I now pronounce you, a hot mess

[Silhouette]

Now, let's see...we were talking about whose business it is about how LGBTs tick sexually..

True St. Mike. An average HIV/AIDS patient becomes quickly indigent. Thereafter they cost taxpayers around $500,000 each in heroic-care before they die their untimely deaths. And the overuse of antibiotics artificially-propping up a failing immune system for even the most basic bacteria is creating dangerous superbugs that will infect the general population that may not be prepared to deal with them.

I think its time for Sillyhouette Freud to quit sniffing crotches and mind your own business. It's apparent you have issues of your own.

What's apparent is that each time I bring up a system of denial in the LGBT cult, I get a response exactly like yours. They come in different variations but the underlying end-request is the same "don't look under the rug at what makes LGBTs tick. Just shut up, move along and give us our way".

But I won't do that. Lesbians who are attracted to all things male in their lesbian partners are harboring closeted heterosexual fantasies. And often they act on them. This thread's subject is proof of that.

It's important that society on the brink of normalizing your very narrow set of deviant sex behaviors, at the very least understands exactly what those behaviors are about, where they come from and where they're heading.

Normalizing and fixating a label for the puposes of legal leverage on a group that appears self-unaware and shifting is a dangerous proposition. If the cult itself isn't even aware of how it ticks and disallows anyone else from exploring how they tick, then what the hell are we doing giving them special legal status and permission to act as "mother and father" to children with our blessings in marriage?

That's because other peoples sex lives are really none of your business. As long as they are consenting adults, to each his/her own.

They become my business when they try to dominate the 1st Amendment and co-opt erstwhile mother/father marriages for children. When they try to claim 14th Amendment rights, then their behaviors become everyone's business. And everyone wants to know why lipstick lesbians are attracted to masculine traits in their partners?

The question isn't going away and we can't give you special static rights until you nail down the shifting-specifics on what exactly "LGBT" is?

 

[Silhouette]

So what exactly do you call a lipstick lesbian who is attracted to all things masculine in her sexual partner?

Answer: a normal hetero woman who is confused and closeted.

 

[EverCurious]

Well it's a good thing you straight anti-gay folks know exactly what "makes LGBT's tick," as well as what they are feeling and thinking in their relationships and bedrooms. *rolls eyes*

Lesbians are women who are emotionally and sexually attracted to other women. That isn't just about physical pleasure, which is widely varied across ALL sexual orientations. One's desire for penetration does not define one's sexual orientation in any way, the analysis given in here is almost as stupid as saying that all women who like anal are "closet gay men." Further, a lesbian's "attraction" to a butch or fem, is no different than someone preferring smart to funny, brunettes to blondes, athletic to plump; none of which is the be all and end all of the physical pleasure and sexual satisfaction aspect of a relationship, much less one's ultimate sexual orientation.

Ya'll have exactly zero clue what happens in LGBT bedrooms so stop trying to act like you do. Not all lesbian's use dildos, not all heterosexuals engage in penetration, not all gays have anal sex, and not all LGBT relationships even involve sex. Your stereotypes are skewed because most LGBT's, like most heterosexuals, don't care to share the private details of what they're doing in bed; so what you hear about is from those types who tend to want attention, and both LGBT's and heterosexuals who want attention are prone to eliciting for shock value - not only in what they "put out there" to share, but also in what they engage in. Most LGBT relationships are not centered entirely around sex; just like most heterosexual relationships, sex is merely one component of their partnership with each other. To define someone's relationship entirely by their sexual desires, is both immature and dishonest.


Personally, I prefer /actual/ psychology to religiously biased psychobabble:

From The American Psychological Association:

"Sexual orientation refers to an enduring pattern of emotional, romantic and/or sexual attractions to men, women or both sexes. Sexual orientation also refers to a person's sense of identity based on those attractions, related behaviors and membership in a community of others who share those attractions. Research over several decades has demonstrated that sexual orientation ranges along a continuum, from exclusive attraction to the other sex to exclusive attraction to the same sex. However, sexual orientation is usually discussed in terms of three categories: heterosexual (having emotional, romantic or sexual attractions to members of the other sex), gay/lesbian (having emotional, romantic or sexual attractions to members of one's own sex) and bisexual (having emotional, romantic or sexual attractions to both men and women). This range of behaviors and attractions has been described in various cultures and nations throughout the world. Many cultures use identity labels to describe people who express these attractions. In the United States the most frequent labels are lesbians (women attracted to women), gay men (men attracted to men), and bisexual people (men or women attracted to both sexes). However, some people may use different labels or none at all.

