Defining gay.

Hi! I don't post on this side much anymore, but a topic that comes up a lot is 'gay'. Am I gay? What is gay? Is he gay? Will I turn gay? Every combination comes up as a topic.
Using my own experience, I thought I would comment on how difficult defining gay is, when combined with variable gender. What is gay?- Read on, and you'll either be absolutely clear, or hopelessly confused. (Common terms in parentheses)

As a male I was attracted to other males (gay). I also married a woman (confused). I transitioned to female, and am attracted to males (straight). I am still technically married to a woman (gay), but we sleep in separate bedrooms cause she's not gay (lesbian). My boyfriend is bi-gender, so when he's male, we are (straight), but when she's female we are (gay, lesbian) even tho' in the past he has been attracted to males (gay). In public, he usually presents male, making us a (straight) couple, but my sister usually sees her as female, making us a (lesbian) couple.

If you even occasionally feel your gender is changeable, and are confused about sexuality, I hope this clears it up.
This is why I gave up on terms a long time ago. Find someone to love, and worry about what to call it later.
N.B. there's a lot of LOL in this post, don't panic!

The latest GLAAD Media Reference Guide suggests referring to couples as 'same sex' or 'opposite sex' in order to avoid implications that one is gay or straight (as one or both partners could be bi or asexual, e.g.). They haven't yet addressed what to do when one or both members of the couple (polycule/whatever) don't identify consistently as one of the binary gender options.

If you are female-identified then you are straight (or mostly so). I guess your partner would be bi- or pansexual if they have an attraction to both genders. I have no idea what to call a bi-gendered or genderfluid individual who is only attracted to one gender of partner - I think we need a new word for that!

I created a new word for my sexuality. Loveable.

Actually, it kind of relates back to one of our core principles: sex is different than gender. So LGB describe sexual attractions irrespective of gender. (At least, if we believe our own press.) Doesn't make it less complicated but it's an interesting test to see if you've completely abandoned sex=gender bias. I certainly haven't. It's hard to make that break after decades of believing it.

In my opinion, the answers to these gay/straight questions on this public forum are skewed by agenda. Most of the members here are married or in committed hetero relationships. I'd venture a guess that in every single one of those relationships the SO will end up covertly reading this forum. Many of us have our pictures in our avatar, and even if we don't it'd probably be pretty easy for an SO to figure out who we are. Some of us are smart enough to never ever forget that our SO's will read it. The rest of us damn well better get that smart.

That said, it's not that we're all really gay and we're lying about it. A vast majority of us probably are straight. Regardless, isn't the real important trait or quality one of monogamy and, sappy as it sounds, love? Look, by definition on this forum we all dress like women and we try like hell to look good doing it. Is it gay if you get a little tingle if a guy tells you you're pretty? Are you so incredibly straight that you'd be aghast? Regardless, isn't what's important that you'll go home to your SO and tell her you love her... and mean it! And that you'd never consider straying from your marriage/relationship with ANYBODY?

I'm in a new chapter of my life and I'm gay. I was also married for decades. I've been told over and over "You don't just change." Maybe so. Maybe this gay virus was lurking all my life. It did not matter! Not one little bit! I loved my wife, and I was as committed and monogamous as anyone on the planet. That's what mattered. I know, I've also heard that if I was truly gay for all those years that it would have been impossible for me to function within a marriage. Whatever. I can only speak for me.

Another thing... A lot of people (including people on this forum) think (believe) there's something wrong with being gay. It's not impossible to think there's something very wrong with it even if you are! It's no longer PC to say you believe there's something wrong with it, but nobody can keep you from thinking it. So sometimes that comes out as shouting from the mountaintops "I"M NOT GAY!!" The hidden message in that is there IS something wrong/disgusting about gay people and some like putting that distance between themselves and gay people by loudly making that proclamation.

There is something highly incongruent about so many of us (including, at times, me). We spend $$$ on clothes and makeup, we constantly diet, we study and practice walking and talking in the most feminine way we possibly can. We're incessant and intentional. We know what attracts us to women, and that's the way we dress and that is what we strive to become. Then we're offended at the suggestion that we might just possibly like it when a man finds us attractive. Oh, please! So, some guy notices you from across the room and you're going to act like you're offended? It's OK if it gives you a little flutter! It doesn't mean you're going to go off and join the Village People!

I'll also never understand why we can be so infuriatingly compelled to slice things so thinly to avoid the gay label at all costs. I have a "thing". And if I do things with someone else who has a "thing" like mine, I'm gay! That is a homosexual act! It doesn't matter that I feel like a woman, or consider myself a woman, or even that I imagine that I have a vagina, or that I don't ever do anything with my "thing", to the rest of of the world, I'm gay. I don't understand why we run so fast and so far away from that.

