"Gender Fluidity"

Do you believe one person can pass from homosexual to heterosexual and back again? Can a man really have a baby, or did Time Magazine (Sept 9, 2016?) -- google it -- make up that whole story?

Gender fluidity...

Something just didn't seem right with your terminology. So I got that 30 second degree by googling it.. What I thought it was is correct:

"Gender fluid is a gender identity which refers to a gender which varies over time. A gender fluid person may at any time identify as male, female, neutrois, or any other non-binary identity, or some combination of identities. Their gender can also vary at random or vary in response to different circumstances.

gender.wikia.com/wiki/Gender_Fluid"

So it is about how you identify your gender -- not the changing of which gender you are attracted to.

I don't know if there is a term for someone's sexual preferences/orientations changing... Personally, I've always had a problem with the focus on the term sexual orientation. It seems more political and less scientific. My personal thought is that it focus too much on the human not having any control, and in essence being a victim in some way. I don't find the need for there to be a "gay gene". Furthermore, imagine that one day someone found this so-called "gay gene", but a percentage of gays didn't have it. Are they supposed to renounce themselves? Would it be so horrible if a guy without such a gay gene, fell in love with another man and knew he wanted to spend his life with this other man?

Also the "gay gene" idea seem to me to fall short on the topic of bisexual. There are people who use that term who are simply people that want to get off, and the gender of their partner is secondary. There are those that use the term, but for them it means they want both male and female sexual encounters. There are also those that use the term, but for them it means they are capable of loving someone regardless of gender. If they fall in love with an opposite sex partner, that is who they will spend their life with. If they fall in love with a same sex partner, that is who they will spend the rest of their life with. They won't fuss about how they need to have sex/love from both. I guess I admire that last group...

For myself, I never saw women as unattractive, or sex with them as gross. I simply had such a stronger need to have a man who I was attracted to desire to be with me. Over the years, the template for the kind of man who turned me on or what I desired to do with them has not changed. Who is to say if the human lifespan was 200 years that I would still be that way. I could see myself loving a woman. I would just think that the longing for another man to let me inside him would be too strong to go away.

Part of my attraction was always looking for that missing father figure. As I get older I realize that men are just boys who have gotten older. They can be just as imperfect as me. So this idea of having this sturdy, never doubting fatherly presence in my life is rather illogical. All men are capable of being wrong, self-doubting, etc. When I see a man for whom he is, then the dream of having this giant redwood of a man who can love me and always protect me from the storms in life seems so silly. Could that translate to one day only wanting to be with a woman? That is probably over simplification of my sexuality. I would probably always have that soft spot for a man to want to spend time with me.

Sometimes with my insomnia, I just look at my partner while he sleeps. I've wondered if had he been in my life as a child, would I have been 100% straight. For that mental exercise, I have realized that I would simply have felt contentment at an earlier age. I would have still desired to sleep by his side in our adulthood.

As to males having kids, it reminds me of a story I read years ago...

There was a scientific magazine that needed to study the effects of women with (what I think I remember to be as Ovarian Cancer). Obviously, you don't want to take healthy pregnant women and remove their ovaries and see if their baby turns out fine. So they decided to experiment with primates. However, the problem there is if you remove the ovaries of a female primate, you won't have more lab primates from her. So supposedly, they took a fertilized embryo, and inserted it into the abdomen of a male primate - thus not ovaries nor even a uterus. They did not bring it to term, but aborted it (via cesarean of course) just before it would have come to term. The biopsy did not show any signs of problems.

Now of course, one thing someone has to be concerned with is that the placenta is something that grows out of the fetus and typically anchors itself to the blood rich lining of the Uterus. With just an open abdominal cavity, one has to be concerned about where it might attach. If for any reason it gets detached, the adult could bleed to death. Likewise, if brought to term and it had attached to a vital organ, it may have done permanent damage to what it latched on to.

Nevertheless, supposedly the experiment proved that a pregnant woman who needs her ovaries removed may not cause the fetus to get damaged.

Now, I didn't read the 2016 article, but I heard a summary of it. Realize that reproduction at the cellular level is about an egg (which has the complete mitochondria DNA from the mother as well as half of her nuclear DNA) mingling with a sperm which has half of the male's nuclear DNA. The result is a fertilized egg which in the right environment comes to term and creates an offspring.