Sexual orientation is distinct from other components of sex and gender, including biological sex (the anatomical, physiological and genetic characteristics associated with being male or female), gender identity (the psychological sense of being male or female)* and social gender role (the cultural norms that define feminine and masculine behavior).

Sexual orientation is commonly discussed as if it were solely a characteristic of an individual, like biological sex, gender identity or age. This perspective is incomplete because sexual orientation is defined in terms of relationships with others. People express their sexual orientation through behaviors with others, including such simple actions as holding hands or kissing. Thus, sexual orientation is closely tied to the intimate personal relationships that meet deeply felt needs for love, attachment and intimacy. In addition to sexual behaviors, these bonds include nonsexual physical affection between partners, shared goals and values, mutual support, and ongoing commitment. Therefore, sexual orientation is not merely a personal characteristic within an individual. Rather, one's sexual orientation defines the group of people in which one is likely to find the satisfying and fulfilling romantic relationships that are an essential component of personal identity for many people."

And this:

"No, lesbian, gay and bisexual orientations are not disorders. Research has found no inherent association between any of these sexual orientations and psychopathology. Both heterosexual behavior and homosexual behavior are normal aspects of human sexuality. Both have been documented in many different cultures and historical eras. Despite the persistence of stereotypes that portray lesbian, gay and bisexual people as disturbed, several decades of research and clinical experience have led all mainstream medical and mental health organizations in this country to conclude that these orientations represent normal forms of human experience. Lesbian, gay and bisexual relationships are normal forms of human bonding. Therefore, these mainstream organizations long ago abandoned classifications of homosexuality as a mental disorder."

Full report here ~ http://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/orientation.pdf

And for those who would argue the APA's merits:

"The American Psychological Association was founded in 1892 with 31 members and grew quickly after World War II. Today, APA has nearly 122,500 members and 54 divisions in subfields of psychology. We aspire to excel as a valuable, effective and influential organization advancing psychology as a science.

APA members are doctoral-level psychologists who work in myriad settings, including academic research, private psychology practice, K-12 schools, hospitals, the armed forces, court systems, prisons, business and industry and the VA. A doctoral-level psychologist holds a PhD, PsyD or EdD in psychology from a regionally accredited institution. Individuals who hold a doctorate in a related field from a regionally accredited institution may also join APA as members.

APA affiliate and associate members include psychology students, teachers of psychology and other mental health professionals. They also include psychologists who live outside of the United States and Canada."

And here's a long blurb about the "LGBT and child molestation" lie ~ Facts About Homosexuality and Child Molestation



Also, just as a "The More You Know!" fact, using "Freud" to describe anything I've read in this thread about LGBT thus far is a huge mistake... Freud actually believed that everyone was innately bisexual and they became heterosexual or homosexual as a result of their experiences with parents and others. Freud was also an LGBT supporter; (from a letter Freud wrote in 1935):

"Homosexuality is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation, it cannot be classified as an illness; we consider it to be a variation of the sexual function produced by a certain arrest of sexual development. Many highly respectable individuals of ancient and modern times have been homosexuals, several of the greatest men among them (Plato, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, etc.). It is a great injustice to persecute homosexuality as a crime, and cruelty too....

"If [your son] is unhappy, neurotic, torn by conflicts, inhibited in his social life, analysis may bring him harmony, peace of mind, full efficiency whether he remains a homosexual or gets changed...."

 

[Silhouette]

1. Lesbians are women who are emotionally and sexually attracted to other women. That isn't just about physical pleasure, which is widely varied across ALL sexual orientations. 2. One's desire for penetration does not define one's sexual orientation in any way, the analysis given in here is almost as stupid as saying that all women who like anal are "closet gay men." 3. Further, a lesbian's "attraction" to a butch or fem, is no different than someone preferring smart to funny, brunettes to blondes, athletic to plump; none of which is the be all and end all of the physical pleasure and sexual satisfaction aspect of a relationship, much less one's ultimate sexual orientation....

