197 replies to this topic

[ealdwita]

.....Sung to the tune of Al Jolson's 'Sonny Boy'.......
♪♫♫♪ ♪ ♫
"Funny little fellow,
Wears his sister's clothes,
Don't know what to call him,
But we think he's one of those!"
♪♫♫♪ ♪ ♫

[Leave Britney alone!]

Walnut Whip, on 11 December 2012 - 04:20 PM, said:

You can't really tell half the time.
So you don't know if they're male,female or bi-sexual.
In my brief interaction with the prof in writers corner I would say he's a man.
But us blokes are not well known for their intuitation.
You never know. This person could come out with "I'm a tomboy".
Bi-sexual's are not the only ones who might be ambiguous.

Very true, the Q in LBGQT encompasses a wide range of people, some very different than others, the definitions we traditionally have are not adequate, "straight" "gay" "bisexual" are terms which are being rejected by some within the Millennial generation. They are doing something that should have been done long ago but was stopped short by the Reagan and Bush years. Those are labels, labels people use to lock others in, to hurt others, while for others they are just casual words and not controversial at all, but the two are related.

Quote

The range of what "queer" includes varies. In addition to referring to LGBT-identifying people, it can also encompass: pansexual, pomosexual, intersexual, genderqueer, asexual and autosexual people, and even gender normative heterosexuals whose sexual orientations or activities place them outside the heterosexual-defined mainstream, e.g., BDSM practitioners, or polyamorous persons.

http://en.wikipedia....ivity_and_scope

Mostly every group on that list will have members that in public look and act very much like "straight" people.

Tomboys could very well self-identify with Q.

[regi]

I believe you, on 11 December 2012 - 03:36 PM, said:

I make a casual effort to conceal by not advertising. No work beyond that, I don't censor my every post here or conversation while in the chatroom, especially if the venue is smaller, even this post is rather lengthy for me but  so easy to follow because no walls of text to read...for now; sorry.

No, I don't follow.
The OP asked for our impression, and I explained why I couldn't make an educated guess as to their gender.
As for any poster who doesn't want their gender revealed, I don't give a rat's behind whether they're male or female.
In this internet world, it's how others respond that gives me the best impression of "who" they are.

[Leave Britney alone!]

regi, on 11 December 2012 - 05:01 PM, said:

No, I don't follow.
The OP asked for our impression, and I explained why I couldn't make an educated guess as to their gender.
As for any poster who doesn't want their gender revealed, I don't give a rat's behind whether they're male or female.
In this internet world, it's how others respond that gives me the best impression of "who" they are.

I was simply commenting on the last 29 words of your post that I quoted, no worries (:

Edited by I believe you, 11 December 2012 - 05:13 PM.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

I believe you, on 11 December 2012 - 04:44 PM, said:

Very true, the Q in LBGQT encompasses a wide range of people,

http://en.wikipedia....ivity_and_scope

You're telling me. Is that Pomosexual or Pornosexual? I'm guessing that Autosexual is... well, why don't we all have a guess.

[Leave Britney alone!]

747400, on 11 December 2012 - 05:50 PM, said:

You're telling me. Is that Pomosexual or Pornosexual? I'm guessing that Autosexual is... well, why don't we all have a guess.

Pomosexual
A portmanteau of pomo, short for postmodernism, and sexual, used as a noun—a person who shuns labels (e.g., heterosexual and homosexual, which define people by their sexual preferences)—and as an adjective, referring to such a person or to the philosophy of pomosexuality

http://medical-dicti....com/Pomosexual

[Hasina]

I believe you, on 11 December 2012 - 05:53 PM, said:

Pomosexual
A portmanteau of pomo, short for postmodernism, and sexual, used as a noun—a person who shuns labels (e.g., heterosexual and homosexual, which define people by their sexual preferences)—and as an adjective, referring to such a person or to the philosophy of pomosexuality

http://medical-dicti....com/Pomosexual

Oh this 'kind' of sexuality fits more in line with my own feelings towards people and sexuality as a whole, wonderful to find this out. Thanks IBY~

[JGirl]

get out of bed professor t, and get in here!!

[Leave Britney alone!]

Hasina, on 11 December 2012 - 06:10 PM, said:

Oh this 'kind' of sexuality fits more in line with my own feelings towards people and sexuality as a whole, wonderful to find this out. Thanks IBY~

I identify with pomo. It has nothing to do with the way you look or act but everything to do with your outlook and how you interact with others.

Postmodernism in general is about breaking all boundaries, black/white, christian/witch, rich/poor, whatever...a world where these labels don't exist and people can just accept people as people. The you-vs-me and them-vs-us script is outdated...

Edited by I believe you, 11 December 2012 - 06:51 PM.

[JGirl]

i think all these 'new' categories to define sexuality are ridiculous.
first of all why do we need them? you are just you. your sexuality is not going to change you. to have a name for your sexuality does not change you. who you romp in the hay with does not define you.
the bottom line is we are (most of us anyway) sexual beings. to define it further only creates unecessary  division.

[starlight1020]

I say Professor T is male. I just get the feeling by the way posts are worded...and as others have said, "professor" for some reason says male to me.

[Professor T]

JGirl, on 11 December 2012 - 06:51 PM, said:

i think all these 'new' categories to define sexuality are ridiculous.
first of all why do we need them? you are just you. your sexuality is not going to change you. to have a name for your sexuality does not change you. who you romp in the hay with does not define you.
the bottom line is we are (most of us anyway) sexual beings. to define it further only creates unecessary  division.

Humanity loves to label things....

Unforunately, we then try to live by those labels, which is wrong..

[Professor T]

Good Morning UMers!

Am counting results now and getting ready to reveal, lol..

Love some of these comments btw, I'm truly amazed by the intuitive responses and the results are going to knock your socks off..

Well Done UMers!

[Leave Britney alone!]

I vote T is female and already stated why...

I also meant empathy, not sensitivity, now that I reread it. T has empathy as in consideration for others.

Professor T, on 11 December 2012 - 07:19 PM, said:

Humanity loves to label things....

Unforunately, we then try to live by those labels, which is wrong..

And force others to live by them which is worse...

Destroying them can only occur by adding in labels designed to destroy the first set, people will not just abandon their gender biases.

The labels though are nothing, this is already occurring, the boundaries are shattering.

Some people play within the borders; others play with the borders themselves.

Edited by I believe you, 11 December 2012 - 07:53 PM.

[JGirl]

Professor T, on 11 December 2012 - 07:19 PM, said:

Humanity loves to label things....

Unforunately, we then try to live by those labels, which is wrong..

i find it curious that those who subscribe to these 'new' subcategories do so many times with the attitude of refusing to be pigeon-holed into one of three (existing) categories - lesbian, homosexual, bi sexual. the thing is, they're just adding more 'holes' and believing that choosing one of the alternatives somehow makes it ok, or better, or makes them more important.

Edited by JGirl, 11 December 2012 - 07:56 PM.