Guess I've alienated enough people for one day.

Here we go again blah blah "gender binary" blah blah seems like the popular buzz word on the day.
Trying to label each faction of gay just ends up being a fruitless quest.
Paula it sounds like you actually get it where most people can't get their minds around it but think they do.
I think women are great sure but would I date one? Not likely because I would prefer to date another man.
Call me gay I can take it.LOL
Paula I like the way you think!! Loveable is all you need LOL

Rhonda I think you made some great points.
I think a lot here are deathly afraid of the "gay" connotation.
If I'm out in 100% girl mode and a guy likes what he sees I am flattered and absolutely love it!
If he were to ask me out I would tell him exactly what I am and leave it up to him to decide if he wants to go out or not.
I have gone out with some really nice straight guys that have no problems with a gay tranny as a date.
Some run for the hills of course LOLOL.

I read the original post twice. The first time my head hurt, and the second time I couldn't stop giggling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhonda Jean

I'm in a new chapter of my life and I'm gay. I was also married for decades. I've been told over and over "You don't just change." Maybe so. Maybe this gay virus was lurking all my life.

---

Most of the gay males (and many of the lesbians) over the age of 40 that I know have been married. Some more than once. Several have children. Did they enjoy sexual relations with their spouse...well at least once. Sexuality, like the spectrum of trans people s a continuum. It is not black/white. Thus the "bi" label. :)

Oh, BTW the new copy of the "agenda" will be out a few weeks. Why do people say we have an agenda. My agenda usually includes feeding the cats and going to the store.

Anyways, in RE the OP. I know this has happened before, and in a straight family. They wrote a song about it. Here's the diagram

I think the problem we always have in these threads is that most of us view everything through the lens of monosexism.

@I Am Paula - I don't like to apply a label to anyone else, but I would suggest one of the following might, if you are comfortable with either of them, fit you better:
1. Bisexual
2. Pansexual
3. Queer
Your comfort with being with someone who's gender identity shifts, and your past relationships with men and women suggests that you are probably not monosexual. Indeed, your description of your own orientation as changing as your partner's gender identity fluidly shifts is problematical - as best we can tell, your sexual orientation DOES NOT CHANGE, and it absolutely, positively does not change based on your partner. Ask any of the GG's here who don't instantly become lesbians when their spouse transitions. (For that matter, if sexual orientation worked that way, bisexuality couldn't really exist - and it most assuredly does exist.)

As for Rhonda Jean, my guess is that, again, the word "bisexual" probably applies. In her case, it would seem her attraction towards women diminished over time, and her attraction to men has increased. That absolutely happens with many bisexual individuals - their degree of attraction to a certain gender changes. (My experience with it is that it happens fluidly for me, shifting every few months - this was super annoying, btw, until I found ways to make it fun.) Because her attraction seems to be exclusively towards men, I think "gay" is a fine word for her to use, although it's possible, even if unlikely, that she might find herself attracted to a woman again one day. I have no way to know, of course, just saying "bisexual" could fit.

Again, I'm not trying to label either of you - just suggesting some terms that are oft misunderstood and stigmatized, but yet completely and simply explain the "well, I used to be attracted to X, now I am attracted to Y - WTF?" Believe me, I struggled with this myself for a long time. (Mine changed so fast, though, that I often had a crush on a man and a woman at the same time. I thought everyone was like this, you know, with the whole "being gay is a choice" thing I was always told. But turns out, choice doesn't really factor into it so much.)

Another angle to this, is that romantic orientation is not the same as sexual orientation. You can sleep with someone of a gender you'd NEVER fall in love with, for example. In straight people, both are aligned, but for some of us, they are not. (And some combinations of the two are really horrible - for example, heteroromantic, homosexual. That would be someone who falls in love with people of the opposite gender, but is only sexually attracted to those of the same gender. This is not an easy combination to live with, I'd imagine.)

edit to clarify, because of this insightful and true post:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lorileah

Most of the gay males (and many of the lesbians) over the age of 40 that I know have been married. Some more than once. Several have children. Did they enjoy sexual relations with their spouse...well at least once.

---

In suggesting the labels I'm putting out there, I'm not trying to negate the experiences of people who were gay or lesbian but married someone of the opposite gender because, in the past, not doing that was the surest way to out yourself, and often there was IMMENSE social pressure to do this. Someone who does this isn't necessarily bi. It's about who you have the capacity to be attracted to - if you can be attracted to more than one gender, not necessarily to the same degree or in the same way, then "bisexual" is probably a pretty good fit. Trying to be something you aren't - straight, and marrying someone who you feel no attraction towards whatsoever - is a different deal. (BTW, bi people suffer from this too.)

