Oh I don't disagree that there needs to be a mental attraction or compatibility.  I think what I, and maybe a few others, are railing against is the claim that physical looks are irrelevant.  "The first bite is with the eye" and all that.

I certainly could not sustain, or even start, a romantic relationship with a dead-eyed simpleton or a wet, clingy character.  I like feisty, strong willed, intelligent, independent partners.

It's essential really because the clingy, hip-monster types couldn't cope with entertaining themselves because of the stuff I get sucked into for hours on end sometimes and the dullards would have absolutely nothing in common with me...I'd be better off with a labrador - at least we could play fetch!

Quote from: finewine on August 06, 2009, 01:45:01 AM
Oh...I'd be better off with a labrador - at least we could play fetch!

So that's why you are bouncing! Driving the labrador nuts

I hate it when peeps resurrect topics that were started years ago.  Most of what we said then isn't current anymore. 

So scratch what I said 2 years ago.

Quote from: Jeannette on September 15, 2007, 09:14:22 PM
I'm not sure.  Would this transperson feel at ease dating a transsexual woman, particularly if she's pre-operative? There are many things to consider and while I may date someone who is a FTM (I'm heterosexual)  his feelings need to be addressed as well.

I'm post-op now in a loving relationship with a cis man.  I wouldn't date a pre-op trans man.  Nothing personal just the way I feel.  Whilst personality is important in any relationship, I also like falling for a bloke that's handsome.  I don't like arrogant, know-it-all male chauvinist pigs no matter how handsome or intelligent they are.

Quote from: Jeannette on August 06, 2009, 12:15:36 PM
I hate it when peeps resurrect topics that were started years ago.  Most of what we said then isn't current anymore. 

So scratch what I said 2 years ago.

I'm post-op now in a loving relationship with a cis man.  I wouldn't date a pre-op trans man.  Nothing personal just the way I feel.  Whilst personality is important in any relationship, I also like falling for a bloke that's handsome.  I don't like arrogant, know-it-all male chauvinist pigs no matter how handsome or intelligent they are.

sorry i guess i am the 'peep'. however being new;y transitioning and new to the forum i had not looked at the date line. also since i am new to the cahnges going on inside me that i need tp gather as much info as possible in a very short time. frame. at 59 i dont have that much longer to go so i am trying to change as fast as possible. "i've still got some love to give"

yes I could..
Myles

Quote from: finewine on August 04, 2009, 04:28:27 PM
So you believe you can be romantically in love with a brain in a jar (which, by extension, defines romance for you as purely intellectual in scope)?

If this is incorrect, how does it differ from your quoted statement?

This isn't an attack on your point of view, I'm genuinely interested because I clearly work very differently from you, dear boy

I could become romantically in love with a "person lacking a physical body" but.. A guy's got needs.. I would probably end up with a physical lover of some sort on the side as well... but then..

I don't understand how people can "only love one person at a time" either... so....

Quote from: Miniar on August 07, 2009, 08:50:06 AM
I don't understand how people can "only love one person at a time" either... so....

Not sure I'm understanding this. Do you mean that it's not possible for you to love only one person at a time even if one person is all you have at the moment, or are you saying that you cannot LIMIT yourself to loving one person at a time? Or something else entirely?

I still consider myself polyamorous even though I've been in a monogamous relationship for years. I chose to be monogamous with this person, and for some reason I never wanted to be with anyone else during this time. But I'm still poly.

Well, technically, I have loved people online - the equivalent of a "brain in a jar".  There is something terrible about never being able to feel physical closeness, however; and something I doubt I'd be able to live with for the entirety of my life.  But if the love were strong enough... I'd probably live my whole miserable existence in daydreams of what could be.  I'm ridiculous like that.

On the main subject... I am pansexual.  Individuals should have their own beauty, their own appeal, and I shouldn't discriminate in any way.  I like the idea of a relationship with a trans person, regardless of whether they be pre or post surgery or hormones, because of the psychological position it would put us in; the sort of understanding, I suppose.  Bodies are the means by which we do something, but not the reason we do it.  But that is my opinion.

I do not care in the slightest what is in someone's pants. While I prefer pole to hole (lol), I'm down with whatever. My wife was pre-op mtf, and I was fine with that. I care a lot more about who the person is than what they have; however, that's not to say I don't care about physical appearance. It's all a package deal.

SD

Quote from: Arch on August 07, 2009, 10:58:40 AM
Not sure I'm understanding this. Do you mean that it's not possible for you to love only one person at a time even if one person is all you have at the moment, or are you saying that you cannot LIMIT yourself to loving one person at a time? Or something else entirely?

I don't understand how people presume to control their emotional attraction to another person in such a way that makes it impossible for them to fall in love with more than one person at a time.
(is that any clearer?)

