I've always thought that sexual orientation does not break into discrete categories, nor does it break into categories with overlapping boundaries. Rather, it seems like it's more of a continuum from gay to straight. There's an old paradox (aSoritesParadox,Ibelieve), which asks whether or not taking one pebble from a heap of sand will result in there not being a heap. Of course, the answer is 'NO'. But you continue to do this and at some point you no longer have a heap of sand. There are attempts to solve this problem but the reason I'm bringing this up is that sexual orientation seems somewhat like this. At certain points we feel like it's very clear that a person is gay or a person is straight. But other areas seem somewhat blurred and unclear. I think those within this middle ground tend to feel pressured by some 'to choose' or 'make up her/his mind'.
I've wondered if I'm gay. I thought about this hard. I sat there one day, watching people pass by, and I noticed that the people who would 'catch my eye' were mostly women. And whenever men caught my eye, it was for a different reason than when a woman did. Seeing a woman I find attractive has a sort of deeper, primordial, and also ineffable quality to it for me, and this quality is lacking when I see attractive men. Something about seeing a woman just 'does it' for me. This is really hard to explain (after all, I did say it was ineffable). I've seriously considered alternative explanations, such as "You are really gay but you've just been socially conditioned to feel the way you do when you come across beautiful women. After disabusing yourself of these social inculcations, your true sexual orientation as a gay will emerge". But such explanations are so unsatisfying. I really don't think it's all just a matter of social inculcation: I really do find a difference in the way I 'feel' with men and with women!
These two topics seem disjoint but there is a connection between the two. At times I have wanted the company of a man, but only while I was dressed. And, even while dressed, I never had a sort of 'attraction' to men in the way I've had attraction for women. It's as if having a man there was a further article of clothing to top off and complete my crossdressing into a woman. So, in a sense, the desire for a man's presence and attention, for me, was narcissistic in the sense that his presence served as a completion of my 'appearing' and 'feeling' like a woman, no different from the hosiery, skirts, heels, etc. (I understand that I may not be 'feeling' like a woman, but it is that feeling that I get when dressed of which I speak).
Needless to say, I've had the company of a man only once (and really, it was a bit of a mechanical experience, to say the least).
I was wondering what other's thoughts are on this issue.
Jill
Sexual Orientation
Moderators: KimberlyS, CathyAnn
-
Jill
- Miss Crystal Goddess
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 5:55 pm
- Location: California
- Contact:
Sexual Orientation
Jill
-
Kerri
- Miss Platinum Goddess
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:11 pm
- Location: North Scotland
Hi Jill,
Please understand this is not an attack or an aggressive response.
I feel it may be the case that you are viewing the "man" presence as an accessory to your appearance.
I understand how you might be feeling, I had a similar experience just the other week.
Being a crossdresser / transgendered person is not easy. It is a life of conflict between natural emotions and perceived emotions.
As a genetic male I get much pleasure from the female form. Genetically I am attracted to women, the older I get the broader is my range of admiration. (18 - 70).
Whenever we chose to adopt our feminine mode, it is, in my opinion only skin deep. In a touchy feely way we are feminine but genetically we are still male.
In a dress I am as attracted to a Real Girl every bit as much as when I am in shirt and pants.
I have occasionally felt attracted to specific males. But this has predominately occurred while in Male Mode. But I cannot imagine having a relationship with a man. I find it abhorant.
I have not offered much in the way of advice.
take care
Kerri
Please understand this is not an attack or an aggressive response.
I feel it may be the case that you are viewing the "man" presence as an accessory to your appearance.
I understand how you might be feeling, I had a similar experience just the other week.
Being a crossdresser / transgendered person is not easy. It is a life of conflict between natural emotions and perceived emotions.
As a genetic male I get much pleasure from the female form. Genetically I am attracted to women, the older I get the broader is my range of admiration. (18 - 70).
Whenever we chose to adopt our feminine mode, it is, in my opinion only skin deep. In a touchy feely way we are feminine but genetically we are still male.
In a dress I am as attracted to a Real Girl every bit as much as when I am in shirt and pants.
I have occasionally felt attracted to specific males. But this has predominately occurred while in Male Mode. But I cannot imagine having a relationship with a man. I find it abhorant.
I have not offered much in the way of advice.
take care
Kerri
-
DonnaT
- Miss Great Goddess
- Posts: 8222
- Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 11:04 am
- Location: No. Virginia
Well, the coffee table didn't fall over. 
I left the dictionary under the broke leg, since I caught the gist of the query.
