someone elses answer.

Yes. A sexual fetish and dressing up as an animal is clearly exactly the fucking same as gender dysphoria. Abso-fucking-lutely.

[Esternial]

So there is no category then.
I'd also argue that furry can be a sexual identity.
You've proven my point by throwing Transgender into a seperate category from Gay and Bisexual.
I do not see any category that unites these things, but that doesn't also include other sexual "deviants." I note you've previously said you don't disagree with me though, so i'll wait for someone elses answer.

Yes. A sexual fetish and dressing up as an animal is clearly exactly the fucking same as gender dysphoria. Abso-fucking-lutely.

I think we've already been over that.

Over and beyond.

We're all sitting in the Bahamas right now.

[The Steel Magnolia]

There's an exclusionary category of "things that aren't fetishes."

And saying that furries are a personal identity on the level of transgenderism is offensive to transgenders unless you're going to agree with the troll argument that it's possible to identify as a different species.

Ever heard of otherkin?

Yes, I have. It's a bullshit tumblrism that is intensely transphobic.

It's like "demisexuality". Except it's not 'slut shaming the orientation', it's 'lolol fuck you trans people I can be a wolf if I want to! Woof woof!"

[The Steel Magnolia]

You can act as one and believe you're one, but not BE one.

You accidentally summed up transsexuality.

Except species is not a social construct, so no, no they did not.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Yeah, screw the rest of us who can't/don't want surgery! Sexuality is about genitals, nothing more!

Good lord.

Wow... passive-aggressive much?

What was passive about it?

That was straight out aggression. Answer the criticisms and we'll talk.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Yeah, screw the rest of us who can't/don't want surgery! Sexuality is about genitals, nothing more!

Good lord.

I'm also amazed if you think I was referring JUST to genitals... having lived transgendered for years I've finally made the next stage to becoming a woman.

But hey, let's just condescend to people.

Bullshit it's the "next stage."

Genitalia is not a requirement of womanhood. There is no such thing as "stages." There is identity, and that is the sole and only determination of gender.