TDT 4: What the $#@! is a "womxn", anyways?

[Auzkhia]

I'm still bisexual but it feels like it has taken a back seat since I am nonbinary trans, because a lot of people define sexuality in relationships with men and/or women.

It feels like all nonbinary people could be considered queer, not just because of their gender, even though genderqueer is a synonym, but sexually queer.

Fellas, is it gay to be nonbinary? Only if you want to label like it. I just say I'm bi, pan, and queer when asked about my sexual orientation.

What feels natural to you? If it all of the above, well, that’s fine.

Like I said, I'm still bisexual, my gender doesn't totally change the way I feel sexual attraction..

I guess except for I cannot be considered gay for liking men and straight for like women. Though I wasn't those, I still was bisexual, I knew years before I questioned my gender. What has changed is how I might be perceived as a transfeminine NB. I don't want to apply queer labels for men, like mlm or Achillean. I think I could claim the labels of sapphic and nblnb. Still attracted to men, but my gender is not at all male.

Honestly, I'm just queer, and I love using it for myself when I need to be breve.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

What feels natural to you? If it all of the above, well, that’s fine.

Like I said, I'm still bisexual, my gender doesn't totally change the way I feel sexual attraction..

I guess except for I cannot be considered gay for liking men and straight for like women. Though I wasn't those, I still was bisexual, I knew years before I questioned my gender. What has changed is how I might be perceived as a transfeminine NB. I don't want to apply queer labels for men, like mlm or Achillean. I think I could claim the labels of sapphic and nblnb. Still attracted to men, but my gender is not at all male.

Honestly, I'm just queer, and I love using it for myself when I need to be breve.

Hey, no sweat. I’m bi too. The only difference between you and me is probably that I identify as cisgender female while you identify as queer.

[Khasinkonia]

I'm still bisexual but it feels like it has taken a back seat since I am nonbinary trans, because a lot of people define sexuality in relationships with men and/or women.

It feels like all nonbinary people could be considered queer, not just because of their gender, even though genderqueer is a synonym, but sexually queer.

Fellas, is it gay to be nonbinary? Only if you want to label like it. I just say I'm bi, pan, and queer when asked about my sexual orientation.

I’ve always been of the opinion that broad statements regarding nonbinary folks are difficult to make. I always frame it like this: Binary trans folks are physics, nonbinary folks are quantum. Different rules, almost. With genderqueer folks—folks who are consistently neither male nor female—I think sexuality is in sort of a flux. A man in love with a consistantly femme enby would probably read as straight, while a man in love with a consistantly masc enby would probably read as gay, even if both enbies in fact identify as agender and merely present leaning one direction or the other rather than completely neutral. Given that I’m not aware of any sexuality orientation specifically directed at nonbinary people, I think most binary people who’re in love with a nonbinary person are either bi, pan, or straight/gay with an exception made for this specific case. With genderfluid and bigender folks who only have male and female gender identities/aspects of their identity, I’d define their lover as bi, while genderfluid and bi/pan/etcgender folks with any identities distinct from male and female would probably have to be pan/omni. As far as nonbinary people’s sexualities in relative to other lovers, it’s similarly kinda a semantics thing as far as I can tell. A genderfluid person in love with a binary person would probably be either be bi or pan from what I’ve seen, but if said genderfluid person was attracted only to one gender, you’ve got the choice between flip-flopping between saying gay and straight based on their current gender, or saying something like male/female-attracted. Bigender and pangender folks, being simultaneously multiple genders at once, kinda seem forced to be either bi or pan unless you wanna break the gender-space continuum and watch sexuality-time collapse in on itself(don’t get any ideas you cheeky aces). Nonbinary folks outside of the binary with a singular form(agender, demi, etc) seem to be bi and pan in general, but if they’re attracted to only one gender it seems to me that male/female-attracted makes the most sense, while straight and gay are used for purposes of simplicity or just because they feel like it.

That’s just my theorising on the quantum world of nonbinary folks, as I’m just a common ol’ binary lady

[Cappuccina]

Aw.. I like my oven.

Liking robots is a fetish, not a sexuality....

No, I've spoken to someone who was specifically attracted exclusively to robots, not humans.

That literally makes zero sense. I'd still say that's a fetish, not a sexuality.