1. Then why is there such a high rate of domestic abuse in lesbian relationships? All the trappings of a man without the man still results in the same emotional situation as being with a man. So the lipsticks often defect. At least a real man has the actual physical strength to bring home the bacon.

2. It's not JUST the desire for physical penetration. It's also the lipstick's desire for a lowered voice, chunkier more masculine physique, a masculine walk and just all around masculine presence in her partner's body. If a man wanted his wife to dress, talk, walk and act like a man, even in bed, your cult would IMMEDIATELY label him as a closeted gay man. Don't deny this lest you destroy your credibility here.

3. See number 2.

 

[EverCurious]

1. uhm relevance? Not sure what domestic violence rates have to do with lesbian women who are emotionally and sexually attracted to other women, but let’s roll with your implied point that LGBT’s are more prone to domestic violence as best we can and see what comes up…

Most of the domestic violence studies have been done on the general public, not specifically LGBT relationships, but I was able to find a few LGBT specific ones. The following seems to be the most /national/ in scope out of all the studies as it included multiple studies from specific locals in its conclusive analysis, to wit:

"Perhaps surprisingly, statistics have shown that lesbian people experience domestic violence at a very similar rate to that of heterosexual women (Waldner-Haygrud, 1997; AVP, 1992). It has been estimated that between 17-45% of lesbians have been the victim of at least one act of violence perpetrated by a female partner (Burke et al, 1999; Lie et al, 1991), and that 30% of lesbians have reported sexual assault / rape by another woman (Renzetti, 1992)." ~ http://www.pandys.org/articles/lesbiandomesticviolence.html

I also discovered two studies on LGBT domestic violence studies (yep… that happened), which basically screw up the whole works by inferring that we shouldn’t try to combine, or even perhaps use, these various studies because they’re not always comparable.

The first reviewed 17 empirical studies done between 1995 and 2006 and concluded that “Previous researchers studying the issue [of SSIPV] have acknowledged significant limitations within the existing research that reduce its usefulness and generalizability, as will be discussed in the review of the literature section. The purpose of the study described in this article was to conduct a systematic evaluation of recent empirical research examining SSIPV.”

Of those studies cited in the 14-45% of originating lesbians comment, only the Waldner-Haygrud 1997 study was qualified as “adequate” by this review. They gave it a 10 out of 15; dropping their score for a lack of representative procedures, standardized participation conditions, and multiple levels of variables in the study. ~ http://www.musc.edu/vawprevention/lesbianrx/theory.shtml

The second study reviewed 19 studies overall (all prior to 1999) and stated the following conflicting findings. “Comparisons by type of couple showed that 28% of heterosexual couples, 48% of lesbians and 38% of gay male couples reported physical abuse in one study, but the amount of physical force used was low for all groups. In one study, 104 cases of relationship violence were examined. Of these cases of violence, 72% were committed by men and 28% by women. In a study asking about whether a same-sex relationships had suffered from physical abuse, 7% of 706 lesbian couples and 11% of 560 gay men couples indicated physical abuse had occurred. In studies using only lesbian couples, psychological abuse was reported as occurring at least one time by 73% to 90% of lesbians. Sexual abuse by a woman partner was reported by 1% of lesbians, but 20% of lesbians indicated having been sexual abused by a male partner. More than 30% of lesbians had been in a same-sex relationship where at least one physical incident occurred. Lesbians, gay men, and heterosexual couples used similar conflict resolution strategies, including (in order of decreasing frequency): arguing, positive tactics (effective communication), withdrawal, and conflict engagement strategies (physical abuse). One study of treatment of lesbian batterers has been done. Average length of treatment was one year, with abusive behaviors decreasing within 4 to 6 weeks of treatment.”

It also notes some serious issues with those studies results, to wit: “Using personal networks to recruit participants may lead to inflated estimates of abuse, e.g., lesbians who have been abused might also be likely to have friends who were abused. Design flaws in many studies also may exaggerate prevalence rates, e.g., when asking lesbians about abuse in previous relationships, some fail to distinguish between same-sex violence and previous violence by a male partner.” (That last part is a major failure in the stats of lesbian abuse rates wouldn’t you agree?)