Another fun fact - there are more bisexual women than lesbians - we think the ratio is about 2:1. It's the opposite with bisexual men - there are more gay men than bisexual men. Both are stigmatized by both straight and gay people, which is why many of us (I certainly did this) go through mental gymnastics to avoid the term "bisexual."

PaulaQ. I wasn't really looking to label myself, as I said, I just use loveable. My intention was to point out how difficult labels become when we add another variable-gender. Plus, it was fun to map out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Am Paula

My intention was to point out how difficult labels become when we add another variable-gender.

---

It's only difficult because you were trying to use labels that don't describe either of you very well. Many people I know who identify as bi, pan, or queer are in relationships that are very much like yours.

There is a tendency to assume everyone is monosexual - and we aren't. That's why the terminology become so clunky in some of our discussions. (It doesn't help, though, that thanks to cisprivilege and monosexism, we describe sexual orientation for most people with a term that is relative to their own gender, rather than simply describing who they are attracted to.)

I think "loveable" is a perfectly good term too, and certainly applies to you! :)

PaulaQ; I love your clarity, as ever, speaks true to me.

I would say due to social pressures most males do suppress an inherent sexuality associated with other males, a sexuality as you say, is unromantic, purely sexual in nature. That would be the "gay/bi" aspect of myself aged 15-20. My romantic side and indeed my sexual-attraction have only ever been towards women.

Being happily married the labels don't matter, i get everything i need there. So whether it's now technically lesbian, who cares. In the end humans love humans and have sex with humans - or vacuum cleaners or other fetishes :-) So what, the world is being destroyed so let's not worry about other people's proclivities.

xxx Pamela

I am Paula - Love your style of humor. I thought it would be a serious post at first. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pamela7

I would say due to social pressures most males do suppress an inherent sexuality associated with other males, a sexuality as you say, is unromantic, purely sexual in nature. That would be the "gay/bi" aspect of myself aged 15-20. My romantic side and indeed my sexual-attraction have only ever been towards women.

---

Yeah, that was my experience too, although I am romantically attracted to more than one gender as well, so I always had crushes on both men and women, in addition to sexual attraction. I am biromantic / bisexual. I'm also have a fluid sexuality. Pansexual is a good description of me as well - I am completely comfortable with trans men, trans women, and gender non-conforming people. There is probably SOMEONE I am not attracted to because of their gender, but I haven't met them yet. There are plenty of other reasons to not be attracted to someone, but I'll say a good part of my background thoughts are "I wonder what it would be like to sleep with them?" when I meet someone new... (I've had that my whole life. It's pretty irritating when I'm in a phase where I'm about equally attracted to men and women...) Given that I'm trans, bi, fluid, and a BDSM top, good old fashioned queer is a pretty good label for me too.

Just thought I should point out some labels that apply to me since I was tossing 'em out there for others.

Interesting topic. I can see the whole romantic and/or sexual attractions.

When I was young, teen and Pre-Op, I was always attracted to girls/women in a romantic way and wanted to be just another GF, but not sexually as I wanted nothing to do with the male bits. Never even thought of guys either way.
During transition and on HRT, I decided to check men out. One was a TG/CD, not a lot happened there, and no male bits involved from me. The other was I guess a BI-Gay guy, more happened there but still no male bits involved from me. And neither was romantic at all. Didn't think of that as Gay for me, as I was totally the woman.

As Post-OP I had sexual relations with a butch Lesbian for awhile. She knew me for 1 to 2 years prior. She did not have sex with men, but as a woman with me it was great.
I tried sexual with str8 men for a while, but never got any romantic connection in any way. So gave up on that.
My partner, Post-Op MtF also, we had mostly a romantic attraction. We tried sexual for awhile, but she was not really into sex at all. But as a romantic couple we were together for 38 years. I guess we were seen as Lesbians.

I always figured I was BI as I had no real preference with either. But sexually really prefer women. In this last 1.5 years found the term Pan-Sexual, and figure that describes me better.
I get romantic feelings with some of the Trans women and some of the Trans men, and would love to try sexual. Not really sure on the non-confirming or fluid, as I only see them more as female to me. Also attracted to TG/CD, both romantic and thoughts of sexual.
As for sexual attraction, when at the gym on treadmill will watch both male and female working out. Being bored I will get into sexual fantasy.