[Autonomous Cleaner Bot Cleaners]

Aw.. I like my oven.

Liking robots is a fetish, not a sexuality....

No, I've spoken to someone who was specifically attracted exclusively to robots, not humans.

Well, that just makes sense.

That literally makes zero sense. I'd still say that's a fetish, not a sexuality.

[Hediacrana]

I'm still bisexual but it feels like it has taken a back seat since I am nonbinary trans, because a lot of people define sexuality in relationships with men and/or women.

It feels like all nonbinary people could be considered queer, not just because of their gender, even though genderqueer is a synonym, but sexually queer.

Fellas, is it gay to be nonbinary? Only if you want to label like it. I just say I'm bi, pan, and queer when asked about my sexual orientation.

I’ve always been of the opinion that broad statements regarding nonbinary folks are difficult to make. I always frame it like this: Binary trans folks are physics, nonbinary folks are quantum. Different rules, almost. With genderqueer folks—folks who are consistently neither male nor female—I think sexuality is in sort of a flux. A man in love with a consistantly femme enby would probably read as straight, while a man in love with a consistantly masc enby would probably read as gay, even if both enbies in fact identify as agender and merely present leaning one direction or the other rather than completely neutral. Given that I’m not aware of any sexuality orientation specifically directed at nonbinary people, I think most binary people who’re in love with a nonbinary person are either bi, pan, or straight/gay with an exception made for this specific case. With genderfluid and bigender folks who only have male and female gender identities/aspects of their identity, I’d define their lover as bi, while genderfluid and bi/pan/etcgender folks with any identities distinct from male and female would probably have to be pan/omni. As far as nonbinary people’s sexualities in relative to other lovers, it’s similarly kinda a semantics thing as far as I can tell. A genderfluid person in love with a binary person would probably be either be bi or pan from what I’ve seen, but if said genderfluid person was attracted only to one gender, you’ve got the choice between flip-flopping between saying gay and straight based on their current gender, or saying something like male/female-attracted. Bigender and pangender folks, being simultaneously multiple genders at once, kinda seem forced to be either bi or pan unless you wanna break the gender-space continuum and watch sexuality-time collapse in on itself(don’t get any ideas you cheeky aces). Nonbinary folks outside of the binary with a singular form(agender, demi, etc) seem to be bi and pan in general, but if they’re attracted to only one gender it seems to me that male/female-attracted makes the most sense, while straight and gay are used for purposes of simplicity or just because they feel like it.

That’s just my theorising on the quantum world of nonbinary folks, as I’m just a common ol’ binary lady

I love that. You should be making the queer version of xkcd.

[Cappuccina]

No, I've spoken to someone who was specifically attracted exclusively to robots, not humans.

Well, that just makes sense.

That literally makes zero sense. I'd still say that's a fetish, not a sexuality.

What? It'd be like calling beastiality or pædophilia a sexuality. It just a weirdo fetish.

[Hediacrana]

Well, that just makes sense.

What? It'd be like calling beastiality or pædophilia a sexuality. It just a weirdo fetish.

If that conversation could be had outside of this thread, that would be great.

[Auzkhia]

I'm still bisexual but it feels like it has taken a back seat since I am nonbinary trans, because a lot of people define sexuality in relationships with men and/or women.

It feels like all nonbinary people could be considered queer, not just because of their gender, even though genderqueer is a synonym, but sexually queer.

Fellas, is it gay to be nonbinary? Only if you want to label like it. I just say I'm bi, pan, and queer when asked about my sexual orientation.