And there are those that are bisexual. Not being bisexual I do not know if there is an attraction towards a man similar to that we have towards a woman, but I imagine there is, at least somewhat.
Being gay or bisexual is also something one is born with. Whether one chooses to let others know depends on, for example, their social standings.
Sexual orientation or identification can be something that stays in the closet or something we let out. There is a choice, but there is no choice to that orientation or identity.
You've experimented with the gayness~bisexual orientation because? Because you crossdress?
Only you know the answer to that question. But it appears that for what ever reason you experimented, you now know you are not gay. And if you do not find any desire to be sexual active with a man, you are not bisexual but have leanings in that direction. Even if it only occurs while you are dressed.
It is, as you say, window dressing that completes you when dressed. I don't have the slightest clue why a CD would need such window dressing, but if you do, you do. You're not hurting anyone, unless you aren't honest with the guy. So, if it is something you like, then do it.
Sexual identity, like sexual orientation has its differences and extremes also. This is illustrated by the varying results of the COGIATI test.
Understanding ourselves, however, can, for many, take a lifetime.
I left the dictionary under the broke leg, since I caught the gist of the query. I believe there is overlapping, and I believe there are extremes. On the male side, there are those you see that exude gayness and those that you'd never know while interacting with them. There are those that appear to exude gayness, but haven't a gay bone in them. There are those that are straight that exude macho from the core.I've always thought that sexual orientation does not break into discrete categories, nor does it break into categories with overlapping boundaries.
And there are those that are bisexual. Not being bisexual I do not know if there is an attraction towards a man similar to that we have towards a woman, but I imagine there is, at least somewhat.
And at some point, you have two heaps of sand, an overlap if you will.There's an old paradox (aSoritesParadox,Ibelieve), which asks whether or not taking one pebble from a heap of sand will result in there not being a heap. Of course, the answer is 'NO'. But you continue to do this and at some point you no longer have a heap of sand.
There is a social aspect to most everything we do. Crossdressing is a prime example. I am a firm believer that a CD is born, not made. The fear, for example, of being outed as a crossdresser, however is social. Yet we still dress. We cannot change who we are just because society may not be willing to accept it. We can only choose to let the rest of society in.At certain points we feel like it's very clear that a person is gay or a person is straight. But other areas seem somewhat blurred and unclear. I think those within this middle ground tend to feel pressured by some 'to choose' or 'make up her/his mind'.
I've wondered if I'm gay. I thought about this hard. I sat there one day, watching people pass by, and I noticed that the people who would 'catch my eye' were mostly women. And whenever men caught my eye, it was for a different reason than when a woman did. Seeing a woman I find attractive has a sort of deeper, primordial, and also ineffable quality to it for me, and this quality is lacking when I see attractive men. Something about seeing a woman just 'does it' for me. This is really hard to explain (after all, I did say it was ineffable). I've seriously considered alternative explanations, such as "You are really gay but you've just been socially conditioned to feel the way you do when you come across beautiful women. After disabusing yourself of these social inculcations, your true sexual orientation as a gay will emerge". But such explanations are so unsatisfying. I really don't think it's all just a matter of social inculcation: I really do find a difference in the way I 'feel' with men and with women!
Being gay or bisexual is also something one is born with. Whether one chooses to let others know depends on, for example, their social standings.
Sexual orientation or identification can be something that stays in the closet or something we let out. There is a choice, but there is no choice to that orientation or identity.
I believe that your description is one example of proof that sexual orientation and sexual identity are not the same.I really do find a difference in the way I 'feel' with men and with women! These two topics seem disjoint but there is a connection between the two. At times I have wanted the company of a man, but only while I was dressed. And, even while dressed, I never had a sort of 'attraction' to men in the way I've had attraction for women. It's as if having a man there was a further article of clothing to top off and complete my crossdressing into a woman. So, in a sense, the desire for a man's presence and attention, for me, was narcissistic in the sense that his presence served as a completion of my 'appearing' and 'feeling' like a woman, no different from the hosiery, skirts, heels, etc. (I understand that I may not be 'feeling' like a woman, but it is that feeling that I get when dressed of which I speak).
Needless to say, I've had the company of a man only once (and really, it was a bit of a mechanical experience, to say the least).
I was wondering what other's thoughts are on this issue.
You've experimented with the gayness~bisexual orientation because? Because you crossdress?
Only you know the answer to that question. But it appears that for what ever reason you experimented, you now know you are not gay. And if you do not find any desire to be sexual active with a man, you are not bisexual but have leanings in that direction. Even if it only occurs while you are dressed.