My problem with a lot of this is I am purely sub/bottom type. Although in fantasy chats, have had non-Trans males and Trans CD males want me to top or Domme. Have played with this using a false penis or toys but not sure what this gets me. Not romantic or sexual for me.

All of this gets vary confusing at times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Am Paula

I created a new word for my sexuality. Loveable.

---

I know none of us are into 'labels' but I like that one!

This has been a nice thread for me to read. It is all so amazingly confusing that I think the "gay" term really just doesn't make any sense. During the numerous rehearsals for some day coming out to my SO "I am not gay" is one of the first top statements.

A lot of that has to do with me wanting to lessen her fears. But like others said, I would enjoy a male's attention when I am dressed. I have also had many mancrushes on straight and gay guys. I don't thing I could ever BE with a male but CD/TG/fem guy maybe.

As I write about it, it makes it much easier to leave it ambiguous as opposed to hardcore definition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Am Paula

This is why I gave up on terms a long time ago. Find someone to love, and worry about what to call it later.

---

I agree. Single terms that identify both the person involved and who they're attracted to, although they do work with the cisgender crowd, simply do not work with the T community. Best to use 9 words for anyone who wants to give an explanation to someone: "I identify (male, female, or fluid) and I'm attracted to (male, female, or both).

When I stand on Earth's surface, the sky is up and Earth is down. When I'm upright in a hole, Earth is in every direction, except up where the sky is, except when someone covers up the hole with earth. In a plane, Earth is still down and the sky is up, but I'm also IN the sky. When I'm upside down, Earth is down and the sky is up. When I'm on the Moon, Earth could be in any direction, but the sky most likely is still up. When I move towards the Earth at 99% the speed of light and I turn on my headlights, the light of said headlights still moves away from me with the speed of light.

Words FTW.

I Am Paula,
I had a thread running titled, " Do I look gay ?" Yes I did also post a picture.
It was after a comment my wife made saying I must look gay when I go out dressed to my social meetings. I think she has the fear that because I look like a woman I will act like a woman and become involved with a man which to confuse things may be dressed like a woman at the time.

My loveable arrangements aren't as complicated as yours, I'm attracted to women in guy mode and I'm attracted to women when dressed but much more so. If I were born female I'd either be bi or a lesbian, nothing in my brain is sexually attracted to men. My label if I need to use one is male lesbian.

I do get it when you say your description is tongue in cheek, having such a confused lifestyle has just got have some funny moments, thanks for putting some humour into it.

Well I must say, the only body Ive ever been attracted to is female. If I had been born female I think Id most likely been a lesbian. I do enjoy myself I cant lie. lol, If I cant smile then where would I be?

I know your post was done tongue in cheek, Paula. But, my definition of gay is a male attracted to male parts. Whether or not a person defines themselves as male is up to each individual.

When a trans calls herself a lesbian, that means she's attracted to female parts. But, if she says she's gay or straight, that usually means she's attracted to male parts. That's as label-y as I'll get on that issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by docrobbysherry

But, my definition of gay is a male attracted to male parts.

---

So how about this person? They have a vagina.

Attachment 260075

So by your definition, if a man were with them they'd be straight, not gay, right? Because a vagina is "female parts" - I assume, that's what you mean. How on earth does that make any sense? For further evidence that it has NOTHING to do with genitals, I submit this image:
Attachment 260078

Since buck, has a vagina, the other guys, who most likely have a penis, are totally straight right? Male, with a penis, attracted to someone with a vagina = straight by your definition, right?

I assert that there is no straightness whatsoever going in in that picture.

BTW, another question:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by docrobbysherry

When a trans calls herself a lesbian, that means she's attracted to female parts. But, if she says she's gay or straight, that usually means she's attracted to male parts.

---

What if she's with another trans woman who still has a penis? Is she not then a lesbian? What if only one of them is post-op? Are they then a straight couple?

Basing attraction on genitals makes zero sense, and is just cisgender foolishness. Unless you are a nudist, you don't get to see what the other person's genitals are like until you are already attracted to them, and presumably about to sleep with them.

Attachment 260077

OK, the first date at a nudist camp folks shown above get to base their attraction on genitals, I guess. But everyone else? Not so much - by the time you know what your partner has, you've already been attracted for a bit.

What an interesting, thought-provoking and amusing thread this is. But the most important thing--and most of us can agree on this, I think, even if we agree on little else, is right there in the original post:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Am Paula

Find someone to love, and worry about what to call it later.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhonda Jean

I'll also never understand why we can be so infuriatingly compelled to slice things so thinly to avoid the gay label at all costs..