I’ve always been of the opinion that broad statements regarding nonbinary folks are difficult to make. I always frame it like this: Binary trans folks are physics, nonbinary folks are quantum. Different rules, almost. With genderqueer folks—folks who are consistently neither male nor female—I think sexuality is in sort of a flux. A man in love with a consistantly femme enby would probably read as straight, while a man in love with a consistantly masc enby would probably read as gay, even if both enbies in fact identify as agender and merely present leaning one direction or the other rather than completely neutral. Given that I’m not aware of any sexuality orientation specifically directed at nonbinary people, I think most binary people who’re in love with a nonbinary person are either bi, pan, or straight/gay with an exception made for this specific case. With genderfluid and bigender folks who only have male and female gender identities/aspects of their identity, I’d define their lover as bi, while genderfluid and bi/pan/etcgender folks with any identities distinct from male and female would probably have to be pan/omni. As far as nonbinary people’s sexualities in relative to other lovers, it’s similarly kinda a semantics thing as far as I can tell. A genderfluid person in love with a binary person would probably be either be bi or pan from what I’ve seen, but if said genderfluid person was attracted only to one gender, you’ve got the choice between flip-flopping between saying gay and straight based on their current gender, or saying something like male/female-attracted. Bigender and pangender folks, being simultaneously multiple genders at once, kinda seem forced to be either bi or pan unless you wanna break the gender-space continuum and watch sexuality-time collapse in on itself(don’t get any ideas you cheeky aces). Nonbinary folks outside of the binary with a singular form(agender, demi, etc) seem to be bi and pan in general, but if they’re attracted to only one gender it seems to me that male/female-attracted makes the most sense, while straight and gay are used for purposes of simplicity or just because they feel like it.

That’s just my theorising on the quantum world of nonbinary folks, as I’m just a common ol’ binary lady

Gender and sexualities are overlapping spectra of infinite variation. Being femme and a demigirl, it has changed my perspective on attraction to women and nonbinary people. But I like to say if you're into me, you're not straight, and that I am gay for everyone, even they are meant to be jokes not serious statements.

[Cekoviu]

No, I've spoken to someone who was specifically attracted exclusively to robots, not humans.

That literally makes zero sense. I'd still say that's a fetish, not a sexuality.

If you're exclusively attracted to a specific class of things and/or beings, it is a sexuality. A fetish is an add-on to a sexuality, such as being attracted to women [sexuality] and particularly women with large feet [fetish].

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

I have the opposite problem. Everything makes me cry.

I also cry at the weirdest things and weirdest contexts.

Thanos's chin.

You cried at Thanos' chin?

I cry almost daily at any inconsequential shit, usually with little or no idea of the reason. Rage uncontrollably and fantasise murder too at similar thresholds. It's not a sign of superior emotional intelligence or depth, as I say, often it's inability to healthily process emotional stimuli.

I regard it as a legitimate weakness and sign of poor self-control and I'd rather it weren't a thing.

Oof. I hope HRT doesn't do that to me. There are times when I get a bit down and I don't know why. If I were on HRT would I be crying at those times? Idk. To what extent did you feel these feelings before HRT?

My fantasies when angry are about me talking about my real feelings to the person(s) I'm mad at; meanwhile, you're over here talking about murder fantasies.

That sounds like a much healthier rage fantasy.

[Cekoviu]

Oof. I hope HRT doesn't do that to me. There are times when I get a bit down and I don't know why. If I were on HRT would I be crying at those times? Idk. To what extent did you feel these feelings before HRT?

I can't speak for DI, but sometimes I'll be really cheerful and perhaps even laughing, then just suddenly start welling up. With that as the baseline, I'm sure you can imagine what it's like when I'm sad. (Funnily enough, my eyes started watering slightly as I wrote this, with literally no prompting.)

My fantasies when angry are about me talking about my real feelings to the person(s) I'm mad at; meanwhile, you're over here talking about murder fantasies.

That sounds like a much healthier rage fantasy.

I guess, but it's also indicative of how much of a pushover I am, since I only actually tell people when I'm mad at them in my fantasies. That's not very healthy either, although it's definitely less intense than murder fantasies by a huge amount.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Oof. I hope HRT doesn't do that to me. There are times when I get a bit down and I don't know why. If I were on HRT would I be crying at those times? Idk. To what extent did you feel these feelings before HRT?

I can't speak for DI, but sometimes I'll be really cheerful and perhaps even laughing, then just suddenly start welling up. With that as the baseline, I'm sure you can imagine what it's like when I'm sad. (Funnily enough, my eyes started watering slightly as I wrote this, with literally no prompting.)

That sounds like a much healthier rage fantasy.

I guess, but it's also indicative of how much of a pushover I am, since I only actually tell people when I'm mad at them in my fantasies. That's not very healthy either, although it's definitely less intense than murder fantasies by a huge amount.

Were you experiencing that emotional instability prior to taking HRT?

[The Rich Port]

I have the opposite problem. Everything makes me cry.

I also cry at the weirdest things and weirdest contexts.