It is my understanding that in mice they have used certain stem cells to create an egg. If they could do that in a human male, then another male could use his sperm to fertilize the created egg cell from the first male. They would still need a surrogate to bring the fetus to term as they have yet to create an artificial womb. Do realize that such is probably years from actual feasibility and such an endeavor would be probably be cost prohibitive for most male couples.

Personally, I think the idea is rather cool. When I am attracted to another man, the first thing that goes through my head is if I could breed him, could we make beautiful children together (not just in physical appeal, but in temperament). Some guys look at other guy's cocks. I look at their ass, their balls, and their genes.

loverofintersex1 said:

Do you believe one person can pass from homosexual to heterosexual and back again?

Click to expand...

Yes, but like none2_none2 commented, that's not "gender fluidity". The term you're looking for is "fluid orientation" or "fluid sexuality".

Can a man really have a baby, or did Time Magazine (Sept 9, 2016?) -- google it -- make up that whole story?

Click to expand...

This is a different question again but, yep, trans men can have babies. That story isn't the first case, I've read several others e.g. Thomas Beatie, Kayden Coleman etc.

Hormone therapy makes it unlikely but not impossible for a trans guy to conceive. Those who are trying to get pregnant usually suspend HRT for the duration, but occasionally trans guys get pregnant by accident while on HRT.

(And some trans guys have surgery that would make it impossible to get pregnant, but many don't.)

This topic seems to me to be more about people trying to hard to be 'special'. i recognize that we are a diverse species when it comes to most things, even sexuality but now its become more of a 'movement'. i have met some of these gender fluid people and find them overly aggressive about their sexuality.

i met a friend for lunch one day, something i rarely get to do and she brought along a group of her friends who were 'non-binaries'. i asked what it meant and they proceeded to tell me in a very animated way about Gender Fluidity. Several of them got upset when the waitress used the wrong pronoun for one of them and i watched them tear into her over it. They called her a 'fucking CIS' which i thought was 'sis' and confused me more since it contradicted the whole pronoun argument. i was informed it meant 'Comfortable In ones Sex'... which is bad unless the sex you are comfortable with isn't the one you are?

What was definitive in deciding it was all about being 'special' was when one informed me she/he was hetero-flexible and one of the others chimed in, in a very condescending way, that he/she was non-binary. The entire group argued for several minutes over what name they fell under while declaring how being pigeon holed by a Doctor who had the audacity to 'force' them into a gender based on their reproductive organs, was the ultimate evil....

They also seemed to take umbrage that i wouldn't declare anything more than gay and that i didn't need a fancy name to be myself.

i needed a good hard spanking when Master came home that night just to clear my head... it's going to be long time before i ask permission to leave the house again...

leashedbottom said:

i met a friend for lunch one day, something i rarely get to do and she brought along a group of her friends who were 'non-binaries'. i asked what it meant and they proceeded to tell me in a very animated way about Gender Fluidity. Several of them got upset when the waitress used the wrong pronoun for one of them and i watched them tear into her over it.

Click to expand...

Sounds like those people were jerks. That happens sometimes. But I wouldn't rush to judge all genderfluid/NB people on the behaviour of a few people on one occasion. I know several perfectly lovely NB folk.

I've also met several BDSMers who were dicks about it and made a habit of shoving their sex lives in the face of nonconsenting strangers, but I don't judge all BDSMers by that!

They called her a 'fucking CIS' which i thought was 'sis' and confused me more since it contradicted the whole pronoun argument. i was informed it meant 'Comfortable In ones Sex'... which is bad unless the sex you are comfortable with isn't the one you are?

Click to expand...

What? They said that? Somebody's either bullshitting you or badly misinformed. I've heard a couple of bogus etymologies for "cis" but that one's new to me!

The "trans" part of "transgender" comes from Latin; it means "opposite side". "Cis" is also Latin, meaning "same side", so it's the natural complement of "trans". Hence the Romans would talk about "Gallia Transalpina" (the part of Gaul that was on the far side of the Alps, relative to Rome) and "Gallia Cisalpina" (the part of Gaul that was on the near side).

Both "trans" and "cis" were adopted into the English language, with those same meanings. "Trans" shows up more often, but "cis" has been used here and there for a very long time. It shows up in geography now and then (e.g. "cisatlantic") but it's probably best known in chemistry, where "cis" and "trans" are used to distinguish between similar molecules with slightly different shapes. See here for an example: cis-1,2-dichloroethene is the one where the two chlorine groups (green) are on the same side of the center line, and trans-1,2-dichloroethene is the one where they're on opposite sides.