Unfortunately this review does not give us a rating for the studies it looked at, nor even the names of the studies it reviewed. So it’s impossible to verify the quality of the listed studies as I did with the first review ~ Theory of Violence in Lesbian and Gay Relationships


In any event, let’s move to the only study I’ve been able to verify as even “adequate” via the two study reviews:

The Waldner-Haygrud Study of 1997 - "Participants were recruited at lesbian and gay community events and through personal networks. Surveys were completed by 283 participants, including 118 lesbians and 165 gay men. Most participants were in college or college educated, white, and about 32 years old, on average.”

The conclusion of the study is that, “About 47% of lesbians and 30% of gay men reported being the target of at least one conflict tactic in a same-sex relationship. About 38% of lesbians and 22% of gay men said they had initiated at least one conflict tactic against a lesbian or gay partner. Lesbians (30 to 38%) were more likely to push and be pushed by their partner than gay men (12 to 18%). Lesbians and gay men did not differ in prevalence of other tactics experienced or perpetrated. Pushing was used most often (12 to 38%), followed by threats (12 to 27%), slapping/ punching/striking with an object (13 to 26%), punching (9 to 15%) and using a weapon (none to 2%). The severity of the victimization did not differ for lesbians and gay men." ~ Victimization and Perpetration Rates of Violence in Gay and Lesbian Relationships


So the bottom line is that these studies are all over the place and unreliable. They can’t even agree upon a “middle ground” stat here, 17-45% is a HUGE variance wouldn’t you agree? Not to mention there is absolutely ZERO study on butches being more domestically violent than fems in said lesbian domestic violence studies so it’s not proper to imply that the butches are the abusers…

In the interest of fairness to your inferred point though, let’s go forward with the numbers we’ve been given in the [possibly flawed] studies anyway; an estimated 17-45% LGBT domestic violence rate, and expand things a bit to see if we can find correlations.

Here are the top 10 most and least accepting countries as per a global poll by Pew Research Center which asked; "Should Society Accept Homosexuality?" as compared with the domestic violence rates from a journalism group called ORB (they bought together a bunch of countries domestic violence data) and I threw in the majority religious makeup of the countries as per wiki stats just for GP:

Top 10 most accepting countries

1. Spain 88% acceptance rate, 13% domestic violence rate (71.8% Catholic)
2. Germany 87% acceptance rate, 22% domestic violence rate (62% Christian, 32% No religion)
3. Canada 80% acceptance, 6.4% domestic violence rate (38.7% Catholic, 28.6% Christian)
4. Czech Republic 80% acceptance, 21% domestic violence rate (45.2% no response, 34.2% no religion)
5. Australia 79% acceptance, 25% domestic violence rate (25.3% Roman Catholic, 22.3% No religion, 18.7% Christian)
6. France 77% acceptance, 26% domestic violence rate (44% Catholic, 29% No religion)
7. Britain 76% acceptance, 29% [*U.K. rates] domestic violence rate (50.6% No religion, 41.7% Christian [*U.K. rates, excluding Ireland])
8. Italy 74% acceptance, 19% domestic violence rate (83.3% Christian)
9. Argentina 74% acceptance, no data on domestic violence rates (71% Catholic)
10. Philippines 73% acceptance, 17.9% domestic violence rate (80% Roman Catholic)

-- US 60% acceptance, 35.6% domestic violence rate (76% Christian) --

Top 10 least accepting countries
1. Nigeria 1% acceptance rate, 18.3% domestic violence rate (50.8% Christian, 47.9% Muslim)
2. Tunisia 2% acceptance rate, 21.6% domestic violence rate (95% Muslim)
3. Indonesia 3% acceptance rate, 11% domestic violence rate (27.18% Muslim)
4. Egypt 3% acceptance rate, 33.7% domestic violence rate (90% Muslim)
5. Jordan 3% acceptance rate, 23% domestic violence rate (94% Muslim)
6. Ghana 3% acceptance rate, 22.9% domestic violence rate (71.2% Christian, 17.6% Muslim)
7. Senegal 3% acceptance rate, no data for domestic violence (96.4% Muslim)
8. Palest. Ter. 4% acceptance rate, no data for domestic violence (85% Muslim)
9. Uganda 4% acceptance rate, 59.1% domestic violence rate (85.4% Christian)
10. Kenya 8% acceptance rate, 41.2% domestic violence rate (82.5% Christian)

*Sources - The Global Divide on Homosexuality Pew Research Center and Orb

I don't see any particular correlation between social acceptance/rejection of homosexuality vs domestic violence rates here. 9 out of 10 of the most accepting countries reporting domestic violence have a lower domestic violence rate than the US. In fact, the domestic violence rate in the US is actually higher than all but 2 of the 17 countries I’ve listed here; clearly we have a domestic violence problem over the entire country…

How about we address /that/ instead of merely trying to pin the [possibly flawed and HUGELY varied] stat of 17%-45% of lesbians who [might] be abused/abusing their GFs?