Thanos's chin.

You cried at Thanos' chin?

I cry almost daily at any inconsequential shit, usually with little or no idea of the reason. Rage uncontrollably and fantasise murder too at similar thresholds. It's not a sign of superior emotional intelligence or depth, as I say, often it's inability to healthily process emotional stimuli.

I regard it as a legitimate weakness and sign of poor self-control and I'd rather it weren't a thing.

Oof. I hope HRT doesn't do that to me. There are times when I get a bit down and I don't know why. If I were on HRT would I be crying at those times? Idk. To what extent did you feel these feelings before HRT?

My fantasies when angry are about me talking about my real feelings to the person(s) I'm mad at; meanwhile, you're over here talking about murder fantasies.

That sounds like a much healthier rage fantasy.

Yes.

I also cried at that one episode of Futurama where Fry's dog waits for him ._.

[Cekoviu]

I can't speak for DI, but sometimes I'll be really cheerful and perhaps even laughing, then just suddenly start welling up. With that as the baseline, I'm sure you can imagine what it's like when I'm sad. (Funnily enough, my eyes started watering slightly as I wrote this, with literally no prompting.)

I guess, but it's also indicative of how much of a pushover I am, since I only actually tell people when I'm mad at them in my fantasies. That's not very healthy either, although it's definitely less intense than murder fantasies by a huge amount.

Were you experiencing that emotional instability prior to taking HRT?

Absolutely not. It's not constant, though, as I experience more of a cyclical, PMS-like change in emotions. That doesn't happen to all trans women, but that's what I experience.

[First American Empire]

Pansexual means you're attracted to all genders, but not everything that exists.

See there kinda falls my point. Like does pan cover my attraction to Garrus Vakerian?

Millions of people are attracted to Garrus Vakarian, including people of every sexual orientation label that includes being attracted to men. It's not specific to pansexual people. (I'm not attracted to Garrus since I'm only attracted to women. I am attracted to Tali'Zorah though, enough that I'm willing to give up playing as FemShep to romance her.)

[Hanafuridake]

Pansexual means you're attracted to all genders, but not everything that exists.

See there kinda falls my point. Like does pan cover my attraction to Garrus Vakerian?

[Khasinkonia]

I’ve always been of the opinion that broad statements regarding nonbinary folks are difficult to make. I always frame it like this: Binary trans folks are physics, nonbinary folks are quantum. Different rules, almost. With genderqueer folks—folks who are consistently neither male nor female—I think sexuality is in sort of a flux. A man in love with a consistantly femme enby would probably read as straight, while a man in love with a consistantly masc enby would probably read as gay, even if both enbies in fact identify as agender and merely present leaning one direction or the other rather than completely neutral. Given that I’m not aware of any sexuality orientation specifically directed at nonbinary people, I think most binary people who’re in love with a nonbinary person are either bi, pan, or straight/gay with an exception made for this specific case. With genderfluid and bigender folks who only have male and female gender identities/aspects of their identity, I’d define their lover as bi, while genderfluid and bi/pan/etcgender folks with any identities distinct from male and female would probably have to be pan/omni. As far as nonbinary people’s sexualities in relative to other lovers, it’s similarly kinda a semantics thing as far as I can tell. A genderfluid person in love with a binary person would probably be either be bi or pan from what I’ve seen, but if said genderfluid person was attracted only to one gender, you’ve got the choice between flip-flopping between saying gay and straight based on their current gender, or saying something like male/female-attracted. Bigender and pangender folks, being simultaneously multiple genders at once, kinda seem forced to be either bi or pan unless you wanna break the gender-space continuum and watch sexuality-time collapse in on itself(don’t get any ideas you cheeky aces). Nonbinary folks outside of the binary with a singular form(agender, demi, etc) seem to be bi and pan in general, but if they’re attracted to only one gender it seems to me that male/female-attracted makes the most sense, while straight and gay are used for purposes of simplicity or just because they feel like it.

That’s just my theorising on the quantum world of nonbinary folks, as I’m just a common ol’ binary lady

I love that. You should be making the queer version of xkcd.

Welllllllll... I do happen to have a tumblr, a drawing pad, and plenty of time so maybe I just might. I'll post a link if I ever feel like actually trying it out

[Cappuccina]

That literally makes zero sense. I'd still say that's a fetish, not a sexuality.

