you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

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

That is not the definition you have used in similar context as you think a man with GAMP can he heterosexual

I'll respond, because another poster, /u/Vulvamort, had the same question, that may not have been sufficiently answered.

I said that a paraphilia of gyneandromorphophilia can coexist alongside of a desire for age appropriate opposite sex partners strictly on the basis of that sex and for the normal sex acts--heterosexuality. This is an empirical fact, not a hypothetical. Gyneandromorphophilia only appears to exist in men. That does not mean that gyneandromorphs are necessarily excluded from women's pool of sexual partners. Gyneandromorpophilia refers to a particular sexual motivation, not a behavior. (Such as if you paid me 1 million dollars to have sex with a gyneandromorph, I would collect that million dollars.) When I said they can be heterosexual, I was indicating that they may not be 100% GAMP, and they usually are not. Typically they like both women and trans women (GAMs,) in varying proportions. People only with the paraphilia of GAMP appear to exist, and they often appear to have been at one point having no interest in GAMs, just normal women. Once this paraphilically vulnerable person discovers the existence of "women" with penises, it is possible for them to loose their interest in normal women in exclusive exchange for their new-found interest in gyneandromorphs.

Now, I could see how my statement that a man who likes highly feminized men--that they can be heterosexual--is at face value an absurd thing, but the heterosexuality only refers to one portion of their overall sexual makeup, the other part being GAMP. Heterosexual is not the complete package.

Consequent to that, the way I'm using the word heterosexual isn't to say that if a man is labeled heterosexual, that they can never be interested in men, but may only have an interest in men on the basis of a paraphilia. If a man has an interest in men the same way that a gay man does, then heterosexuality is off the table. Incidentally, GAMPs are not interested in men men.

I do not treat paraphilias as qualifiers to heterosexuality, in the way that a man may have a preference for blondes. If I did, then my insistence that a man who likes feminized men is somehow heterosexual would then be a contradiction. This is due to my understanding of the phenomena, which I share with many sex researchers, that paraphilic interests are as unique and alive as standalone things as heterosexuality is. GAMP is probably the most difficult one to talk about, because of its similarity to the het/homo/bisexualities. If we were instead talking about something such as erotic asphyxiation, it would be easier, and we would probably readily agree that waterboarding a person for sexual gratification isn't anything like the way that the overwhelming majority get theirs, and needs a different classification. Likewise, if a person only wanted to have sex with women and waterboard men, then I assume that most people would agree that "bisexual" is an inappropriate label, or at least highly questionable, for our Geneva-convention-violating agent. Because I don't treat paraphilias as qualifiers, they cannot be included in the definition of het/homo/bi, because these three are about sex, not waterboarding.

It's a personal policy that if I concede a point to another person, or make a conceptual shift in a discussion, that I'll say as much. I don't want to be the smartest person in the room, because then I'm not learning anything.

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

Gyneandromorphophilia only appears to exist in men.

I’ve talked to too many paraphilic women to buy Blanchard’s theory that paraphilic women would be super rare. I've also talked women who seem very GAMP.

heterosexuality only refers to one portion of their overall sexual makeup

If removing all sexual attractions to female people wouldn’t make a man asexual then said man isn’t hetersexual.

Heterosexual is not the complete package.

Hetersexual isn’t the complete package regarding sexuality in general as there are also other properties than the sex property that would further reduce the pool of people the person would consider potential sexual partner. Hetersexual is the complete package regarding regarding sex orientation though as the job of a sexual orientation is to give a complete list of the sexes the person might be interested in having sex with.

which I share with many sex researchers

Sex reaseachers are interested in the etiology of things, and the etiology and the orientation are not the same thing. But even in etiology there would be a difference between the two groups as something would have caused these men to develop in different ways, making one group GAMP and the other heterosexual.

If we were instead talking about something such as erotic asphyxiation, it would be easier, and we would probably readily agree that waterboarding a person for sexual gratification isn't anything like the way that the overwhelming majority get theirs, and needs a different classification.

I still consider the sex of the person they want to be waterboarded by of importance in sexual orientation taxanomy. A person who only wants normophilic sex with females and also only want to be waterboarded by female people still show a female sex specificity. And if the person doesn’t care who they get waterboarded by for sexual gratification then that person lacks the monosexual property of always caring about the sex of the person doing sexual stuff to them. The sex of the actor can only be ignored if the person doing the waterboarding isn’t involved at all in the process and therefore can’t turn the monsexual person off with their presence, maybe is in another room, and only there to push the button as the person doesn’t have a device to push the button themselves.

A person who is sexually turned off by people of the wrong sex only in the context of sexual encounters that are normophilic isn’t someone I consider monsoexual at all. They show a sex flexibility that monosexual people lack.

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

I’ve talked to too many paraphilic women to buy Blanchard’s theory that paraphilic women would be super rare.

I also refute the idea that paraphilias are rare to nonexistent in women.

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

I also refute the idea that paraphilias are rare to nonexistent in women.

? EDIT: Read it wrong, I see now.

Either way, even the button thing is bit of a stretch. I don't know if you have the natural instinct against incest or not, but if you do, monosexuality is like that regarding the wrong sex. If you would feel icky about involving a family member in the paraphilia, then a monosexual person would feel the same way about involving someone of the wrong sex.