Final analysis argument; the most current report I can find specifically on LGBT domestic abuse is from 2013 ~ http://www.avp.org/storage/documents/2013_ncavp_ipvmediarealfinal.pdf

It cites a total of 2,697 reports of domestic violence in the LGBT community. Even if we assume that 45% of those are lesbian butches mistreating their fem partners we’re looking at 1,000 lesbian abusers out of a Gallup poll estimated 10 million LGBT’s in the US in 2013 (Special Report 3.4 of U.S. Adults Identify as LGBT

LGBT domestic violence reports are not half as alarming when you put down the actual numbers are they?

Of course that’s exactly /why/ percent is used in the anti-LGBT agenda, because if you go off numbers then they would be asking us to make ridiculous comparisons like 2,697 LGBT domestic violence incidents in all of 2013 vs 66,581 domestic violence victims received assistance and services, and another 9,000 domestic violence victims requesting assistance or services that couldn’t be helped on just September 17th, 2013 alone. ~ A 2013 census of domestic violence in a single day - http://nnedv.org/projects/census/4225-domestic-violence-counts-census-2013-report.html


2 & 3) Emotional and sexual attraction isn't based just on who brings home the bacon, wears the pants, or is physically stronger… 2015 called and wanted to let you know that it’s not the 1960’s anymore, shit’s changed a bit in the past 55 years. But seriously, is that really all relationships are for you? To each their own, I guess.

Regardless, that kind of thinking is certainly not the norm, most men and women out there desire to have more equality and depth in their relationships than what "roles" they have, regardless of their sexual orientation or identity.

Anyway, while labels like butch and femme can be helpful, and might even be important to some lesbians, just because someone has one of these labels does not mean they subscribe to any particular role, in the bedroom or otherwise. The fact that someone happens to act or dress more masculine only "labels" them as "butch," it does not make them a man nor does it imply that they want to be a man. Thus a fem woman attracted to a butch women is still attracted to women, and thus a lesbian, not men, and thus straight, as you are implying.

One can like typically male classified personality traits but prefer a woman's body, just as easily as one could like typically female classified emotional traits and prefer a woman’s body. Like I have said, it is not much different than being attracted to a quiet person vs a loud person, big boobs vs small boobs, etc. Sexual orientation is not black and white, it's not you are either 100% gay or 100% straight either, bisexuals exist too, and we almost all exist on some varied spectrum of personal and individual tastes for masculine and fem traits - just like heterosexuals do, ya'll just avoid classifying the "masculine" or "fem" traits within heterosexual ranks because that would be counter-productive to the anti-gay agenda, plus it could send some homophobics to the funny farm if they actually looked for gender specifics in what they found attractive about their partners.

One could easily find "masculine" authority traits in woman in management positions, police officers, military, lawyers, etc., and women who have somewhat "masculine" jobs; tattoo artists, mechanics, welders. Same with men who exhibit meeker "fem" traits like compassion in counseling positions, teachers, nurses, writers, etc., and men who have somewhat "fem" jobs; waiter's, maid's, cook's, etc.

One simply cannot boil down all the complexities of attraction into stereotypes and say they apply universally. Stereotypes are merely an easier to grasp classification; a vague surface layer of the complexities of individual reality, at best.

I find fem emotional makeups to be extremely frustrating and annoying, and more masculine emotional makeup’s far more enjoyable to be around, that doesn’t make me a “closet” straight. I find myself more attracted to the appearance of fem women, but that doesn’t make me a “closet” lesbian. I also find appearance fem men more attractive than appearance “butch” men, still doesn’t make me a “closet” lesbian. I relate to a more “masculine” identity than a “fem” identity, but that doesn’t preclude me from being attracted to men. I actually consider myself to be “mostly lesbian with too much straight to not be bisexual.” However, that’s both complicated to explain, and a hell of a lot longer, so I, like most LGBT’s, simply say “I’m bi,” which no more explains who I am, or what I feel, than saying "I'm white."

