• Sombyr@lemmy.zip
      16·
      7 months ago

      This seems to be the attitude of most I encounter nowadays. I think every friend I have who I’ve asked about their sexuality tend to reply “I dunno, I just like what I like.”
      It seems the labels are slowly starting to lose their use, which to me is a good thing. It means we’re getting to the point where we don’t need it to feel normal anymore because it’s just normal by default. We’re not quite there yet, but it shows we’re moving in the right direction.
      Not that people can’t use labels if it makes them more comfortable, I’m just glad more people are starting not to need them because they’re already accepted.

      • JDubbleu@programming.dev
        3·
        7 months ago

        I’ve noticed this too both in those around me and myself (mid 20s). I don’t identify as queer and have always been “straight”, but more recently the thought of sucking a trans girl’s dick is kinda hot? I’m not attracted to guys at all, so it would have to be someone who is otherwise extremely feminine, but eh?

        I don’t know what to call it and I honestly don’t really care to think about or try to label it because it’s a worthless distinction. It helps that most of my friends are queer so I’ve had any and all stereotypes/expectations surrounding attraction completely shattered, and I’ve found this to be true of more people I meet over time who don’t identify with queer culture at all. I’ll be interested to see how this continues to change in the next 20 years.

  • lugal
    133·
    8 months ago

    I like the meme but let’s get that straight (no pun intended): both tomboys and femboys break out of the gender binary. Their very existence puts heteronormativity into question. If a boy can look like a girl and be it just having long hair, that’s the beginning of the end of an oppressive system that should end as soon as possible.

  • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
    55·
    7 months ago

    The tragic hilarity of toxic masculinity is that it strives to define “a man” by what he isn’t, in an attempt to preserve an exclusive and narrowly defined top slot of a social hierarchy. But all one has to do is claim behaviors as a different group, and the definition contracts accordingly. At the same time, the fact that said “masculine” definition is malleable to the point of sheer fiction, evades everyone in that group.

    • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
      16·
      7 months ago

      Sound alike the gymnastics to define racial categories to preserve a social hierarchy as well. What is white? Well it’s people from here and here, not Irish, not Jewish, etc. Oh wait, Irish are allowed now but not Okies. Okay, they’re allowed now but no Jews! Now, Jewish can be allowed sometimes but no Italians. Alright, Italians, but no Jews, Irish are also okay, some Hispanic people if they can pass, certain Asians can be let in, etc. Etc. It always go on like that. It stays malleable just to make it exclusive.

    • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
      8·
      7 months ago

      Men is what my ooga booga caveman brain defines as not female and not unkown. Non-binary folk are unkown to caveman brain for example. Trans women are women and same with trans men. Femboys are close enough to female that ooga booga caveman brain wants to put dick in some.

      Reject modern prescriptivism, embrace caveman brain descriptivism!

  • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
    46·
    8 months ago

    Depends on why you’re attracted to them? Obviously it’s a spectrum but if you’re attracted to feminine qualities, that’s pretty straight.

    • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      41·
      8 months ago

      I figured out that I’m attracted to femeninity. What’s between the legs doesn’t really matter to me. My girlfriend told me that it makes me part of the community and not just an ally like I’ve always called myself.

  • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
    37·
    7 months ago

    I don’t get all of these labels, to be honest.

    Creating a whole spectrum of labels seems like the wrong direction - if I’m attracted to someone, that’s all there is to it. The rest don’t matter, especially if it’s about other people’s relationships, then all the more so - that’s their business, and as long as nobody is getting harmed, then we need to support them.

    • Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      13·
      7 months ago

      This was a popular mindset when I was a teen. We always said “labels are for soup cans” when it comes to sexuality.

    • gerryflap@feddit.nl
      7·
      7 months ago

      I kinda agree, but also want to offer a different perspective. I agree that the more specific labels are not efficient for communication in most cases, because nobody knows all of them and it’s easier to just say who you find attractive.

      However, they can still be useful to discover more about yourself. As someone who’s aromantic and asexual I’ve found that many of the labels in the community caused me to ask myself the question “how do I feel about this”. Before finding “my” labels I just kinda felt like “nope” about anything related to relationships, but all the more specific labels and spectra have made it much more clear to me what I want and what I don’t want. They also provide a way for people to find others with the same experiences as them, which can feel incredibly validating.

      These specific labels are a jargon for queer people, they make sense in their context, but are not useful when trying to communicate with most people from outside of the community.

    • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.caEnglish
      4·
      7 months ago

      I agree.

      It should be more about who you like, not what people call them/you/your labels/their labels.

      I always feel like the labels are there to make the “heteronormative” types feel more comfortable, which isn’t really working for them either so…

      I dunno, I’m just a person who likes people who meet criteria that makes my brain release the happy chemicals.

    • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
      2·
      7 months ago

      I agree with the “not getting all these labels” but they aren’t really for me. I’m not out trying to find someone to date or bang or whatever.