---

It's because we've been taught that for a boy to be feminine or behave in any way like a girl is the worst thing we can be. Men who are gay are assumed by 99% of the straight world to be wanting the female role in life and/or sex. Hence, gay male=feminine=sissy, the worst thing a boy could ever be. And that's the primary reason why we avoid that label. The secondary reason is just as important; for those of us who really don't have any desire to have any type of romantic or sexual relationship with another male, we feel the need to avoid the tag of gay because to women, it's a real turn off oh, about 99.9% of the time.

Does that help?

To I am Paula, thanks for clearing it all up lol. If we are going to map this we are gonna have to do it old school because I tried to GPS this on my phone and it promptly overheated and shut down. To Paula Q, the photos you put up made me start singing livin after midnight by Judas Priest. Yes, in the 80's I was a metal head, sorta, and went to a few JP concerts never knowing he was gay. None of my friends seemed to know either lol. Later after he officially came out, he said he was never really in the closet. WTF?? lol. Come to think of it, he never did sing about girls.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sometimes_miss

It's because we've been taught that for a boy to be feminine or behave in any way like a girl is the worst thing we can be. Men who are gay are assumed by 99% of the straight world to be wanting the female role in life and/or sex. Hence, gay male=feminine=sissy, the worst thing a boy could ever be. And that's the primary reason why we avoid that label. The secondary reason is just as important; for those of us who really don't have any desire to have any type of romantic or sexual relationship with another male, we feel the need to avoid the tag of gay because to women, it's a real turn off oh, about 99.9% of the time.

Does that help?

---

Sometimes Miss, I understand that that feeling is applicable when younger, or even older when someone is uninformed. However, why is it so hard for some to let the fear of that label to go away as they mature or get more informed about the diversity of life? If one can accept that gays are real, are real and decent human beings being unduly persecuted historically and even today, then why should being mis-labeled (assuming that one is not gay) cause one's defense mechanism to go into overdrive to vehemently deny something that does not need to be denied, just clarified, sometimes with a simple yes or no and a smile? To me, it appears that the defender of their straightness is insecure enough in themselves that they feel that a simple yes or no is not enough. They put too much importance on what others think, especially strangers. I am not necessarily saying this directly to you but rather to everyone who feels this way. In my opinion, someone who is fairly secure in themselves, i.e. who and what they are and are not, then there is no real need to worry about being mis-labeled, unless it may negatively impact ones ability to work (make money) and grow (get promoted and make even more money) within a company or organization. Otherwise, it seems totally unnecessary and a waste of valuable brain time, meaning that there are other things that we should worry and get upset about besides this. I hope what I said makes sense?

PS: I think that the percentages used are way, way over stated. Yes, some may look down on someone else being gay, but in todays world that is becoming less and less of an issue.

On a more serious note. Some of what Sometimes Miss is saying has some real truth behind it. I am and have always been a people watcher/observer. I just can't help myself as I find people in general fascinating, regardless of gender, or whatever type of person they are. Not that all my observations are 100% correct, but- I am willing to put it out there that I can grasp things better than a lot. It comes from years and years of practice. Anyway- when it comes to women who talk about their husbands/bf's, the most common thing they talk or brag about is their partners masculinity. Yes yes, not ALL women, but it from my experience, it is the most common thing they talk up their guy about. His tough manly job, how he can do this or that physically.... Some women do appreciate the guys who are not so manly, like their softer qualities and all. They are a minority, and I think too, often are not as likely to brag about their man's sensitive nature even if they do appreciate it more so than the women who are more likely attracted to the more masculine type of guy.

I know I am oversimplifying this quite a bit, but, when it all gets broken down, women are generally not attracted to feminine men, and are not likely to talk much about their partner's softer side even if they appreciate it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AllieSF

PS: I think that the percentages used are way, way over stated. Yes, some may look down on someone else being gay, but in todays world that is becoming less and less of an issue.

---

It's easy for us to forget what the rest of the world is like. We spend so much time discussing this, that it becomes normal to us. But to the rest of the world, we're definitely NOT normal. It's true that most will tolerate us. But the line between tolerance and liking it are still very far apart. Yes, there are some men who are secure in themselves, but if you ask any of them if they've ever wanted to have sex with another guy in mixed company or with their female SO present, I can bet you that very close to that 99.9% will answer no, absolutely not, no way, ever. Or something to that effect.

Same with what I wrote about women. Despite the happy few here that have tolerant SO's, most, given the choice, would prefer that their hubby/boyfriend wasn't a crossdresser, and also prefer that he remain 'all man' while having sex. The number of women who find men dressed in women's clothing sexually attractive is very, very few.

