RE: The rise and fall of the binary. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message


MasterCaneman -> RE: The rise and fall of the binary. (9/20/2013 1:06:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HarryVanWinkle

quote:

Don't mind me. I'm just an engineer, wishing that people were easier to define.


Generally speaking, the more easily people are defined, the less interesting they are.

That was deep, Harry.




MsEloquence -> RE: The rise and fall of the binary. (9/20/2013 1:30:39 PM)

Two comments

DarkSteven: I had always presumed that bi curious meant "desires people of my own sex but have so far only had heterosexual sex." Interesting that we have different perspectives.

DarkSteven and JeffBC: my experience of engineers is that we're big on heuristics, so gray areas aren't really that scary after all.




KnightofMists -> RE: The rise and fall of the binary. (9/20/2013 5:52:40 PM)

I just love that people are difficult to define! Maybe people will start to be more focused on appreciating the person and all their unique qualities. I know I found life to be much more simpler when I was focused on the person rather than the people. A guy had a dream. I wonder if that was what he was talking about? Forget about people pay attention to the person.




theshytype -> RE: The rise and fall of the binary. (9/20/2013 6:05:57 PM)

I enjoy the fact that people cannot be easily defined by a label.  I love gray areas. 
I may have not known all different meanings behind trans, for example, but welcome whatever explanation a person wants to provide.   

Even in cliques, each person has their own characteristics separate from the group.  They may share a common interest, but they're never exactly the same as each other, as individuals.  The terms you've referred to are no different.  I believe they should be used to distinguish a commonality but not define the person.  

It's easy for me to understand that there may be more behind a person's label since I, myself, have never felt as though I fit perfectly into some.  




DesFIP -> RE: The rise and fall of the binary. (9/20/2013 9:02:34 PM)

I don't believe I ever viewed the world as so black and white. But being at the far end of the spectrum, totally het, totally monogamous, means I don't have to deal with those who aren't so solidly in one camp or another. I don't care about who someone else has sex with if I'm not having it with him.

Other people get to choose their own labels. I don't like being called names by others so I don't do it to them. And if someone else now says that X is offensive, I just go okay and stop using it. If they say that Y defines them better, I will use it. Not because I really care about the label but because it's simple good manners.




masterdrax1 -> RE: The rise and fall of the binary. (9/21/2013 12:06:13 PM)

Is that right that transgender addresses both crossdressers and transvestites???

Doesn't sound right to me - then again I'm a Software Engineer that likes a spec to make some sort of sense even when its on the back of a cig packet - which it is most of the time.




DarkSteven -> RE: The rise and fall of the binary. (9/21/2013 12:24:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: masterdrax1

Is that right that transgender addresses both crossdressers and transvestites???

Doesn't sound right to me - then again I'm a Software Engineer that likes a spec to make some sort of sense even when its on the back of a cig packet - which it is most of the time.


The term transgender addresses crossdressers, transvestites, and transsexuals. All three.




ResidentSadist -> RE: The rise and fall of the binary. (9/21/2013 12:53:03 PM)

I see the world from a similar perspective. I am pro label and have seen improper trans labeling get people hurt or killed. I empathize with the engineer who wants to know what the parts do, what they are called and how to use them properly. At one time CollarMe tried to be binary, and only used two categories. That lasted all of 53 days.

Oct 01, 2002 Owners & Slaves . . . (only lasted 53 days)
Nov 24, 2002 Tops & Bottoms . . . (only lasted 69 days)
Feb 02, 2003 Submissives & Dominants
Feb 04, 2004 Submissives, Switches, Dominants
Nov 01, 2004 Slaves, Submissives, Switches, Dominants

I am glad to see you take the pulpit, I spoke my piece about labels from a less friendly stand point ranting atop a soap some years ago. -=Sub/Slave, Guppy/Shark, Role Mislabeling Fatal, Shame on You=-

ETA: Labels and definitions for our roles are good, use them well and let them define your base not confine your reach.




PreviouslyVC -> RE: The rise and fall of the binary. (9/21/2013 2:49:52 PM)

FR

Important questions, in no particular order:

what pronouns would this person like me to use when I am talking about them?

might this person like me to hit them with things?

might this person like to hit me with things?

might this person like to have hot monkey sex with me?

---

Less important questions:

what label does this person use for their gender?

what label does this person use for their kink orientation?

what label does this person use for their sexual orientation?




SoulAlloy -> RE: The rise and fall of the binary. (9/22/2013 1:44:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven


quote:

ORIGINAL: masterdrax1

Is that right that transgender addresses both crossdressers and transvestites???

Doesn't sound right to me - then again I'm a Software Engineer that likes a spec to make some sort of sense even when its on the back of a cig packet - which it is most of the time.


The term transgender addresses crossdressers, transvestites, and transsexuals. All three.


Hmmm, not so sure on that - when I dress up it's to feel good rather than a fluctuation of my gender, I still identify as male throughout. I consider it akin to the ancient taboo of women wearing mens clothing only in reverse (not a taboo now of course, but once upon a time...)

Though I guess it's how you identify with the labels as an individual.




RumpusParable -> RE: The rise and fall of the binary. (9/22/2013 2:59:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven


quote:

ORIGINAL: masterdrax1

Is that right that transgender addresses both crossdressers and transvestites???

Doesn't sound right to me - then again I'm a Software Engineer that likes a spec to make some sort of sense even when its on the back of a cig packet - which it is most of the time.


The term transgender addresses crossdressers, transvestites, and transsexuals. All three.



Actually, no, it doesn't. Transgender addresses all of those who are not cisgender, anyone whose gender identity does not match the assumed/expected/assigned one for their sex.

Most crossdressers and transvestites are cisgender. There are exceptions, yes, but the majority are cisgender so far studies show. At first they were included in the general terminology regarding transsexuality due to the assumptions (just like that a male dressing in culturally-assigned "women's clothing" was assumed bisexual at least, but most likely gay) that their dressing so meant they were not cisgender. Today referring to a transgender person as a transvestite or vice versa is largely offensive within the LGBT and Transgender communities/sub-cultures.

Transgender is an umbrella term used as I stated above. It covers transsexuals, genderfluid, agender, bi-gender, third gender, genderqueer, androgyne, and other gender identities. Anyone who is not cisgender.

What clothing one prefers to wear, for sexual reasons, for comfort reasons, for genderfucking reasons, whatever, isn't addressed by the distinction between cisgender and transgender people nor does it indicate status.

You will find many references that still confuse these, but as said this lack of distinction is outdated though still repeated, but as research continues and sub-cultural definitions are refined, it is becoming more understood and acknowledged that the clothing one chooses to wear does not indicate gender status on its own. It may be in relation to gender status, but does not itself define one as other than cisgendered. Again, it's a case similar to the (still hanging around to a large extent) beliefs about cisgender crossdressing or transvestism indicating homosexuality in males.

Additionally, sexuality has no bearing on transgenderism just like it has none on cisgenderism. It doesn't have any part in indicating if a person is either and either can be of any sexuality.


Take me as an example: I am a transgender person as a genderless female. I usually dress neutrally but am assumed a girl due to body shape. For me, dressing in distinctly our culture's feminine or masculine clothing is one of a few things or a mix depending on the day: 1) dressing how I please regardless of gender assumptions, 2) presenting as a binary gender for the hell of it, 3) presenting as a boy or girl more distinctly or more extremely for the enjoyment of being in drag, and/or 4) intentionally engaging in genderfucking. My sexuality is pansexual.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875