The biggest joke are people who care only about genitalia. As long as it is slick and there is some liquid it doesn’t matter all that much what the other party has
Imagine being some kind of radical feminist lesbian sperging for hours about how men treat us as body parts and then see only vaginas and dicks. The irony
If it’s not for you, then it’s not for you. But one thing I cannot recommend: don’t take those who’s preferences you dislike and assume they reduce people to a piece of meat.
There’s plenty of fish in the sea. You can find some that do like penis, or don’t care, or both.
The thing is sexuality is a continuous spectrum (0,1). Using advanced mathematical apparatus we can prove that every single person is bisexual. That’s why mathematics is fundamentally gay
Moreover we must consider intersex people. What if their stuff is 20% dick and 80% vagina?
Then we need more dimensions in our spectrums. This line from penis to vagina won’t work because both of those have their own unique varying properties
However, since you distinguish sexual interests from romantic ones in some cases, I wonder where for example “panromantic” or “biromantic” would be on your tier list. Similarly homosexuality is not distniguished from homoromanticism etc…
Nevermind though, in case it wasn’t your intention to create a more or less “complete” picture.
Liking one genitalia and not the other is not “traeating people as body parts”. Is it objectivization if a straight cis male likes women, but is not attracted to a transgender woman with male genitalia? I don’t think so…
If they are attracted to women with male genitalia exclusively they are called chasers so why would the other way around be any different? Genitalia fetishism is always a bit disgustingly reductive
You will only avoid all this unnecessary garbage if you do not try to categorise these things in artificial labels and just have sex with who you want. If two people want to fuck then they do it and there is no need to call it a mouthful
Otherwise you get monstrosities like ‚I am only attracted to white boys below 5’10 during blue moon. I call it xyzuality’ just shut up already and keep sucking
“Oh I like you I am also abcdsexual with vagina preference hihi” like shut up and get on your knees
If someone is attracted only to woman with male genitalia is not feticism, nor a “chaser”, it’s a sexual preference and, just like any sexual preference, if it’s carried out in a respectful and non-creepy way, it’s perfectly reasonable and must be respected.
I agree with the proliferiation of labels not being super useful and possibly damaging, while sexuality is very complex. What I don’t agree with is your critique of “liking only genitalia” = “objectivizing”
The biggest joke are people who care only about genitalia. As long as it is slick and there is some liquid it doesn’t matter all that much what the other party has
Imagine being some kind of radical feminist lesbian sperging for hours about how men treat us as body parts and then see only vaginas and dicks. The irony
Are you having sex with a cut of meat or a person
If it’s not for you, then it’s not for you. But one thing I cannot recommend: don’t take those who’s preferences you dislike and assume they reduce people to a piece of meat.
There’s plenty of fish in the sea. You can find some that do like penis, or don’t care, or both.
The thing is sexuality is a continuous spectrum (0,1). Using advanced mathematical apparatus we can prove that every single person is bisexual. That’s why mathematics is fundamentally gay
Moreover we must consider intersex people. What if their stuff is 20% dick and 80% vagina?
Then we need more dimensions in our spectrums. This line from penis to vagina won’t work because both of those have their own unique varying properties
No.
You just say: I don’t wan to have sex with you.
You don’t need to explain yourself, like a wimp, or go into muddy waters of stupid definitions
Dang, and binary dimension for consent. And another one for your comprehension of jokes!
I have a feeling you dislike me for some reason so I am gonna skip this dialogue
No I was just joking and you keep taking me serious for some reason, I was responding to a joke of yours after all
The last line has so many words I do not know.
However, since you distinguish sexual interests from romantic ones in some cases, I wonder where for example “panromantic” or “biromantic” would be on your tier list. Similarly homosexuality is not distniguished from homoromanticism etc…
Nevermind though, in case it wasn’t your intention to create a more or less “complete” picture.
It was just a joke of course I mean cmon. Tier list of sexualities is hilarious and a bit of a jab at society
I see, okay. Took it a bit too serious then. ;)
Cmon, my jokes are not even possible to be mistaken for alt right. I take special care to make them the least believable and absurd
Especially since the most common sexuality just…wasn’t on the tier list at all. Not even marked as F tier or something.
Liking one genitalia and not the other is not “traeating people as body parts”. Is it objectivization if a straight cis male likes women, but is not attracted to a transgender woman with male genitalia? I don’t think so…
If they are attracted to women with male genitalia exclusively they are called chasers so why would the other way around be any different? Genitalia fetishism is always a bit disgustingly reductive
You will only avoid all this unnecessary garbage if you do not try to categorise these things in artificial labels and just have sex with who you want. If two people want to fuck then they do it and there is no need to call it a mouthful
Otherwise you get monstrosities like ‚I am only attracted to white boys below 5’10 during blue moon. I call it xyzuality’ just shut up already and keep sucking
“Oh I like you I am also abcdsexual with vagina preference hihi” like shut up and get on your knees
If someone is attracted only to woman with male genitalia is not feticism, nor a “chaser”, it’s a sexual preference and, just like any sexual preference, if it’s carried out in a respectful and non-creepy way, it’s perfectly reasonable and must be respected.
I agree with the proliferiation of labels not being super useful and possibly damaging, while sexuality is very complex. What I don’t agree with is your critique of “liking only genitalia” = “objectivizing”