How do I tell my gay friend dating a transman that he is bisexual?

submitted by Smolders1Cock is god's greatest gift. from self.LGBDropTheT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BiHorror 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (29 children)

He might be homoflexible. Either way, depending on he is (is he pretty chill or a rabid TRA?) , you could explain to him why he isn't gay as he thinks he is. Or let him go.

[–]MyLongestJourney 28 insightful - 1 fun28 insightful - 0 fun29 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

He might be homoflexible.

You mean bisexual.

[–]BiHorror 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (14 children)

Nah, I meant homoflexible. I consider them two different things. The friend also has the possibility of being homoflexible if he wouldn't date other women.

[–]MyLongestJourney 26 insightful - 1 fun26 insightful - 0 fun27 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

it is called bisexuality.

[–]BiHorror 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Agree to disagree then.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 4 insightful - 10 fun4 insightful - 9 fun5 insightful - 10 fun -  (6 children)

Pistols at dawn.

[–]BiHorror 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

No thanks. But, if you're curious as to why those are my opinions, I'll be more than willing to explain in a polite manner.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

That was humor...

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

Uh huh... Considering how some of ya act on this sub, that could've been a joke or something else.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I don't know who "ya" is, since you are here as well, but sure.

[–]reluctant_commenter 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Do you mind if I ask how that is not a type of bisexual? Just curious. My working definition of homosexuality is exclusive same-sex attraction.

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

I see them similar to the GAMPs we were talking about in the other post. But, I should've probably clarifed myself more. I see them as a straight/gay but a subset of it. Most of these "flexibles" see themselves as such becuase they had say 1-2 incidents that wouldn't be considered 100% hetero- or homosexual. Ranging from having a "attraction" (that was fleeting, if it could be considered an "attraction" to begin with. I think, by the terms that asexuals (?) use, it would be "aesthetic attraction"), kissed or dated the opposite/same sex without actual attraction or just a "smudge" of it, had one fantasy but wouldn't dare actually go out given the chance, etc.

Basically, think of it this way: they don't consider themselves gay or straight and call themselves "flexible" becuase they wouldn't be considered "goldstars" gays (or straight). I just call them it becuase that's what they want to be called and it's not gonna kill me. The label is hurting no one, and basically differentiates them from straights/gays who never touched or thought about the opposite/same sex, but also bisexuals who had actual attraction of both sexes.

Also, now that I think about it... OP never stated if his friend was actually attracted to this transman. For all we know, he could've been pressured into it to seem "woke."

Edit: words

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

Oh. Sounds like you are talking about people who just tried it and realized they didn't like it, but maybe are in denial about being straight and/or want to acknowledge their past experiences?

and basically differentiates them from straights/gays who never touched or thought about the opposite/same sex, but also bisexuals who had actual attraction of both sexes.

I think most people use the words "homoflexible/heteroflexible" in a very different way than you, then. Usually I hear it applied to people who are like a 5.5 or a 1.5 (so to speak) on the Kinsey scale, i.e. bisexuals at the extreme of either end, who are attracted to both sexes but one of their directions of attraction just very rarely happens. (I don't really have an opinion on how those terms should be used, I'm just observing.)

Also, now that I think about it... OP never stated if his friend was actually attracted to this transman. For all we know, he could've been pressured into it to seem "woke."

Yeah, that's true.

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

Oh. Sounds like you are talking about people who just tried it and realized they didn't like it, but maybe are in denial about being straight and/or want to acknowledge their past experiences

Yeah, I seen most of them like that. With only a few being so keen on the "attraction" part. I wonder if these people are also apart of the group of straights who want to be apart of LGB (not sure about homoflexible).

I think most people use the words "homoflexible/heteroflexible" in a very different way than you, then. Usually I hear it applied to people who are like a 5.5 or a 1.5 (so to speak) on the Kinsey scale, i.e. bisexuals at the extreme of either end, who are attracted to both sexes but one of their directions of attraction just very rarely happens. (I don't really have an opinion on how those terms should be used, I'm just observing.)

I've seen and used it in both ways. It's just that when I see the people who do use it, it's less of those who would be 5.5 or 1.5. Like, while I don't want bisexuality to be seen as 50/50 but I just find it odd to classify "bisexual but rarely rarely happens" as bisexual. I find that most of these people who are like that just have a "attraction" that goes in and out quick. Similar to how some lesbians/gay men (or straights) think they might be "attracted" to the opposite but that super disappears.

Yeah, that's true.

Yeah, I'm just starting to find it annoying that people will automatically go to "bisexual" when trans people are involved when there could be multiple other reasons.

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

I find that most of these people who are like that just have a "attraction" that goes in and out quick. Similar to how some lesbians/gay men (or straights) think they might be "attracted" to the opposite but that super disappears.

Oh, gotcha. Like a sort of fleeting "oh I recognize that that person is attractive enough that I notice that they are, but I'm not actually into them".

Yeah, I'm just starting to find it annoying that people will automatically go to "bisexual" when trans people are involved when there could be multiple other reasons.

Totally agree. I try to call it out when I see it. It is just not grounded in reality. There used to be a couple asshole users who would really go off on bisexuals a few months ago, but I actually haven't seen them do it recently, so maybe they are being censored now.

[–]jiljol 20 insightful - 2 fun20 insightful - 1 fun21 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

"Homoflexible" lol what is this, the mid 00s? Give me a break, there is nothing "homo" about being attracted to the opposite sex. This is bisexuality/"Kinsey 5-4", plain and simple. It's homophobic BS to imply that homosexuality can be flexible.