And again, if you truly believe otherwise, you have a potential gold mine at your fingertips. Just start a dating service matching up all those women who find crossdressers sexually attractive, with crossdressers. I'm sure most of us would gladly pay you a handsome fee to meet all those single women who find it a turn on.

"And again, if you truly believe otherwise, you have a potential gold mine at your fingertips. Just start a dating service matching up all those women who find crossdressers sexually attractive, with crossdressers. I'm sure most of us would gladly pay you a handsome fee to meet all those single women who find it a turn on. "

I agree with everything you just said and in no way meant that people accept us. I agree that tolerance and acceptance may be somewhat similar, but the differences are significant. I wish I could find that gold mine idea and then have the courage to take the risk to make it all happen. Alas, I do not think that will happen with me.

My point is that we need to think less of what other people think of us and live our lives as we, not they, think is best. Old habits, fears and perceptions are hard to get rid of. But, and this is a BIG but, we need to do that (live for ourselves) to help other people get used to and maybe even one day celebrate the diversity of life and personalities that are all around us, no matter where we live.

Sometimes Miss, you are right that we can get so caught up with OUR normal that we can forget what is normal for the majority. How many times have their been posts that will be like, why do people think we are gay????? That is the perception for most because that is all what they have seen and heard. My wife was no different. At the time when I told her about me CDing, as far as she knew, CDers were effeminate gay men. Most of what the has ever been shown in the media in regards to CDing would be drag queens and almost all of them are openly gay. Those who are or have transitioned generally are attracted to the sex that would have made them gay with their birth sex. More are than are not anyway, which is because they are not gay, but straight in regards to their gender identity. Law of averages basically take over here.

Straight women are simply going to be attracted to masculinity, because that is how heterosexuality basically works. We of course bend all of the rules, and for us, our "world" is so much broader in terms of gender and sexuality. Much like I am Paula's original descriptions, she goes from straight to gay to straight, to bi, then straight and gay again. The normal for most is a world where gender and sexuality is clearly defined. Black and white. No shades of anything, you either are or are not- with everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by docrobbysherry

But, my definition of gay is a male attracted to male parts. Whether or not a person defines themselves as male is up to each individual.

---

It's like quantum mechanics. The same laws that govern the observable universe do not apply to sub atomic particles. We can't use the same terms for cisgenders AND the T community, because unlike cisgenders whose understanding it is that the terms describe sexual characteristics, the T community refer to their gender identities which often do not match their sexual characteristics.

I don't know why people whose gender identities don't match their sexual characteristics want to debate terms like straight, gay, or lesbian. If they want to describe themselves they should simply state how they identify and who they're attracted to (with an understanding they are describing gender identity and not sexual characteristics). It's only 8 more words than simply saying "straight", "gay" or "lesbian". This takes no more than 3 seconds. It's simpler and more understandable than coming up with (and having everyone else adopt), brand new single-word terminology that describe all three: the gender identity, the current state of visible sexual characteristics, and the sexual preferences of someone to whom this applies.

Once a person has transitioned and is totally absorbed into society as their target gender, there is no confusion when they use the same terms as cisgenders because effectively, they are seen as cis by everyone, whether they've had SRS or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lorileah

Anyways, in RE the OP. I know this has happened before, and in a straight family. They wrote a song about it. Here's the diagram

---

L:

So that's what they do in Colorado!?!? I thought there were laws against that...

Anyway, for the original question, people have to remember that being gay goes way beyond who you sleep with. I also involves who you have emotional relationships with, who you look to for support, how you align yourself politically, etc.

By the late 90's it finally came to me that I was bisexual. This was towards the end of my first marriage. Maybe 5 years prior to that, I had admitted to myself that I was gay. To this day, my orientation continues to be bisexual. My guess is maybe 50/50 to 60/40 female. When I finally got around to demonstrating this to myself, it seemed like a perfectly natural place for me. When I started to dress, that also felt perfectly natural. What that says to me is that I do have a particular feminine component to my being; not enough to rate thinking about transition, but a fixture nonetheless.

Ging back to when I sorted my sexuality and in my recent times, my gender identity, I have not noticed any perceptible shift. For what I can see, it feels fairly constant so I'm not expecting any real changes. But as they say, Never Say Never...

DeeAnn

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReineD

Once a person has transitioned and is totally absorbed into society as their target gender, there is no confusion when they use the same terms as cisgenders because effectively, they are seen as cis by everyone, whether they've had SRS or not.