      I was having a conversation with some co-workers last week about the difference between bisexual and pansexual. I might have been wrong in my explaination. I’m a straight white man (so my knowledge is limited), but I’m usually more open than my (normally older) co-workers. They didn’t understand the need for it, or why it mattered. I said well apparently LGBTQ people had enough interactions to need a new word. If you aren’t dating or in that world then you wouldn’t understand the need for a more detailed definition of Bi vs Pan.

      For the record they just thought it should all be lumped under Bi with no need for an extra trans inclusion word since (in their mind) trans was already included.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      2·
      7 months ago

      I think you are right, but after a milennia of religious obligations to be 1) man or 2) woman and no other couples allowed than 1 + 2, it might help people sort it out.

      I mean it’s not like a cis man likes all women either.

      So in the meantime, before we become an enlightened startrek society, it can come in handy I guess.

  • MareOfNights@discuss.tchncs.de
    31·
    7 months ago

    But what if I’m attracted to androgyny? I feel like a lot if people are and I don’t know a word for that.

    For reference I’m talking about memes like: My taste in women: Picture of LeanBeefPatty My taste in men: Picture of F1nnster

    I think finnster had some coming out video, so might not be accurate anymore. But I see similar memes a lot.

  • Hugucinogens@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOP
    25·
    7 months ago

    Or maybe a conversation driver. Y’all tell me.

    Edit: definitely a conversation driver, after all.

    Important takeaway if you don’t watch the linked (4min vlogbrothers) video: “[…] A question like “Is butt legs?” does demand engagement. […]”

  • TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world
    24·
    7 months ago

    I recently realized that the straightness category is very analogous to whiteness.

    If a cis person were to date an agender enby, they might be heterosexual by virtue of being sexually attracted to someone of a different phenotypical gender/sex, but would probably not be considered straight. Despite the enby being hetero to the cis person, people might call them homos, even if the enby was AMAB and the cis person was a woman.

    This is why people see attraction to trans people as not straight. If the chick has a dick or the dude doesn’t, it just doesn’t feel straight to cis people. Even if the trans person had The SurgeryTM, the fact that they’re not “normal” makes attraction to them not straight to these freaks.

    Just like conceptions of whiteness, male/female, and pornography, straightness is really based on vibes rather than strict criteria. This allows the category to be used as a tool of exclusion and oppression, given legitimacy by its supposed ties to objective measures.

    Straight =/= heterosexual. Liking femboys is gay, liking tomboys is gay, liking trans people is gay. An AMAB transfem & an AFAB transmasc in a trans for trans relationship aren’t straight, even though they aren’t homosexual from any coherent perspective. Straightness isn’t coherent beyond separating normal from queer. All heterosexual people can find a trans person hot if we pass, and many will find us hotter if they know we’re trans.

    • Squirrel@thelemmy.clubEnglish
      5·
      7 months ago

      That’s it, absolutely. It’s bigotry in language form. The only people who care about what qualifies as “straight” are those who shun those different from themselves.

    • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
      3·
      7 months ago

      I made the same point above, but should’ve just scrolled a bit to find this comment then I wouldn’t have had to lol.

  • kingthrillgore
    21·
    7 months ago

    Dude is thinking about this so hard he fell asleep before sex. Just admit your enby or bi. Its easier than trying to explain why. Its not your problem if people don’t like femboys. Femboys are beautiful.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      18·
      7 months ago

      I think they’re implying that they had sex but that he’s still contemplating it. There’s a bunch of condoms hanging off the nightstand lol

  • olutukko@lemmy.world
    16·
    8 months ago

    Can’t we just move past the whole gay straight thing. We all like somethint and it’s certainly almost never just black and white

  • clemdemort@lemmy.world
    6·
    7 months ago

    Hello, I’m here to change your sexuality, there is no such thing as straight or gay, in my opinion we are all pansexual, but some of us are gynephilic (attracted to feminity) others androphilic (attracted to masculinity) some are both.

    Of course women can be masculine and men can be feminine, what matters is presentation, you’re attracted to presentation not gender.

    Ergo if a femboy is so feminine that you’re attracted to them it’s normal, it just means you like feminine presenting individuals. (Means you’re straight, but what does straight even mean bruh)

    However there is something important to take into account, romantical attraction, you can only want to date women but like a more manly presentation in that case you are still androphilic BUT you’re romantically attracted to women. Which is probably an oversimplification of butch lesbianism, or liking tomboys.

    This is my theory on the subject, it’s probably flawed somewhere but I need other eyes to see it.

    All in all, like who you want, be who you want.

    • JeffreyOrange@lemmy.world
      3·
      7 months ago

      I agree with this, putting up straight lines between this shit is so dumb. Especially when you see what a broad array of fetishes there are, but when it comes to sex/gender you can only be strictly straight/gay/bi thats stupid.