Both: What is the difference between a sexuality and a preference? What makes someone straight? What makes someone gay?

submitted by peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS from self.GCdebatesQT

Curious to hear everyone’s thoughts!

all 50 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]worried19 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I think sexuality is sexual orientation. The sex(es) you're attracted to.

All the rest consists of preferences, which I believe are malleable and influenced by culture.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Thanks for sharing! I feel similarly.

[–]worried19 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Although I will say, sometimes sexuality is not that clear cut. I think orientation can be malleable in some people and not others. People who are bisexual to some degree may not understand that for monosexual people, there's no choice involved. A exclusively homosexual lesbian cannot simply decide to be attracted to someone of the male sex, nor should she have to.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I think orientation can be malleable in some people and not others.

I’m not sure if I agree that is the orientation being malleable. I feel like the people who experience it that way must be bisexual or asexual.

for monosexual people, there's no choice involved

100%

[–]worried19 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Well, I think there's probably a greater percentage of people who are not monosexual than is acknowledged. Like if we had a culture that was super encouraging of people being with the same sex, you'd find more people engaging in same-sex relationships. There are most likely a lot more people who are bisexual to some degree than would admit to it in polls, or who are even really aware of it themselves.

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Some researchers I've read previously predicted approximately 10-15% of people are being bisexual, and 2-5% of people are being homosexual. Which makes it 1/5th of whole population, which is a lot.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Well, I think there's probably a greater percentage of people who are not monosexual than is acknowledged.

That makes sense! I’m not sure if it’s possible to have a society that treats same-sex relationships as exactly the same because of the procreation thing, but even in a super accepting society, I feel like many bisexuals would just never explore it because it easier not to. I always wonder if evolution is making more of us gay or like me because we need to stop making so many people.

[–]worried19 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I feel like it would be the opposite. Right now there's a lot of stigma towards men exploring bisexuality, so if we had a society that actively encouraged same-sex relationships and expected men and boys to experiment with each other, I think we'd see a lot more of it. Men start off in the same social groups, they tend to experience libido in similar ways, and many already experiment even without social approval. I think we'd see an increase in that. But I don't think it would change the fact that the majority of men are predominantly heterosexual and would want to settle down with women for the long term.

I always wonder if evolution is making more of us gay or like me because we need to stop making so many people.

Interesting thought, but if that's the case it doesn't work so well because gay and trans people still have the same drive to procreate and raise kids. And of course they don't start out infertile. If evolution was trying to do that, you'd think it would make more people intersex instead.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You may be right. I’m not sure why I’m so negative about it.

Interesting thought, but if that's the case it doesn't work so well because gay and trans people still have the same drive to procreate and raise kids.

Gay people don’t want sex with people we can biologically have kids with though and trans people (like I was at least) avoided our genitals as much as possible. I feel like both those things make it really unusual for us to reproduce. I guess intersex would guarantee it though. It might be a silly thought.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

Not sure if this is still an active post, but I’m bored and finally remembered my login, so...

Sexuality- the sex(es) you are attracted to

Preference- the specific features or traits/qualities you are attracted to, even the belief system you’d prefer your partner to have, the type of relationship you want to have (open, poly, monogamous whatever) etc. Basically what you hope for or look for in a partner (their sex matching/fitting your sexuality being a known given)

Straight (Heterosexual)- sexual attraction solely to the opposite sex

Gay(homosexual)- sexual attraction solely to the same sex

(And bi would Obvi be sexual attraction to both/either sex)

I think my question is, what is the same about sexuality and preference?

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and welcome back!

Your definitions make sense to me.

I think my question is, what is the same about sexuality and preference?

Some people feel like everything is a preference including things like genitals and sexuality can be fluid. I usually just think those people are bisexual or asexual and don’t experience sex the same way as monosexual people because of that. I was hoping that some people who think about sexuality that way might share there thoughts, but it seems like we are mostly just agreeing with each other (except for that whole robot sex discussion lol).

[–]CatbugMods allow rape victim blaming in this sub :) 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Sexuality is the sex of the people one is capable of being sexually attracted to.
Preference is what one likes within that category. So like, as an example I find wiry, pale, long haired and bearded, has-some-Victorian-wasting-disease lookin dudes. I like women who are tall, fit, busty and blonde. Bisexuality with preferences.

Preference doesn’t extend to genitals as some transgender advocates (really a group of men who want lesbians to interact sexually with their penises and not advocates for the actual rights of transgender people) want us to say.

Being straight means you’re attracted to the opposite sex of your sex. Being gay is being attracted to the same sex. Gender as it’s understood by tra or by radfems/gc doesn’t fit in in any sensible way.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Thanks for sharing! Your descriptions make sense.