---

Reine, I really like your no nonsense thinking on all this.
Oh if it were that simple. I have been rebuked from people here and elsewhere because I am not a GG(Genetic Girl) or RG(Real Girl) or cis(which I am not by definition), or may not be a TS. The last one is funny, why would any one identify as a 65 year old fat Post-Op TS. To many we are not real women, I guess we are fake women, even in TG friendly websites. How many here have had genetic testing to affirm a GG status. I have chatted with and met some inter-sexed people, including an XY woman. My best compliment comes from a women I chat with who likes to use Regular Woman for herself and accepts me very much as same. She very much likes men who dress, and will CD as a male some. I respond to many of the younger that I have been physically a woman longer, 38.5 years, than they have been alive.

Allie
There are websites that have TG/CDs and some women. They always want a GG or another CD. At this time in my life I would welcome a TG/CD as an intimate friend and more. I never had much luck being romantic with non-trans str8 men, most men just want a woman for their own sexual pleasures.

Gendermutt
Yes we tend to warp our world around us. Have a FtM friend that said he always thought he was a Lesbian. Now he has had top surgery and taking T. So I kid him, guess that makes him str8 now that he still prefers female partners.

To Lorileah and others. If you want to get totally confused check out a movie called "predestination". Plenty of gender/sex confusion, and turns the whole idea of that song on its head, as it was playing in parts of the movie. Some time travel involved to make it happen. My brother and I argued the finer points of time travel paradoxes and the whole gender/sex implications.

I guess I seem bitter now at times, as I have had 40 years of all this and it seems like we still want to argue all this. We just keep inventing more terms to describe all of this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Georgette_USA

We just keep inventing more terms to describe all of this.

---

I think we have to. Either that or we modify existing definitions. I believe as time goes on, we know more about sexuality and gender identity. As we add layers to a given topic, other subtleties and variations come to light. We can't ignore them, so we have add them to what we know in a way that makes sense and is cohesive.

DeeAnn

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flatlander_48

I think we have to. Either that or we modify existing definitions.
DeeAnn

---

When I was younger we had CD/TV - TS - Drag Queens/Drag Kings. Used Gay/Lesbian/BI for sexual wants. No usage of TG back then.

After SRS my partner and I left all that world behind.

I have come to all these new terms fairly recently.
Since her death I have re-entered this world. Some of these are still in use but are now under the general term of TG, or so I was told and reminded by some. Some have argued on here they are just CDs but not TG. Have some friends who say they are bi-gender and not TG or CD. Now have Gender-queer/Gender-fluid/Binary/Non-Binary.

Not sure if Drag are considered TG. Many who use TG imply that is same as TS. Know some sites that use, HPW/CD/TV/TG/T-Girl/Gurl/TS/Pre-/Post-/Non-, and most can't agree on usage. And will imply a hierarchy to them.

And some have problems with the on-line sex worker TS, and other terms for them. And the general Trans/Tranny/Trannie.

We have Gay/Lesbian/BI/pan-sexual/poly-sexual/omni-sexual/am-bisexual/BI-curious/Hetroflexible and homoflexible.

I am sure we can add many others to all this.

So these subtleties and variations make sense and are cohesive. No wonder the general cis world is confused.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Georgette_USA

Reine, I really like your no nonsense thinking on all this.
Oh if it were that simple. I have been rebuked from people here and elsewhere because I am not a GG(Genetic Girl) or RG(Real Girl) or cis(which I am not by definition), or may not be a TS. The last one is funny, why would any one identify as a 65 year old fat Post-Op TS. To many we are not real women, I guess we are fake women, even in TG friendly websites.

---

I'm sorry that you are seen this way.

I don't mean to turn this into a discussion of whether someone passes or not. We haven't met, I don't know how old you were when you transitioned and I don't know how long you've been living your life as a woman. But my point is that if a transitioned transwoman works as a woman, lives as a woman, is known by neighbors and the people she interacts with on a daily basis as a woman, in fact if most people she knows have only known her as a woman and then she tells one of these people that she is straight, then likely the person she tells this to will assume that she is into men. And if she says she is lesbian then people will take it she is into women. If she is living as a woman and most people she knows have not known her as a man, they likely don't spend time wondering whether she has had SRS. In other words, they think of her primarily as a woman.

... which is not the case for a transwoman who is not yet transitioned or who is very newly transitioned and whom most people still know or think of as a man, if they still subconsciously think of this transwoman as having male sexual characteristics. Words like straight or lesbian in this case might be confusing for the simple reason that people assign a sexual characteristic definition to those words. So someone like this might better say, "I'm a woman (or I identify as a woman) and I'm attracted to (... pick one), if she wants to define her sexuality to someone. I'm afraid that in this case, single-word descriptions like "straight" and "lesbian" will not be effective when speaking to people who are not familiar with the concept that gender identity and sexual characteristics can be separate.