Finally, I’m not sure what LGBT’s you’ve been hanging out with, but in my circle we happen to subscribe to the above mentioned not 100% gay or 100% straight ideal and have a wide variety of sexual orientation preferences among us. So no, my “cult” as you put it, would not at all label your exampled person as a “closet gay.” I’m not exactly a “fem” woman and have more masculine traits than some of the men I know, but I can tell you for damned sure my Christian “butch” husband is sure as hell not gay, in fact, truth be told, he finds homosexuality "icky" and votes against LGBT rights, which makes for quite lively discussions between us. In fact, it's actually is part of how we ended up together - friendly debates during games when we were on the same billiards team lead us to become friends and it went from there.

That’s the complex reality of real relationships though; one loves a person, not merely for their political/religious beliefs, nor merely for their sexual identification, but for who they are as a whole package.

No [smart] heterosexual would think to boil their entire relationship down to "dick" or "pussy," so why do you believe that LGBT's would hold such a ridiculous standard?

 

[Silhouette]

OK, now lets talk about why lipstick lesbians are attracted to all-things masculine. With such a wide variety of sexual orientations that shift around, how is it you can get a static legal status to claim "rights priveleges etc."?

 

[Silhouette]

Yep...crickets...

 

[EverCurious]

Sorry it didn't bing me because you didn't quote me.


In any event, I'm attracted to both females and feminine males. That doesn't make a me a lesbian. It's not actually that hard to understand, you're just being difficult. Is your husband/wife a butch or a fem? Or do you chose to ignore such outlying terminology when assessing your own relationship?


Were you required to inform the court who was going to wear the pants in the family when you got married? It would go under the blanket term "sexual orientation," similar to how the blanket term of "race" covers blacks, native americans, asians, etc. The law doesn't need to specifically address if a lesbian likes fems or butches, it merely needs to address that not all "marriage like" relationships are heterosexual.

 

[Silhouette]

Sorry it didn't bing me because you didn't quote me.


In any event, I'm attracted to both females and feminine males. That doesn't make a me a lesbian. It's not actually that hard to understand.

Assuming you are a woman... If you are claiming to be hetero and saying you are attracted to females and feminine males, the LGBT membership would say for a fact that you are a closeted lesbian. I dare you to walk into a group of gay people and announce that you're a woman who is attracted to females and feminine males and then declare you're not a lesbian. You'll get laughed right out of the building.

The simple fact is that if a lipstick lesbian is attracted to a person who looks like a man, dresses like a man, walks like a man, talks like a man, acts like a man...her partner had better keep a sharp eye out on the horizon for an actual man coming along.

I have a funny story about this well known fear factor among butch lesbians. As predicted, it happened, with a male coworker at a school both of the women worked at. They shared a wall of their classrooms and when the butch one found out about her partner's final "coming out of the closet" with the male co-worker, oh my GOD did the walls shake. Kids in those classes reported screaming, the butch dyke pounding her fist on the walls. The lipstick one coming back from their home (the two women still lived together shortly) with bruises. The butch one turned the stero up full blast in her classroom and pinched the speakers facing right up against the wall, drowning out the lipstick's ability to teach class. Then there were days students would arrive and neither woman had shown up. They were just sitting there until nervous adminstrators took over for the day. Just a psycho nightmare meltdown.

And all the while the butch lesbian should have seen all the signs of defection. Her partner, after all, was attracted to how mannish she presented herself. There is a professional term for this type of denial: Uh,....DUH!

 

[PredFan]

Ever notice that there are only two times anyone ever pronounces you anything? One is "man and wife", and the other is "Dead on arrival".

Coincidence? I don't think so.

 

[Silhouette]

Had a non-sequitur on the last page...sorry. Here's where we were:

Sorry it didn't bing me because you didn't quote me.
In any event, I'm attracted to both females and feminine males. That doesn't make a me a lesbian. It's not actually that hard to understand.

