4 ms·
This part doesn't make sense to me: > Read fairly, references to sex in this provision can only mean biological sex. People are not sexually oriented towards t
by a_shovel 2y ago
This part doesn't make sense to me:
> Read fairly, references to sex in this provision can only mean biological sex. People are not sexually oriented towards those in possession of a certificate.
Is this implying that sexual orientation is instead based on biological sex? Because it definitely isn't. You don't need to see someone's genitals to know if you're attracted to them, and you most definitely don't need to see their chromosomes. You can say you wouldn't consider having a relationship with a trans person if you like, but (apart from asexuals) you definitely can't say you aren't attracted to at least some of them, since (despite what some ideologues insist) you can't reliably tell whether someone is trans or not at a glance.
- bobalob 2y ago[flagged]
- jonfromsf 2y agoThat orientation used to be referred to as Super-Gay (Super-Straight is when you're only attracted to biological members of the opposite sex).
- a_shovel 2y agoThe super-\w* orientations aren't real. It would require being able to reliably distinguish between cis and trans people of the same gender at a glance, which isn't possible. Attraction isn't based on sex, or even gender identity, but on gender presentation. A lesbian can be attracted to someone of any gender identity if they have a feminine gender presentation (that appeals to her), and it doesn't make her bisexual if that person is a man. It's not about who she's willing to have a relationship with, it's about who is hot to her on a base, emotional level.
- jonfromsf 1y agoOh man, it's the sexual orientation police. Hide the sapio-sexuals, everybody!