So when people were looking around for a word to mean "not trans", "cis" was the logical choice; it goes with "trans" as naturally as "left" goes with "right", and it's been around longer than the English language.

Note -- all discussions (gay vs lesbian etc) seem to be binary-based -- gay = male, lesbian = female.

loverofintersex1 said:

Note -- all discussions (gay vs lesbian etc) seem to be binary-based -- gay = male, lesbian = female.

Click to expand...

I get the impression you are trolling. You chose your username but claim to have no idea about terminology regarding LGBT let alone intersex. You posted an identical question in the GB and got similar responses there: what did you expect to find different here ( except we're more polite - generally )?
You need to wise up on language *hint Wiki *
iggy

stickygirl said:

I get the impression you are trolling. You chose your username but claim to have no idea about terminology regarding LGBT let alone intersex. You posted an identical question in the GB and got similar responses there: what did you expect to find different here ( except we're more polite - generally )?
You need to wise up on language *hint Wiki *
iggy

Click to expand...

I don't see where he did anything that strange. I didn't check the time/date stamp of his two similar threads, but if the LGBT chat room was the second one it makes sense. One would expect more knowledge about LGBT terms from an LGBT group than the general boards. I would think most would agree. Not only is there typically more politeness here, but when a general board thread goes out on a tangent, it isn't about information that might be of use, but typically one to stir up nonsense.

I wouldn't have posted it in the general board at all, but if he feels more kinship with the str8 community at times, I could understand why he would have posted there.

loverofintersex1 said:

Note -- all discussions (gay vs lesbian etc) seem to be binary-based -- gay = male, lesbian = female.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure where you are trying to go with this statement. Keep in mind these are all labels. Many of us are not fans of labels in the first place. I see them as short cuts to get to know someone. Plus even within the same so-called label, there can be quite a bit of individual uniqueness that a label unfairly distorts the truth.

As stated earlier, I would not have mixed gender fluidity with gay/str8/bi desires. However, I will say this if you read up on trans topics, sexual preferences/orientations can get complex.

You can have a trans individual attracted to a particular gender before they come out to themselves and others and begin the transition process, and the outcome when they are done with transitioning could be an attraction to both genders where before was only one OR it could still be one gender but opposite of the gender they were attracted to before they started the transition.

Obviously, desire isn't just about hormones. It is something else -- or more correctly several something else"s". (If it were just hormones, we would have seen homosexuality "cured" by simply administering hormones. I'm sure it has been tried, but it makes no difference.)

Some may think that trans people whose desires change after transitioning might somehow always had that attraction, but suppressed it. I suppose that could be the case, but somehow I think that probably cannot apply to 100% of the cases. I don't personally know any trans people who have changed in that regard, but there are plenty of cases documented.

I'm not trying to give fodder to those that think desires are all by choice and give hell to gays & lesbians. Rather, I'm hoping people learn that desire is complex. It is not simply something branded into you one way at birth. If it was, then we couldn't begin to understand those trans people whose desires change. Hopefully, if it hasn't been studied in detail, some research will go into studying this phenomena.

none2_none2 said:

I'm not sure where you are trying to go with this statement. Keep in mind these are all labels. Many of us are not fans of labels in the first place. I see them as short cuts to get to know someone. Plus even within the same so-called label, there can be quite a bit of individual uniqueness that a label unfairly distorts the truth.

As stated earlier, I would not have mixed gender fluidity with gay/str8/bi desires. However, I will say this if you read up on trans topics, sexual preferences/orientations can get complex.

You can have a trans individual attracted to a particular gender before they come out to themselves and others and begin the transition process, and the outcome when they are done with transitioning could be an attraction to both genders where before was only one OR it could still be one gender but opposite of the gender they were attracted to before they started the transition.

Obviously, desire isn't just about hormones. It is something else -- or more correctly several something else"s". (If it were just hormones, we would have seen homosexuality "cured" by simply administering hormones. I'm sure it has been tried, but it makes no difference.)

Some may think that trans people whose desires change after transitioning might somehow always had that attraction, but suppressed it. I suppose that could be the case, but somehow I think that probably cannot apply to 100% of the cases. I don't personally know any trans people who have changed in that regard, but there are plenty of cases documented.