[–]BiHorror 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

It's not considered homophobic (nor biphobia), it's simply just someone who normally dates the same sex but finds opposite sex attraction happening at rare times. That's why it's not called homosexuality, it's called homoflexibility. Same goes for being heteroflexible. They're the 1-5s on the Kinsey Scale. They have their own label, nothing wrong with that as it can be used accurately self describe, and bisexuals have their own. I wouldn't force them to call themselves or see them as bisexual when they barely show attraction to the opposite/same sex. Don't like it? That's personal.

Edit: words

[–]lostinreverieMy ovaries are transphobic 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I wouldn't force them to call themselves or see them as bisexual

You say that as though it’s a bad thing to be bisexual. If someone is capable of being attracted to both sexes, even if only slightly, they’re bisexual. That’s not positive or negative; it’s just a fact. Anyone who truly wants to avoid the bisexual label is free to do so, but it won’t change their sexuality.

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

You say that as though it’s a bad thing to be bisexual

I'm not but I'm not gonna consider someone who gets hetero/homo attraction once in a while "bisexual." That's why I'm okay with them having their own label for times where they do get "flexible." They're not bisexual. Just as chasers (GAMPs) aren't gay/bi but form of heterosexuality with a fetish.

Edit: words

[–]lovelyspearmintLesbeing a lesbian 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I'm sure you've heard of FEBFems, right? Even though they're exclusively dating women, they're still attracted to men. There's no such thing as homo/heteroflexible. It's just a different flavour of bisexuality.

[–]BiHorror 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I've heard of them. The thing is, as you said, despite them only dating women, they're still genuinely attracted to men. It's not once in a while like flexibles do. Just as I stated to lostinreverie, it's like considering GAMPs gay or bisexual. They're not. They're heterosexuals with a fetish. So either the friend of OPs is flexible or just the weird opposite version of typical GAMPs.

[–]lovelyspearmintLesbeing a lesbian 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

You do realise people aren't attracted to everyone of the opposite sex/same sex, just attracted to those that attract them. OP's friend is still bisexual, but they clearly have a type, or certain traits attract them, which constitutes the 'sometimes attracted' part. I don't know why this is a hill you insist on dying on. There's three sexualities, homo, hetero and bi, and anything that isn't strictly homosexual or heterosexual is bi. Case closed.

[–]BiHorror 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The thing is, OP never said if his friend was actually attracted to this transman. For all we know, he could've pushed himself into it to not seem transphobic.

Also, depending on how you see it. There's four sexualities. Homo-, bi-, hetero-, and asexuality.

I'm insistence on this because I'm getting tired of everyone always hurling fucking transpeople to bisexuals. Case closed.

Edit: words

[–]lovelyspearmintLesbeing a lesbian 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I never said that bisexuals are all attracted to transpeople, nor that they have to have the burden of dating transpeople despite the sex dissonance. I just said that if someone is attracted to both sexes, then they're bi. Homo/hetero flexibility only applies to bisexuality (as they like both sexes to some extent), and even though that has its limits too.

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

I never said you specifically, but I noticed a lot of people on here always assume someone to be bisexual when some fool (ex: straight woman dating transwomen who call themselves "lesbians," people on here call them "bisexual," despite the woman only dating males) decides to date transpeople.

Personally, I do not see it that way. Hetero/homoflexibility, if true, is a subset of hetero/homosexuality. Why? Because for two reasons (one that i explained to reluctent commenter which is 1): 1. majority of these people call themselves "flexible" because they've had a fantasy, a fleeting "attraction," or may have had dated or kissed the opposite/same sex without attraction. But due to these things, they wouldn't be considered a "goldstar" gay or straight person. 2. While some (and when I say some, I mean the minority) may have an "attraction," it's more incidental/slightly. I wouldn't consider these incidental/slightly as "bisexual," as these said "atttactions" go in and out. Not in a FEB or FEM way, but a... Basically think they might be attracted but they're not. If that makes sense. These people would've been the perfect example of "it's a phrase" stereotype. That's why I don't want them to be considered bisexuals .

Edit: words

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

It's not considered homophobic (nor biphobia), it's simply just someone who normally dates the same sex but finds opposite sex attraction happening at rare times.

Which is, wait for it: bisexuality. Preferring one sex over the other doesn't make you "homo-"anything. It just makes you bisexual.

They're the 1-5s on the Kinsey Scale

Kinsey 2-5 (I'll assume you made a typo) is literally where bisexuality falls. What are you even trying to say?

They have their own label

Oh, come the fuck on. Why are you pretending like this terminology is in widespread use? The only instances where you might find "homoflexible" and "heteroflexible" are fringe academic pieces or SJW articles from the 00s. This is not standard language by any measure.

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

wait for it: bisexuality. Preferring one sex over the other doesn't make you "homo-"anything. It just makes you bisexual

The thing is these people aren't bisexual. Majority of them considered themselves "flexible" not becuase of sexual attraction (only some which is what I called the 1 and 5s) but becuase they may have had, for example, that one fantasy with the opposite/same sex. They consider themselves gay/straight but not 100%. They had some fleeting "attraction" which was only for a moment, then vanished, but since they still had it, they wouldn't consider themselves 100%. There's other reasons too but I'm not gonna get into all of them. But another example would be gay/straight who aren't sexually attracted but would get into opposite/same sex relationship.

2-5 (I'll assume you made a typo) is literally where bisexuality falls. What are you even trying to say?

Nope, I wrote it correctly. On the Kinsey Scale they would be 1-5 (mostly heterosexual/homosexual, only slightly or incidentally homo/hetero).

Again, I'm not gonna force them to use a label they don't want. Also, no. I've not seen them used in SJW articles, I've started to seen them outside of it. Calm down, I get you expect this sub to be some hivemind but it's not. People got their own opinions on stuff. The label is not hurting anyone.