Perhaps I should have said "whatever floats your boat."

I do believe that, but there are more problematic psychological issues that go into such a relationship besides the question of attraction or admiration.

Though of an entirely different magnitude, i think such things as extreme goth style and leather bound skinheads are related indicators of psychological attitudes and attempts to influence social dispositions according to internal problems and deficiencies. These are indicative of certain trends of thinking derived from social experience in the course of ones life, instead of something inborn.

The Doctor wrote: Textbook wrote: In fact there's a point where a woman becomes too attractive and sort of porn star looking where it turns me off, like they try too hard to look great, spend too much time on it so it, emphasise looks too much. I hate the cosmetic industry too. I agree with this sentiment completely.  Too much makeup, facelifts, boob jobs, etc. are big turn-offs for me.

Oh bloody hell - I find myself agreeing with The Doctor and Textbook...

...there's no hope for me; I should resign as an Admin immediately

Jim Garten wrote: Slartibartfast wrote: A Sean Tranesexual would be a person who gets these kind of things confused.

Slartibartfast wrote: Well, I think we've pretty well established that most of the guys on here wouldn't consider dating a transsexual, how about a hermaphrodite?

If that "hermaphrodite" was Jamie Lee Curtis then sure, why not?

Foreplay might be confusing though..."my god, what a choice!"

 I guess this isn't the place for a strapadictomy joke...

Textbook wrote: SE: Well that happens sometimes. But I'm asking if you would.

Edited by someone_else - June 22 2012 at 07:42

hermaphrodites? Biologically what are they? They have to be either woman or man, there is no genetic alternative. However, they may be biologically messed up men or women, like Siamese twins or webbed feet. Still I guess if I met a girl and she was disfigured down under (its not like she'd have  a full set of male organs or something, but just a muddle), and she was born that way, then I would be understanding. Hey, nobody's perfect, least of all me (Steve Hackett Lyric?). I may sound naive but at present I can imagine a relationship without sex or babies quite easily, so I wouldn't freak if a girl I got involved with was biologically incapable of such things.


 

To start off: no, I wouldn't.

My take on the subject is: there are quite a lot of people who do not feel the least comfortable in their own biological selves.
I have every sympathy for them and would support their choice for a sex-change OP, if that enables them to live a happy life which they otherwise wouldn't.
For the life of me I can't see why these people should be shunned by society for making a very brave attempt to gain happiness, a process of which the result is even cannot be a certainty.
Everyone has a right to happiness, why should people be made to suffer just because society says that this doesn't fit the norm? Society can be pretty sick.
There are people who accept such a process and embrace such a relationship, there are others who don't feel comfortable. Personally. I fit in the second catagory.
I would not feel uncomfortable having transexuals as friends.
Live and let live.


Edited by npjnpj - June 22 2012 at 11:59

I don't think so but it has nothing to do with moral reasons, I'm 45 and I never felt attracted to any being other than natural born women (by "attracted" meaning as for having some sort of couple or sexual relationship, not just friendship. For one thing I feel very attracted to my pets   ).

Slartibartfast wrote: Well, I think we've pretty well established that most of the guys on here wouldn't consider dating a transsexual, how about a hermaphrodite?