I don’t feel like genitals are a preference either. That seems hardwired as part of our sexual orientation and it’s beyond frustrating that people act like it’s not or insist they should be in this or that dating pool (males usually, like you say, although some females too).

I’d be really interested to hear someone explain gay or straight when then couple is opposite sex or same sex, because some trans people believe that and think it’s transphobic to say otherwise. Like, I understand that relationships can be seen as something different when trans people are involved and I’d never try to tell my husband he’s gay because that’s not super descriptive for what he is attracted too, but I still understand our relationship is technically a homosexual one and it doesn’t bother me.

[–]CatbugMods allow rape victim blaming in this sub :) 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I can understand how for someone who is deeply emotionally invested in the idea that TWAW would find it transphobic to say that their relationship with another male is homosexual. I agree that it’s very muddied water for a man who is dating a transwoman and not attracted to male presenting men even though homosexual is technically accurate. I wouldn’t sit there and insist your husband is gay despite your marriage being a homosexual one either. Idk, a singular same sex attraction? It’s hard to even guess without any experience.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree that it’s very muddied water for a man who is dating a transwoman and not attracted to male presenting men even though homosexual is technically accurate.

The labels do get confusing (although it’s totally fine not to have a perfect one). I feel like our relationship would have never worked if I hadn’t had bottom surgery either because, obviously, he doesn’t like penises.

singular same sex attraction

That seems like a reasonable description.

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Sexuality, or sexual orientation, is innate and can not be changed (many conservatives and religion tried, with hundreds of inhumane and humane methods).

While preferences is something person chosing on their own. Preferences can be very strong, but if someone likes only taller people, however, the person they fell in love for every other preference except of their height, they will still love them. While with sexuality this will not work, even if you are really liking a person, but they are of opposite sex - it will not work, maximum you will have friendship instead.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for sharing! I basically agree. I do feel like maybe someone can be very narrowly bisexual, like that they could be feel attraction to a passing, post-op transwoman, but otherwise only attracted to natal females (maybe same of a certain type of transman and natal males).

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (32 children)

I don't really care much about whether or not attraction is a sexual orientation or a preference.

I understand that for LGB people it is a big deal because they have been told for centuries that they should force themselves to change their "preference" and be "normal".

But for me it's sexual boundaries regardless of whether they can change it or not, and they should be respected no matter what. It's a preference for me to not be involved with married men: I could change my mind, but I don't want to. Is that choice less worthy of respect just because it's not an innate attraction but a deliberate decision? No. Similarly, even if being attracted to someone of their own sex were a simple preference, there isn't a reason to make them change it.

Technically, sex orientation is based on sex. I guess that adding physical characteristics of the other sex in the mix can be described as either a preference for people of one sex with mixed characteristics (if those characteristics change the person's appearance but they are still recognizable as their biological sex or they haven't gone all the way possible with medical and surgical treatments) or it could be created a completely new name to describe attraction to a person of a sex that looks like a member of the other sex.

Personally, I think that being attracted to someone without knowing that they aren't what they claim to be doesn't mean that they are a different sexual orientation than the one they have been up until that point. But the second they know, if they keep being attracted, then it's not heterosexual/homosexual anymore.

You don't suddenly become an object-attracted person if you mistake a realistic sculpture for a real human being and find it hot, but you become one when you realize that the sculpture is not a person and still want it.

The same is true for trans and androgynous people: if you see a hot girl and think you would like to have sex with her, then find out the girl is actually male and lose all your interest, you are still a straight man or a lesbian woman. When you find out and still want to be with that person, then you had your first bisexual experience, that can be called a specific name if your interest doesn't go farther away from "I am attracted to anyone who presents as a wo/man".

Your husband is not gay, but he is at least bisexual because he's attracted to people of both sexes, even though he needs both sexes to present as women to find them attractive. Bisexuality doesn't mean "I am fine with whatever", they have standards and preferences just like straight and gay people.

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I could change my mind, but I don't want to

That is why conservative christians previously, and TQ+ activists nowadays, are trying to say that sexual orientation is a preference. This will mean that we can change our mind and start dating opposite sex, but we just not wanting to, solely based on their genitals or their original sex. And this makes us wrong, because we chosed to ignore them. It is still pretty twisted up, as no one calls you bigoted if you dont like tall or short people, or if you are dating only blondes, but for some reason with sexuality it is not the case for them. And in reality sexual orientation is not something we have chosen, if it was just a choice - most gay people in homophobic countries would just opt out and live normal lives without hate or threat to their lives.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I know that, that's why I said that I understand why it's a big deal for LGB people.