I'm not trying to give fodder to those that think desires are all by choice and give hell to gays & lesbians. Rather, I'm hoping people learn that desire is complex. It is not simply something branded into you one way at birth. If it was, then we couldn't begin to understand those trans people whose desires change. Hopefully, if it hasn't been studied in detail, some research will go into studying this phenomena.

Click to expand...

What a lovely response. Just what I'd been hoping for -- one where whatever "scholarship" is involved is under the surface, but the thoughtfulness of the answers to some of the issues I've been thinking about are placed in a suitable context!

Agreed: desire is not branded into you at birth. For at least a century that has been accepted -- the famous -- or infamous? -- idea that we all begin bisexual, and then are socially trained to accept "pink for a little girl, blue for a boy" has been merciless to people who feel born into a boy's body but with a female soul. But -- as I know you have anticipated -- what of someone who keeps changing and changing the objects of her/his desire? Maybe that's all gender fluidity means, and I should just shut up, go away, and let us all return to the fantasy lives for which Literotica seems to have been created in the first place.

But what -- ahem -- trigger coming up -- what if you were just born a slut/pig whore/sissy, and will fuck anything? The names have been thrown around -- not just pansexual, intersexual.... Right? Does anyone care or give a damn about that particular soul, or just consign it to the dustbin of binary-based badness?

Maybe I've been wrong all along. Maybe I do deserve to be called a troll -- the ultimate Catch-a-22 of discussion (Deny you're a Troll? They all say that. Admit you're a Troll? See?) I felt as if I'd been electro-shocked earlier. And now, a perceptive, plausible writer. Maybe I'm guilty of binarism when it comes to language and thought....

stickygirl said:

I get the impression you are trolling. You chose your username but claim to have no idea about terminology regarding LGBT let alone intersex. You posted an identical question in the GB and got similar responses there: what did you expect to find different here ( except we're more polite - generally )?
You need to wise up on language *hint Wiki *
iggy

Click to expand...

Why did I neglect Wikipedia? Well, for one, it's open-source. For another, if a given article has less than about a dozen or so peer-reviewed articles behind it, meh.

My poor expression of knowledge of terminology is at fault, also. I know something, but not enough. Politeness, of course, is an art.

loverofintersex1 said:

Why did I neglect Wikipedia? Well, for one, it's open-source. For another, if a given article has less than about a dozen or so peer-reviewed articles behind it, meh.

My poor expression of knowledge of terminology is at fault, also. I know something, but not enough. Politeness, of course, is an art.

Click to expand...

If you're going to ask questions of the community who you think might be 'expert', it would be wise to do at least some preliminary research. It's not like the internet isn't full of helpful information in this regard. And yes, Wikipedia is 'open source' - but trust me, anything that's erroneous (especially in respect of issues like sexuality) gets removed pretty quick. We could also think of it as the most rigorously peer-reviewed website in the world.

KimGordon67 said:

If you're going to ask questions of the community who you think might be 'expert', it would be wise to do at least some preliminary research. It's not like the internet isn't full of helpful information in this regard. And yes, Wikipedia is 'open source' - but trust me, anything that's erroneous (especially in respect of issues like sexuality) gets removed pretty quick. We could also think of it as the most rigorously peer-reviewed website in the world.

Click to expand...

While I love googling and using wiki, etc to learn more, one still has to take all knowledge with some skepticism... Any subject matter is prone to the politics of the day which affect the information that is allowed. Just because information is peer reviewed, doesn't mean that the biases of those involved in the decisions of what is published doesn't influence the outcome...

While such biases may be less in affect for newer sexual terms as most likely (or at least hopefully) those are monitored by basically the ones who helped coin these terms, I would not make any one website as definitive truth for any subject matter.

Granted for preliminary research into a subject matter it is probably just fine. So sure, I would recommend people check things out before asking questions. That being said, quite frankly I found his questions a bit refreshing for this GLBT Chatter forum. It got me to think and double check my own understanding of terms.

How many times can you read about cravings for the same body parts over and over again in a forum without getting stale? Granted, it is a lot better than the General Board where it sometimes seems like to keep it fresh they either make small talk or degenerate in throwing insults at certain people they don't like.