It is, as you say, window dressing that completes you when dressed. I don't have the slightest clue why a CD would need such window dressing, but if you do, you do. You're not hurting anyone, unless you aren't honest with the guy. So, if it is something you like, then do it.
Sexual identity, like sexual orientation has its differences and extremes also. This is illustrated by the varying results of the COGIATI test.
Understanding ourselves, however, can, for many, take a lifetime.
DonnaT
-
CJ
- Miss Diamond Goddess
- Posts: 3562
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2003 11:12 pm
- Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Hi all,
Jill,
Yup, this question's come up numerous times before. It seems like it's an intractable difficulty, this enmeshment of sexual orientation and gender identity. The "window dressing" you refer to is just that, it seems to me, a form of "accessorizing." The attention you say you might enjoy from a man may be a way for you to "complete" your identity as a man with a feminine self. The question you should perhaps ask yourself (if you seek clarity in your own mind about your sexual orientation) is this: would you seek or desire the attention of a man while presenting as a male?
About sexual orientation falling in a spectrum, much like gender identity, I'd be tempted to agree, were it not for the fact that there are only four basic options: attraction to men, attraction to women, attraction to either (or both), and attraction to neither. If this can be called a spectrum, it's a fairly limited one. Maybe a good way of picturing this is to place yourself somewhere in a triangle (assuming, of course, you're not asexual) where each of the points represents an option. Personally (and this'll be my official "coming out"), I'm only attracted to women--even though I sometimes catch myself flirting good-naturedly with other "sisters" whom I know, of course, to be male. The intention is never (and will never be) seriously sexual. But that's just me. Maybe this sexual orientation doubt is a preoccupation that distinguishes "mere" (heterosexual) crossdressers such as myself from those individuals with transsexual tendencies, who knows? There are no experts but ourselves in this regard, really. You'll find your own road, Jill.
Love,
CJ
Jill,
Yup, this question's come up numerous times before. It seems like it's an intractable difficulty, this enmeshment of sexual orientation and gender identity. The "window dressing" you refer to is just that, it seems to me, a form of "accessorizing." The attention you say you might enjoy from a man may be a way for you to "complete" your identity as a man with a feminine self. The question you should perhaps ask yourself (if you seek clarity in your own mind about your sexual orientation) is this: would you seek or desire the attention of a man while presenting as a male?
About sexual orientation falling in a spectrum, much like gender identity, I'd be tempted to agree, were it not for the fact that there are only four basic options: attraction to men, attraction to women, attraction to either (or both), and attraction to neither. If this can be called a spectrum, it's a fairly limited one. Maybe a good way of picturing this is to place yourself somewhere in a triangle (assuming, of course, you're not asexual) where each of the points represents an option. Personally (and this'll be my official "coming out"), I'm only attracted to women--even though I sometimes catch myself flirting good-naturedly with other "sisters" whom I know, of course, to be male. The intention is never (and will never be) seriously sexual. But that's just me. Maybe this sexual orientation doubt is a preoccupation that distinguishes "mere" (heterosexual) crossdressers such as myself from those individuals with transsexual tendencies, who knows? There are no experts but ourselves in this regard, really. You'll find your own road, Jill.
Love,
CJ
-
TamaraSegunda
- Miss Sapphire Goddess
- Posts: 70
- Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 4:27 pm
- Location: San Diego, CA USA
Of course there is a spectrum of sexual orientation. Kinsey divided the basic positions into a scale of seven levels:
1 Exclusively heterosexual with no homosexual experience
2 Predominantly heterosexual, only incidently homosexual
3 Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
4 Equally heterosexual and homosexual
5 Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
6 Predominantly homosexual, but incidentally heterosexual
7 Exclusively homosexual, with no heterosexual experience
Unless you fall into either category 1 or 7, then there are a continuously variable number of possibilities among the intermediate steps. For example, your level of homo- or heterosexuality may be "incidental," but there are many degrees of intensity within that general classification.
I've known gay men who are totally impotent with women and repulsed by the idea of intimately touching a woman. I've also known many hetero men who admit (brag?) that the idea of sexual contact with another man makes them nauseated. What's "normal"? I believe that most of us, if we are truly in touch with our feelings, and secure enough to be honest about them, are neither 1s nor 7s on the Kinsey scale. In real life, we may seldom if ever be actively attracted to a living, breathing same-sex person, but I know that many TG people (myself among them) would have no trouble conjuring up a fantasy of an ideally attractive and sexually dominant male partner who would gently and tenderly make love to them. For such people, it's more than how you would look dancing with him in a ball gown, but it's a not something that's strong enough to translate into real-life behavior. In my view, it's not just harmless, but downright healthy to be fully cognizant of all aspects of your personality; even the "incidental" ones.