I was just talking for myself here: I don't care if you can choose it or not, it's your own business who you are attracted to.

It makes no difference for me where that attraction comes from, all I care about is that it exists, and it's not my business to tell you to change it regardless of whether you chose it or it's innate.

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, I understand this.

And it is the weird part of this problem too, and it always was. Conservatives were saying "no kink shaming", and then saying "homosexuality is just a kink and must be ashamed". And nowadays it is the same, but from progressives. And it makes no sense, because in both cases if homosexuality is a kink, then "no kink shaming" and if homosexuality is not kink but innate, then it can't be changed, so it can't be called as a choice and ashamed.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yup, that whole "lesbians are vagina fetishist" coming from the same people who throw tantrums whenever someone criticizes their kinks just shows how hypocritical and/or completely out of reality these people are.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

But for me it's sexual boundaries regardless of whether they can change it or not, and they should be respected no matter what.

That’s a wonderful way to think about it! It’s sad that often society is only alright with differences like that (sexual orientation) if they aren’t a choice. I feel like if more people felt like it was always inappropriate to question someone’s preference or orientation then maybe the people who think genitals are just a preference would feel like they shouldn’t pressure or guilt anyone. 🤷‍♀️

Personally, I think that being attracted to someone without knowing that they aren't what they claim to be doesn't mean that they are a different sexual orientation than the one they have been up until that point. But the second they know, if they keep being attracted, then it's not heterosexual/homosexual anymore.

That makes sense!

Your husband is not gay, but he is at least bisexual because he's attracted to people of both sexes, even though he needs both sexes to present as women to find them attractive.

That’s true. When I told him, he did not take it well and sort of took some time away and even talked to a therapist because he wasn’t sure if he was okay with it or if it changed something about him. I don’t think he thinks of himself as bi though (it probably doesn’t matter).

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

Honestly, I am not really sure what the problem your husband had with this was. I get thinking it over after you realize something new of yourself, but to the point that you freak out and need to talk to a therapist? Unless the problem is a bit of homophobia, I don't see what issues can there be.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

I feel like maybe he had some internalized homophobia or something. That is my best guess. This was like nearly a decade ago. He’s very much not homophobic, but he wasn’t raised in a household that thought that being gay was okay (even though his parents became more accepting after one of his uncles came out, but he was already grown up by then).

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

Yeah, that is what I though as well. Some internalized homophobia from his background.

I don't know, I just really wouldn't care much if it happened to me. Maybe I would care about the issues we would have as a couple, and that would be something to ponder on when deciding whether or not to pursue a relationship.

But the thought itself? If I find out I am attracted to women as well as men, then I am bisexual. I hope I wouldn' t have a crisis over it.

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

If it works in whatever way, it is great. I know around dozen of similar couples to yours, majority of men there are bisexual, however, one there is straight and he is blindly believing that his wife (hsts and face surgery, passing very well, except things like gait, but majority of people will not see differences in such things anyways) is just a woman and always was a woman (otherwise he had struggles accepting her and himself, she wasn't very happy at first, as she knew that she was born as a man, however, later accepted this situation). And it is perfectly fine, if it stays withing family and works for them, and makes them happy.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

I am not sure I understand, this guy doesn' t know the person he is married to is actually a man and would freak out if he knew?

Because in that case, I seriously doubt that everyone is happy: he is being lied to and as far as I am concerned has been raped by deception for years. There is nothing happy and fine in that situation.

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

No, he is lying himself. And tries not to touch the past of his wife pre-transition, as it makes him uncomfortable. So they both accepted that she is a woman and always was one, even thought it is not the case. And it is somewhat understandable, if you are not bisexual - you can't change your attraction and sexuality. And he loved her for her looking like female, presenting as female and her having no male internal organs, so he loved her as a woman, and realizing that she was a man (and a male) will turn him off, just because of biological side of attraction, he seems to understand this, so he just ignores the facts, and they are living pretty happily together for more than ten years now. She wanted to not be noticed and just live calm life, so it works for her as well.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Ah, ok, that' s different.

I still think it' s an incredibly unhealthy attitude, because if your acceptance is based entirely on pretending that reality isn' t a thing, it' s not exactly great.

