love how they didn’t age at all, just the glasses

“Dang”

The biggest joke are people who care only about genitalia. As long as it is slick and there is some liquid it doesn’t matter all that much what the other party has

Imagine being some kind of radical feminist lesbian sperging for hours about how men treat us as body parts and then see only vaginas and dicks. The irony

Are you having sex with a cut of meat or a person.

Hence why bisexuality and pansexuality will always reign supreme over all the squabbles. Might have to make a tier list

oki, i just wrote a response but then realised i misunderstood you. sorry about that

you are right for the situation i described in my comment. you can combine being a lesbian with a lot of other things, to make it a viable contraception.

i would argue tho, that not liking dick is the entire reason one wouldnt get pregnant in your situation. the lesbian part doesnt matter. meanwhile both a transphobe and a lesbian can get pregnant on their own but a transphobic lesbian can not.

deleted by creator

Sure, but a cis man could also be dating a trans woman in any of these scenarios, and no one would say “heterosexuality” was what was preventing him from becoming a dad.

When people joke about lesbianism = no pregnancy, it’s because they’re assuming all lesbian relationships are between the same kinds of bodies having the same kind of sex.

Trans people being for pansexuals is a common trope in queer pandering media. They specifically pair trans people with pansexuals, so they can be inclusive, but in the specific way that doesn’t ask their mostly cis and straight audience to question their own sexuality, because that might make them uncomfortable.

Its not a reflection of reality. Hot women are hot, hot men are hot, regardless of how they got there.

Edit: I disagree with the ban. It isn’t transphobic to be misinformed. They even phrased it as a question, and didn’t argue their position any further. They sounded genuinely confused about the terms, and every other reply seemed to have drawn the same conclusion.

Pansexual people aren’t pan because they also like trans people, although in the past some people misused the term that way, e.g, “I’m not bi because I’m into trans people, I’m pan.” That is harmful because obviously trans women are women and trans men are men so if you are bi, you like women and men, that already includes trans people.

For sure there is nothing wrong with having sexual preferences. If someone prefers their men without a vagina nbd. But pansexual just means you’re open to being into anyone regardless of gender. I’m pan because I’m into women, men, neither, other… Any expression of gender.

You can be lesbian and not like penis, but being lesbian does not imply that. A lesbian cis woman might be with a trans woman and then that’s not a very effective birth control anymore, but she’s still lesbian.

I’m a lesbian, I’m not changing my label to pan because I’ve dated trans women. Most people who feel attraction feel it before even learning what genitals the other person was born with.

ofc its not a phobia to have preferences. my critique is towards excluding people from certain labels of gender based attraction, for things other than their gender. especially if those people are systemically opressed for their gender.

crazy example now, but sometimes that helps seeing things in a new light:

if i say that im not into old people because i am a lesbian, then thats kinda messed up, because it implies that old women are not women.

does that help?

and ofc, because we live in a cis-normative society, many people dont often think about how women can also have dicks. forgetting about that isnt necessairily transphobic but might also just be a cis-normative oopsy.

Rigid definitions don’t really fully work for non rigid concepts. Sexual attraction, gender, expression and identity all work differently based on the individual. I know definitions are helpful and help us categorize and understand things as humans but human sexuality and gender might be the most complex social behaviours in the entire animal kingdom.

I for instance identify as bisexual even though I am a trans woman who almost exclusively dates other trans women. I just kinda find some guys cute enough but I very rarely act on it.

I could be described as a lesbian a bisexual a pansexual or even just gay.

I also choose to identify as a bisexual because I don’t really see the point of separating trans people in a separate category aside from that. It almost feels like the term “pansexual” was made for some people to say “I like girls and boys but not those ones id like to other specifically for some reason” (also mini rant there’s no word for specific trans attraction but there is one to umbrella them in with everyone and god damn is it fucking annoying the closest thing we have is “trans attracted or T4T” and nobody really knows this shit outside the trans community)

But another trans girl who exclusively dates trans girls might heavily identify as a pansexual lesbian because it just speaks to her more and she doesn’t share the same views on it as I do.

Tl:Dr it’s vibes based man

oki, i just wrote a response but then realised i misunderstood you. sorry about that

you are right, that also works

my intention was to direct attention to how the image implies cis-normativity/transphobia. altho i do see how the image did that by simplifying reality for comical effect and while i dont think i played into similarly opressive structures, i did simply reality myself in my comment.

deleted by creator

id say its disrespectful to pretend lesbian, the label that commonly means woman/non-man lovin women/non-men to mean not being into dicks.

if you are not into dicks, then just say that, instead of pretending lesbianism excludes people with dicks.

thats not what i meant. the message was supposed to be “dont equate being a lesbian with disliking dick”. i apologise if i failed at bringing that across. maybe next time i should be more blunt from the start