KimGordon67 said:

If you're going to ask questions of the community who you think might be 'expert', it would be wise to do at least some preliminary research. It's not like the internet isn't full of helpful information in this regard. And yes, Wikipedia is 'open source' - but trust me, anything that's erroneous (especially in respect of issues like sexuality) gets removed pretty quick. We could also think of it as the most rigorously peer-reviewed website in the world.

Click to expand...

Gee, but you're a little presumptuous. You don't trust me; why should I trust you? How long have you been using the Internet? Why would I put you among the "experts," rather than someone in the peanut gallery? You'll excuse me, but I'm a little tired. More data to file away. Sayonara.

Gender fluidity? Metrosexual?
I prefer "polymorphously perverse".

Labels, they are all still labels. People seem to want to classify others which maybe makes it easier for them. Personally, either I like the person you are or I don't. How you dress or who you have sex with matters not to me.

Personally, I have no idea what label would work for me. Act masuline and yet inside I have always wanted to be able to act girly. Given the chance would crossdress at times. Attracted to women yet have had sex with men and will probably again.

I am not at all gender fluid. I am male, male, today, yesterday, tomorrow, totally male. That being said, the kind of crotch I want to bury my face in or mate with can vary greatly in terms of the physical plumbing. That being said, whether the plumbing belongs to someone who identifies as male, female, sissy, butch, "queer, alien, or "just get down there and make me cum, bitch" is another issue (and I also vary on preferences for that).

here are my somewhat rambling thoughts...!

I consider myself to be gender fluid. I have a masculine presenting aspect and a feminine presenting aspect and actually quite often the two converge. my gender fluidity is about how I'm perceived at any one time, it's nothing to do with my sexuality.
I separated it from being a cross dresser. the general perception of crossdressing seems to be "a man wearing women's clothing". for me though, it's more than that. it's a complete mind and body thing for me. I move differently, act differently. I do my make up and my hair and I exist! it's not a sexual thing, well unless I want to make it a sexual thing. I don't consider it a change in personality either. the feminine bits are still there when I'm presenting as male and the masculine bits are there when I'm presenting as female. just, one takes over from the other, depending on how I'm feeling. I dont think of myself as transgender or transexual.

as for the labelling... i think everyone, on some level, likes to know where they fit in. in my case, finding a label that fits me helped me to understand myself a bit more. it certainly helps when you're trying to explain about yourself to someone who has no idea what terms like transexual, transgender or non-binary mean.

some people may get aggressive about it because it means so much to them. personally, pronouns don't matter so much to me so I'm unlikely to get upset. however, if someone is experiencing bad dysphoria, or is just generally struggling to be understood, it's unsurprising if they get upset at the wrong pronouns being used. it doesn't excuse rudeness though.

Seems like the OP's questions have been answered.

haurni said:

Seems like the OP's questions have been answered.

Click to expand...

Comprehensively I would say! I just think it's great people can be who they want to be, when they want to be!

Life's too short.

Thank you.

You've all been of immense help to me. I apologize for my bad manners to some of you, and I'm in awe of others. This has been an experience I will not forget.

Names, labels....

loverofintersex1 said:

You've all been of immense help to me. I apologize for my bad manners to some of you, and I'm in awe of others. This has been an experience I will not forget.

Click to expand...

Looks to me as if our labels just distort who we are. A cocksucker is anyone who has sucked a cock. If he keeps on going that, he really IS a cocksucker, case closed. Someone who takes it up the ass is an ass-fucker (maybe he gave it up the ass before?) -- and so on. All those rotten old names -- faggot is one -- uggh! -- I'd as soon forget right now. Does anyone agree so far? Love - me.

I am gender fluid. I'm not completely male or female. I have felt non conforming and am perceived that way at times. I remember a gentleman telling me that have male energy-and I was wearing women's clothing.

transqueen said:

I am gender fluid. I'm not completely male or female. I have felt non conforming and am perceived that way at times. I remember a gentleman telling me that have male energy-and I was wearing women's clothing.

Click to expand...

Poor guy couldn't handle you sucking his big cock, I guess. I've seen that happen with guys who call themselves "bi-curious" or "straight" -- just haven't taken that first step to feeling another's guy's cock and feeling their own stirring, liking the new feeling, let alone opening their mouths for cock. Oh well. Don't know what they're missing in life. Male energy, my ass -- except if it's really my ass they want and aren't ready to feel me up.