[–]MezozoicGaygay male 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Well, it works for them for a long period of time, and they are not trying to make anyone else to believe in this. He likes to say "the past is the past, live todays life, not past life" in different conversations, so I supose he already accepted the fact, he just don't like to be reminded about it or to think about it at all.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I don’t know exactly what he means, but the way I interpreted it is that his friend just in denial about it a little or is rationalizing it. I feel like straight guys sometimes deal with dating us that way. It sort of like they think that if we look like a duck, talk like a duck, and other people think we are a duck then than is enough for them to just see us as a duck (or woman) and not choose not to really think about that even if we’ve told them things about our history (because that is the right thing to do). Like, with my husband, we had known each other for 4 years (was dating another guy back then) before we started dating so he already had an idea of me that was fully formed long before I had to tell him I was trans. I think some guys just have an easier time telling themselves that we were never any different than we are now even if we’ve told them about our history. I’m not saying that’s like the best way to deal with it, but I feel like it’s what happens more often than not with guys I’ve dated.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

How do you deal with that on a personal level, though? Like, don' t you think being with someone who accepts all of you would be better?

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I married to a wonderful, loving man and I’m very thankful for that. I feel like, in my life, I have to be comfortable with some contradictions. It sort of works because, I’m not super happy with being born male either, so it’s not like I’d really love talking about my life as a child. Those just weren’t happy times for me. Obviously, we have talked about it because it was really important to me that I told him everything because I didn’t want to feel like I was hiding anything. I even told him what the name my parents gave me as a child was. He didn’t really like those conversations though and it’s not really my most comfortable subject either.

I don’t know if a man who would accept all of that without wanting to avoid parts of it existed. Gay guys would have wanted to be with someone who looked like a guy and had a penis. Guys who were into transwomen also would have wanted someone with a penis (plus, many of those guys are AGP and pornsick, so no ty). Straight guys were always the ones interested in dating me and, if they stayed, they ignored the trans stuff. Maybe a bi guy who liked exactly what I was and embraced my history existed, but I can’t imagine how I would have ever met that guy.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Maybe I would care about the issues we would have as a couple, and that would be something to ponder on when deciding whether or not to pursue a relationship.

And those are like a totally valid concerns too. In many ways, I feel like hardest part about having to tell a guy I was dating I was trans practically is that it meant that we could never have children (the regular way at least).

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, I mean, I think that whatever reason you have to turn down a relationship comes first. I can agree or disagree with one of those reasons, but in the end a person' s decision is more important than anything else.

What I meant is that I think I would focus on the practical issues more than the psychological ones if I were to choose whether to pursue a relationship with a woman or not. I could see myself turning down that relationship for not being strong enough to face the intolerance, for example, or, like you said, for not being able to have children with her (I am not a huge fan of sperm donation and I don' t think I would be able to go through adoption). But I don' t think I would turn it down because I would freak out about the switch from heterosexual to bisexual.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think that whatever reason you have to turn down a relationship comes first

100%

What I meant is that I think I would focus on the practical issues more than the psychological ones if I were to choose whether to pursue a relationship with a woman or not.

Okay, I feel like I understand. To me, your approach is the healthiest one because being straight or bi or gay should be totally neutral things..

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

You don't suddenly become an object-attracted person if you mistake a realistic sculpture for a real human being and find it hot, but you become one when you realize that the sculpture is not a person and still want it.

So is everyone on Westworld object-attracted? At what point does a simulacrum become indistinguishable enough for it to not matter? Humans can't detect essences after all.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I am not familiar with Westworld: what are the characters you are talking about, robots? Anyway if the objects of affection are objects, and the person knows that they are not real human beings, then yes, the person is object-attracted.

A simulacrum will never be indistinguishable from an individual if the real person knows that it is not a human being. A sufficiently advanced artificial intelligence could be mistaken for a person I guess (comparisons with sci-fi stories are ridicoulous, by the way), but the second you find out, that knowledge is stuck in your head and you cannot unsee it.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Seems like that depends on the specifics of the person doing the seeing. If someone considers such a fact to be non-important, they may forget it just as they would any other non-important fact.

Further question: What if the robot body in question was operated by a human brain? Would the fact that an observer who is attracted to the cybernetic individual (who appears in all sense-informed ways to be human) is physically attracted to the robot body and not the individuals brain still mean that the person has object-attraction? Or does the mere posession of a human brain make the robot body also a human body and thus a valid target of human-based attraction?

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Nobody considers it non-important or is able to forget such a thing.

I don' t think a human conscience in a robot body is human. We are humans because of our bodies, not because of our souls/identities/personalities. So if the robot is controlled by a human mind, the person attracted to it is still object-attracted.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Nobody considers it non-important or is able to forget such a thing.

Not even hypothetical people? Seems dubious. If one lived in a society where the distinction was considered unimportant it seems likely that the people in that society might have such an attitude.