And CDers? Same thing. If they want to tell someone they are attracted to women and they say they are lesbian, most people outside this community will not know what they are talking about.

This thread has left my head spinning. There are so many variables as to orientation towards the opposite sex that we seem to run out of terms and labels.
I like to look at this topic from the CD point of view.
It seems that only a miniscule percentage of the males on this list can be classified as "gay" in the sense held by the muggle world. The muggle world seems have a simplified view of the concept of "gay". Men are either straight or gay. Any male who exhibits any romatic interest in other males anything feminine, such as crossdressing is gay or is out in "drag", is a "drag queen". I cannot remember hearing the term "gay" when I was young. Back then, men who had any romantic interest in males or exhibited any female characteristsics were "homos" or "queers." A male in female attire was a "transvestie" and probably "queer" or "homo". In spite of the detailed discussion here, I wonder if the rest of the folk around might still have this oversimplified view. It's hard to find fault with them as they don't really know that other types of people, such as the likes of us even exist.
We are faced with the virtually impossible task of educating the muggle world that the overwhelming majority of us are CDs, and no other term applies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Georgette_USA

So these subtleties and variations make sense and are cohesive. No wonder the general cis world is confused.

---

G:

Understood. There is great potential for confusion. To me, a 2 tiered approach seems best. By that I mean separating the high level, macro kinds of information from the detailed information. The high level stuff being what everyone gets at first pass. The detailed stuff is inside of the community or passed externally as people begin to grasp the high level stuff. Passing the detailed information externally as a first shot will very likely result glazed eyeballs, WTF reactions and be an excuse for people to go no further.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PattyT

I cannot remember hearing the term "gay" when I was young.

---

This doesn't surprise me. Historically and from personal experience, in Asian countries people are generally very private about their lives beyond what is seen superficially. This is based on living in Taiwan for 6 years and working with people from Japan, Korea, China, Viet Nam, Malaysia, Thailand, India and the Phillipines. Also, there isn't a long history with public demonstrations as the first Pride Celebration in Japan was in '94. The first one in Taiwan was November '03, a couple of months before I arrived.

DeeAnn

Reine
I am a big girl and have developed a very thick skin so some of this just rolls off my back.

I have some of this in my profile.
Lived full time as a woman since early 1977, SRS in SEP 77 at age 26. Hence the physical as 38.5 years.

Most of the remarks are on 4 TG friendly websites, where I identify as a woman with a Post-Op TS background. The fact that these are TG friendly and supposed to be more understanding is what gets me upset at times. I am also on a Lesbian site and identify only as a woman, I have never had any issue and have many on-line "friends". Also on just a general nudes site and identify as a woman, never had any issues there.

In my everyday life, my large extended family knows my background. I am also active with 3 local TG support groups and 1 large mixed social group. As far as I can tell I have been fully accepted as a woman by men and women.

To some people and some family I identify as primarily sexually interested in woman, but am open to most all based on the other people.

Georgette, you transitioned almost 40 years ago. To the people you've met in person and repeatedly interacted with over the years (outside of TG groups and TG websites) and to whom you didn't get into the details of your past, if you had told them you were straight, would they not have assumed that you were interested in men? I'm assuming they would have because they would know you as a woman. But, if everyone you've met in these last 4 decades has immediately known you were born male, then I'm sorry. I don't think this is the experience of most long-term transitioners?

This isn't a question related to your biography or your sexual preferences, but more about the terms "straight", "lesbian", and "gay" as they are understood by the bulk of the population (the people not exposed to this community) when they relate these terms to people whom gender dysphoria doesn't come into play.

If you have been read as a male all your life (this would be unfortunate), then I agree, using words like straight, lesbian, and gay may not convey to people who are not a part of this community what you would want to convey. And so if a conversation developed in which you would have wanted to specify your sexuality and sexual preference, saying "I'm a woman and I'm attracted to women", would be more effective than "I'm a lesbian" (if people do read you as a male).

Reine
That is why I hate the identifiers of "Gay Lesbian Straight". That is why I say I prefer sex with women or BI as most can understand that.

When talking with people I never say "I am a woman". As far as I can tell, people assume that I am a woman as NO ONE has ever asked or said anything. For most of my 40 years had little to NO contact with the TG community. Everyone only knows me as Georgette a large woman. As I said it is some of the people on the TG sites that have problems.

I do get confused with others. I have a cis female friend with a TG/CD partner, and she describes their sex life as Lesbians. Not really sure how that works, as I am used to the usual FtF lesbians relations.