Quote from: Miniar on August 07, 2009, 07:10:29 PM
I don't understand how people presume to control their emotional attraction to another person in such a way that makes it impossible for them to fall in love with more than one person at a time.
(is that any clearer?)

Oh, yes, much.

I myself have no problems with being involved with more than one person, but I don't necessarily feel deprived if I'm only with one. And I have to admit that while I was physically monogamous with my now-ex-partner, I was not mentally so. I was male in my mind and had sex with men in my mind. I had my straight male real-life partner and two imaginary gay partners. But I didn't think of them as imaginary. They were real people to me.

I think I'm going off topic...

---

Post Merge: August 07, 2009, 07:28:17 PM

---

Quote from: Adrian on August 07, 2009, 04:45:15 PM
Individuals should have their own beauty, their own appeal, and I shouldn't discriminate in any way. 

I feel this way, too, but not sexually.

All kidding aside, I think it's interesting that so many people (and I'm NOT talking about anyone on these boards) think that homosexuality (and by extension, I suppose, any same-sex attraction) is a choice. It never was for me. I tried SO HARD to be bisexual. Sometimes people laugh when I say it, but it's true. No amount of wishing changed my inner self on that score.

I think it's unfortunate that I'm gay and phallocentric. Narrows down my options considerably. I can't be with women, even transwomen. I can't be with transmen (well, maybe with a guy who's had a fantastic phalloplasty, but I don't know).

Most (okay, virtually all) gay men have no interest in a dickless wonder. Straight men, of course, will have no interest in me because I'm male. All that is left is a few bi guys, and a lot of them could have problems with my anatomy, not to mention that we would have to be mentally compatible in the first place.

So I guess it kind of bothers me when people talk about "not discriminating" or "being open" to love/sex with a person of any gender, including cis and trans of all persuasions. Phrased that way, attraction sort of sounds like a choice. Some of us just aren't built that way, and no amount of trying is going to change that. I'm not trying to be difficult, and I'm NOT trying to pick on Adrian. And I think it's great that so many people here identify themselves as pan and omni. It's just that I'm wired the way I'm wired, but sometimes I wish I weren't.

I don't look at love and sex as equal opportunity pursuits. I just like what I like. I like smart guys. I like geeks and nerds. I like men with a sense of humor that matches mine. I don't like men who are too stereotypically masculine (too stereotypical from my perspective, that is).

Obviously, I discriminate when it comes to the mental attributes; I do the same when it comes to physical attributes--when it comes to gender, when it comes to genitals and secondary sex characteristics, when it comes to body types.

I'm curious. Did any of you pan/omni folks choose to be that way? Did any of you have to consciously reconcile trans people with pre-op genitals, or do you just take people as they come?

Interesting - phallocentric.  As a basically gay man in the making, such a thing is very painful for me to hear about.  Because I know no one is going to want a "dickless" wonder.  I don't want to be a dickless wonder for other reasons, so I am doing what I have to do.

I never tried to be anything other than what I am.  I sometimes feel pansexual, but I'm not really sure if I'm attracted to women.  I know I feel attraction to men, and always have.  I always saw myself as a gay man.  But I've been with women - not sexually, but emotionally.  It felt some level of right, so long as I played the part of "the man".  I guess I tried not to be a lesbian, but that's all I tried to do - I just hated to be seen as more female.

Quote from: Adrian on August 07, 2009, 10:19:37 PM
Interesting - phallocentric.  As a basically gay man in the making, such a thing is very painful for me to hear about.  Because I know no one is going to want a "dickless" wonder.  I don't want to be a dickless wonder for other reasons, so I am doing what I have to do.

I think it's not just the absence of a penis that will doom me--it's also the presence of the female genitals.

I decided that I didn't wanted genital surgery unless it could give me the real thing in one procedure, without a large risk of complications or revisions. I don't want meta, and I don't think meta would help me much in the gay world. But I have to admit...at least with meta, I could get a vaginectomy and balls.

I have very mixed feelings about my front hole, but I don't want to trade it in for anything less than a fully functional and cosmetically pleasing penis. So I'm staying put. And I can't afford meta anyway.

I wish I could poll all the single gay and bi guys in my county and ask them the same questions that Nero posed in the OP. That would give me a place to start. Hey, Nero, how do you feel about becoming a door to door pollster?

HGH topic split
go here for HGH conversation : https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,63398.0.html

Quote from: Nero on August 08, 2009, 12:48:06 AM
HGH topic split
go here for HGH conversation : https://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,63398.0.html

Thanks, Nero. But I didn't know there was an HGH #1. I didn't find it when I searched for it a little while back.