I don' t think a human conscience in a robot body is human. We are humans because of our bodies, not because of our souls/identities/personalities. So if the robot is controlled by a human mind, the person attracted to it is still object-attracted.

Just to be clear, I was talking about a physical brain in a robot body not just an identical thought pattern. You used the term "mind" which has been used in both senses so I wanted to be clear. You still feel the same way?

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Not even hypothetical people? Seems dubious. If one lived in a society where the distinction was considered unimportant it seems likely that the people in that society might have such an attitude.

That' s why I said that comparisons with sci-fi shows are ridicoulous: sure, in a future society that currently doesn' t exist (and likely never will)... we have no clue how things will be. I was talking about our current society: people nowadays are incapable of considering a robot a human being. And while I have no clue what happens in the show you have mentioned, I suspect that the human characters there don' t consider the robotic characters human either.

I still mantain that the differences between a human being and a robotic being wouldn' t be erased in the mind of anyone: growing up in a society that accepts these creatures doesn' t mean that they are going to be considered the same as people. And they shouldn' t be since they aren' t.

Just to be clear, I was talking about a physical brain in a robot body not just an identical thought pattern. You used the term "mind" which has been used in both senses so I wanted to be clear. You still feel the same way?

A physical brain in a robot body will make the individual some kind of biological/robotic hybrid. They would be a completely new life form that would be neither a robot nor a human being.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Philosophy interrogates concepts using sci-fi all the time. Why should this issue be exempt if it helps illustrate the boundary conditions for the concept of the distinction between attraction to humans and objects?

I still mantain that the differences between a human being and a robotic being wouldn' t be erased in the mind of anyone: growing up in a society that accepts these creatures doesn' t mean that they are going to be considered the same as people. And they shouldn' t be since they aren' t.

It could. Is the fact that there are some people who can curl their tongue and some who can't constantly on your mind? Probably not because you grew up in a society where the difference didn't matter. If you lived in a society where one was considered a hideous deformity you would probably be conscious of the difference, and similarly in a society where it was normal and mundane for humans to move between biological and robotic states and the difference was imperceptible, it might not be something that was constantly on their minds.

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Philosophy interrogates concepts using sci-fi all the time. Why should this issue be exempt if it helps illustrate the boundary conditions for the concept of the distinction between attraction to humans and objects?

No, sci-fi (the good one at least) takes a problem in our society and puts it in a futuristic scenario to look at it from a different angle: philosophy debates that. It' s not a comparison with some impossible scenario, it' s a reading of a story through the allegories and metaphors in order to study current society. What you are doing is not that: I read the plot of the show and it seems more fantasy than sci-fi (sci-fi is not just aliens, spaceships and robots, it' s social commentary with aliens, spaceships and robots, Westworld just seems like an exercise in worldbuilding with some fantascientific elements thrown in). This show isn' t describing a problem in our reality, I can assure you that whoever wrote it was not making a future metaphor about trans people' s presentation. That is something you are arbitrarily coming up with to prove that you are right. You are just using this particular comparison because it' s easier for you to debate since you know that in real life this would never happen.

You are doing the same thing trans people are doing when they go "what if they invent a magical chamber that changes sex down to chromosomes?". This isn' t debating problems in our society by using futuristic scenarios and elements, it' s wishful thinking, and an obnoxious and very not smart one to boot.

Regardless, you can' t actually be serious when you compare not being human with being able to curl your tongue. The two things aren' t even in the same realm. As I already said, though, if a society is the kind of society in which it' s normal to move between biological and robotics, then human beings wouldn' t exist anymore in the way we know. There would be a new race part human and part robotic. In that society, sure the difference could be uninmportant because everyone would be both. In fact, in such a society pure humans and pure robots would probably be minorities and likely discriminated against. But in a society in which there is still a distinction between the two categories, no it' s not possible that the distinction isn' t on everyone' s mind when it counts (and sexual intercourse/dating are definitely fields in which it would count). They might reach a point in which both categories are considered equal, but they are never going to be considered the same and interchangeable.

[–]zephyranthes 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Both are words for factors which contribute to a decision to enter a relationship.

Some of these factors are decidedly non-negotiable for an overwhelming majority of people and carry great social impact.

I use the term "sexual orientation" for one such important factor (the sex of the partner vs the sex of the person).

I use the word "preference" for factors that are negotiable, not shared by sharply delineated groups of people, and do not carry significant social impact.

I use the word "sexuality" for a specific person's set of these factors provided all lie in the realm of acceptable behavior.

I use various dysphemisms for factors that are not acceptable and that I want to see socially and legally prosecuted.