If you're exclusively attracted to a specific class of things and/or beings, it is a sexuality. A fetish is an add-on to a sexuality, such as being attracted to women [sexuality] and particularly women with large feet [fetish].

I was gonna say it, but let me not. This thread's just gotten back to being rather calm. I'll just say I strongly disagree, and leave it at that.

[The Rich Port]

If you're exclusively attracted to a specific class of things and/or beings, it is a sexuality. A fetish is an add-on to a sexuality, such as being attracted to women [sexuality] and particularly women with large feet [fetish].

I was gonna say it, but let me not. This thread's just gotten back to being rather calm. I'll just say I strongly disagree, and leave it at that.

You strongly disagree out of willful ignorance to psychological research.

It's a fairly simple distinction and it stands to logic.

Maybe if you contested it on those grounds instead of resorting to emotional or illogical arguments.

[Cappuccina]

I was gonna say it, but let me not. This thread's just gotten back to being rather calm. I'll just say I strongly disagree, and leave it at that.

You strongly disagree out of willful ignorance to psychological research.

It's a fairly simple distinction and it stands to logic.

Maybe if you contested it on those grounds instead of resorting to emotional or illogical arguments.

I have yet to become emotional about anything here, you can rest assured I'll continue my deadpan commentary and posting.

As I said, I'm dropping the topic because if I say what I want to say, it will be quite disruptive to the nice smooth vibe we have here and I'd rather not do that. I'll agree to disagree on this one, simple as that.

[Des-Bal]

You strongly disagree out of willful ignorance to psychological research.

It's a fairly simple distinction and it stands to logic.

Maybe if you contested it on those grounds instead of resorting to emotional or illogical arguments.

Why don't you present that research? That definition would by the by seem to imply that bestiality, pedophilia, and all other sorts of attractions fall under the same umbrella. It also falls apart on it's face because of the word "exclusive."

Sexuality should be understood as the sex a person's attracted to, not the gender, species, or whether they fail to read captchas.

[Cekoviu]

You strongly disagree out of willful ignorance to psychological research.

It's a fairly simple distinction and it stands to logic.

Maybe if you contested it on those grounds instead of resorting to emotional or illogical arguments.

Why don't you present that research but it would seem to imply that bestiality, pedophilia, and all other sorts of attractions. It also falls apart on it's face because of the word "exclusive."

Sexuality should be understood as the sex a person's attracted to, not the gender, species, or whether they fail to read captchas.

Except that's not how it works in practice. Immediate sexual attraction is based on gender presentation, not the sex of a person. And I don't see how a definition including "exclusive" would be unusable.

[Cappuccina]

You strongly disagree out of willful ignorance to psychological research.

It's a fairly simple distinction and it stands to logic.

Maybe if you contested it on those grounds instead of resorting to emotional or illogical arguments.

Why don't you present that research? That definition would by the by seem to imply that bestiality, pedophilia, and all other sorts of attractions fall under the same umbrella. It also falls apart on it's face because of the word "exclusive."

Sexuality should be understood as the sex a person's attracted to, not the gender, species, or whether they fail to read captchas.

Thanks, but can we please not. This is gonna get ugly. Besides I'm pretty sure discussion of zoophilia is quite the taboo on NSG.

[Des-Bal]

Except that's not how it works in practice. Immediate sexual attraction is based on gender presentation, not the sex of a person. And I don't see how a definition including "exclusive" would be unusable.

I disagree, attraction is based on the sex or at least the apparent sex, the latter can be effected by gender presentation but that's not really the decider. Supposing Jason Momoa wore a skirt, used female pronouns, and did traditionally feminine things. A man who saw a picture of that six and a half foot tall pile of muscle and testerone and was aroused would be experiencing a homosexual attraction.


You can't really have "exclusive" work when people are attracted to so many things and nothing at all uggesting people can only be attrated to one. With non-binary genders and non-gender categories you're not going to have any ability to categorize anything. A man attracted exclusively to robots is a robosexual, if it's exclusively male robots its homorobosexual if it's human women but male robots it's hetero homorobosexual. Unless of course being interested in both humans and robot means it's not exclusive and isn't a sexuality which would probably be hard to break to bisexuals.