Chaste
hugs to all,
......Tamara Segunda
1 Exclusively heterosexual with no homosexual experience
2 Predominantly heterosexual, only incidently homosexual
3 Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
4 Equally heterosexual and homosexual
5 Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
6 Predominantly homosexual, but incidentally heterosexual
7 Exclusively homosexual, with no heterosexual experience
Unless you fall into either category 1 or 7, then there are a continuously variable number of possibilities among the intermediate steps. For example, your level of homo- or heterosexuality may be "incidental," but there are many degrees of intensity within that general classification.
I've known gay men who are totally impotent with women and repulsed by the idea of intimately touching a woman. I've also known many hetero men who admit (brag?) that the idea of sexual contact with another man makes them nauseated. What's "normal"? I believe that most of us, if we are truly in touch with our feelings, and secure enough to be honest about them, are neither 1s nor 7s on the Kinsey scale. In real life, we may seldom if ever be actively attracted to a living, breathing same-sex person, but I know that many TG people (myself among them) would have no trouble conjuring up a fantasy of an ideally attractive and sexually dominant male partner who would gently and tenderly make love to them. For such people, it's more than how you would look dancing with him in a ball gown, but it's a not something that's strong enough to translate into real-life behavior. In my view, it's not just harmless, but downright healthy to be fully cognizant of all aspects of your personality; even the "incidental" ones.
Chaste
hugs to all,......Tamara Segunda
-
Kerri
- Miss Platinum Goddess
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 3:11 pm
- Location: North Scotland
This Kinsey dude has put too fine a point on it, way too fine!
I am but a humble Scots man, therefore I cannot speak in such fine tomes as the former contributers.
Putting it simply. In the words of the Bard "A man's a Man, faur awe that."
We may aspire to be feminine for appearances sake, but the majority of male crossdressers are heterosexual.
A bonny lassie is all it takes to stir me!
If a bonny man is what you desire, then do not seek justification with words. Just do what you want, and be done with it!
As far as this Kinsey character is concerned, who incidently I have never heard of. Seven categories is hardly fair. Why even the Irish acknowledge that there are One Hundred Shades of Green!
This thread has cheered me up!
Tara
Kerri
-
Jill
- Miss Crystal Goddess
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 5:55 pm
- Location: California
- Contact:
Thanks for the thoughts girls. It's really nice to have all this to chew on.
I should say one thing to clarify what I said.
When I said that sexual orientation does not fall into discrete categories, nor into discrete categories with overlapping bounds, I did not mean to deny the spectrum idea. Now, the color spectrum is what I had in mind when talking about the discrete categories with overlapping bounds. Perhaps there really aren't categories for sexual orientation in terms of the facts, but there are in terms of our understanding or, to use a big word, in terms of our epistemology is concerned.
So, I do think it's a spectrum but I think the spectrum is quite smooth in transition from one end to the other, just like a pair of nylons on freshly shaved legs!
I should say one thing to clarify what I said.
When I said that sexual orientation does not fall into discrete categories, nor into discrete categories with overlapping bounds, I did not mean to deny the spectrum idea. Now, the color spectrum is what I had in mind when talking about the discrete categories with overlapping bounds. Perhaps there really aren't categories for sexual orientation in terms of the facts, but there are in terms of our understanding or, to use a big word, in terms of our epistemology is concerned.
So, I do think it's a spectrum but I think the spectrum is quite smooth in transition from one end to the other, just like a pair of nylons on freshly shaved legs!
Jill
-
TamaraSegunda
- Miss Sapphire Goddess
- Posts: 70
- Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 4:27 pm
- Location: San Diego, CA USA
-
Celia
- Moderator and "Princess of Chat"
- Posts: 1832
- Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2003 12:32 am
- Location: Western Washington
If I think of myself in the default, masculine terms, the idea of my having sexual relations with some guy really puts me off my feed. But if I were to transition, have SRS, etc., I could certainly see it. Naturally, I would have my preferences (not just any sweating boar would do, certainly), but the thought of men and women together sexually simply resonates with me. Maybe in some cases it isn't just personal sexual orientation but a kind of paradigm.
The thought of a fully-realized Celia in a romantic relationship with a man doesn't seem to me to contradict my heterosexuality, though I do concede it's a considerable shift in perspective. If the coin toss had come out the other way, how many of us think we would have been lesbians?
-Celia
The thought of a fully-realized Celia in a romantic relationship with a man doesn't seem to me to contradict my heterosexuality, though I do concede it's a considerable shift in perspective. If the coin toss had come out the other way, how many of us think we would have been lesbians?
-Celia
Only the young die young.
-
Terri(SO)
- Miss Platinum Goddess
- Posts: 373
- Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 7:35 am
- Location: San Francisco
- Contact:
-
Anita
- Miss Diamond Goddess
- Posts: 3068
- Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 2:55 pm
- Location: Burlingame, CA (San Francisco Bay area)
Hi Jill--
Your description of your feelings about men when dressed matches mine, and you write it out very well.
A big part of my attraction to men comes from knowing that I'm providing an attractive picture for THEM, and I remember how much I appreciated women doing that for me. So "giving back" the same enjoyment that I got earlier in life is a real joy to me.
Your description of your feelings about men when dressed matches mine, and you write it out very well.
A big part of my attraction to men comes from knowing that I'm providing an attractive picture for THEM, and I remember how much I appreciated women doing that for me. So "giving back" the same enjoyment that I got earlier in life is a real joy to me.
-
Cathy L. Anderson
- Miss Emerald Goddess
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:08 am
- Location: Europe
- Contact:
I have a basic problem with the labels "gay" and "straight." I wonder if most people are at least latently bisexual. Like you, I am attracted to women I see, and almost never to men. But deep beneath the surface I sometimes think there is suppressed or repressed homosexual attraction.I've wondered if I'm gay. I thought about this hard. I sat there one day, watching people pass by, and I noticed that the people who would 'catch my eye' were mostly women. And whenever men caught my eye, it was for a different reason than when a woman did.
I see this as normal, and it doesn't necessarily imply that I should act out on such latent tendencies. But I think it's better to admit this possibility with myself than to deny it outright.
Cathy
-
Hayley
- Miss Sapphire Goddess
- Posts: 94
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 9:47 pm
- Location: Australia
Interesting subject, and if I may I would like to include a few thoughts myself.
I am Bisexual. And it has taken life experience to come to a large part of that conclusion. I find the thought of judging ones sexuality by visual means only a small step in identifying ones true inner self. From experiences of asking myself when doubting my own sexuality, I found that it goes deeper than just catching the eye. Beit they male or female, personality plays the larger part to defining whether the person in front of you is your "type".
Would you ladies honestly appreciate, being treated the opposite to your desires. No of course not. No one would either in femme or homme. Let's say you are dressed and out on the town. You are with GF's (be they CD TG or GG is neither here nor there), and a gentleman walks up and starts talking to you, treating you like the lady that you are. Where do you stand? Sorry sir but I'm a sir too? It is just the same as having a woman abuse you for wearing her favourite dress purely by coincidence or having a go at you for being a CD/TG, would you invite her to a drink or take her home?
Alright they are a little on the opposite end of the spectrum, but I hope you understand what I am trying to say.
Defining ones sexuality, and being comfortable to be in that position takes a bit more than looking at both sexes and seeing what you enjoy. However some prefer looks to personality.
A deeper look into ones self is the only way you will find your answer.
Sorry if this offers little in the way of help, but thoughts deeply sought rarely deny reality, but challenge you to face it.
Very interesting topic. Thank you Jill, Ladies.
I am Bisexual. And it has taken life experience to come to a large part of that conclusion. I find the thought of judging ones sexuality by visual means only a small step in identifying ones true inner self. From experiences of asking myself when doubting my own sexuality, I found that it goes deeper than just catching the eye. Beit they male or female, personality plays the larger part to defining whether the person in front of you is your "type".
Would you ladies honestly appreciate, being treated the opposite to your desires. No of course not. No one would either in femme or homme. Let's say you are dressed and out on the town. You are with GF's (be they CD TG or GG is neither here nor there), and a gentleman walks up and starts talking to you, treating you like the lady that you are. Where do you stand? Sorry sir but I'm a sir too? It is just the same as having a woman abuse you for wearing her favourite dress purely by coincidence or having a go at you for being a CD/TG, would you invite her to a drink or take her home?
Alright they are a little on the opposite end of the spectrum, but I hope you understand what I am trying to say.
Defining ones sexuality, and being comfortable to be in that position takes a bit more than looking at both sexes and seeing what you enjoy. However some prefer looks to personality.
A deeper look into ones self is the only way you will find your answer.
Sorry if this offers little in the way of help, but thoughts deeply sought rarely deny reality, but challenge you to face it.
Very interesting topic. Thank you Jill, Ladies.
Big Hugs, Juliann "Self acceptance is not the absence of fear... but the conquest of it!"