Assuming you are a woman... If you are claiming to be hetero and saying you are attracted to females and feminine males, the LGBT membership would say for a fact that you are a closeted lesbian. I dare you to walk into a group of gay people and announce that you're a woman who is attracted to females and feminine males and then declare you're not a lesbian. You'll get laughed right out of the building.

The simple fact is that if a lipstick lesbian is attracted to a person who looks like a man, dresses like a man, walks like a man, talks like a man, acts like a man...her partner had better keep a sharp eye out on the horizon for an actual man coming along.

I have a funny story about this well known fear factor among butch lesbians. As predicted, it happened, with a male coworker at a school both of the women worked at. They shared a wall of their classrooms and when the butch one found out about her partner's final "coming out of the closet" with the male co-worker, oh my GOD did the walls shake. Kids in those classes reported screaming, the butch dyke pounding her fist on the walls. The lipstick one coming back from their home (the two women still lived together shortly) with bruises. The butch one turned the stero up full blast in her classroom and pinched the speakers facing right up against the wall, drowning out the lipstick's ability to teach class. Then there were days students would arrive and neither woman had shown up. They were just sitting there until nervous adminstrators took over for the day. Just a psycho nightmare meltdown.

And all the while the butch lesbian should have seen all the signs of defection. Her partner, after all, was attracted to how mannish she presented herself. There is a professional term for this type of denial: Uh,....DUH!

 

[EverCurious]

Given your insistence I find myself now curious how other LGBT circles might label my orientation, so I'll take your dare. I will find an LGBT forum [outside my usual circle of course,] lay out my attractions, and see what they would call my sexual orientation to be. It'll have to wait until Monday though, I've got stuff to do over the weekend.

I reference for the record my personal "full" orientation label, as noted in my post #105; "mostly lesbian with too much straight to not be bisexual."
Given that my personal sexual orientation leans heavily toward lesbianism, this should be a "best case scenario" test of your claim.

~ I predict that they will label me as bisexual, I also predict that none of them will try to convince me that I am "just" a lesbian.


As for the rest of your post;

So, there was this one Christian teen who molested his sisters when they were like five years old and shit. Christians better start keeping an eye on those Christian guy's, never know when one of them is going to snap and start feeling up their family members... ~ I don't suppose you can find my point there?

I'll give you a point in your favor here though <pre-insert's raving lunatic feminist post>; under a certain age women are pretty much bitches across the board, straight, lesbian, bisexual, doesn't matter, the vast majority are quite simply spiteful over-emotional little bitches. Which is a big part of why I never settled down with any of my girlfriends (or even /had/ many female platonic chick friends); they start getting stupid emotional and I bail (platonic or otherwise.) My husband had a psycho bitch from hell too - like she stalked him for 15 years type psycho.

There an age at which women develop enough confidence and self-control to out grow of being needy emotional twats. To the best of my experience that seems to happen somewhere between 28 to 32. I actually had "age rules" in my "free" days; for men it was "must be over 21 to ride" and for women it was "tricks under 26" (aka not "relationship" material) - unfortunately you'll notice my age rule bar for women was a bit low back then... My men rule probably should have reversed as well, like "must be under 30" because over about that age they want to settle down and shit... my now husband for example heh Don't get me wrong, I love my husband and all, but I have to admit that I miss women...

Anyway, don't suppose you'd care to share what age your co-workers lesbian psycho bitches were? I'm suspecting one or both were beneath the "age of maturity" because I don't care what your sexual orientation is, that's childish behavior on both their parts. Not that it doesn't happen all over the country these days, in all walks of life; there's a crap-ton of whiney self-serving little brats out there...

 

[Silhouette]

Anyway, don't suppose you'd care to share what age your co-workers lesbian psycho bitches were? I'm suspecting one or both were beneath the "age of maturity" because I don't care what your sexual orientation is, that's childish behavior on both their parts. Not that it doesn't happen all over the country these days, in all walks of life; there's a crap-ton of whiney self-serving little brats out there...

They weren't my coworkers. They were teachers at a school where one of my kids went. High school. One of the women was in her late thirties. The other in her forties. At least the older one, the "butch" one had quite a bit of gray in her hair at the time. About half gray. Haggard looking, both of them really.

They don't quite fit your one-size-fits-all "young crazy psycho" lesbian. And you still haven't addressed why butch lesbians seem surprised when then one that was attracted to them goes and sleeps with a man.

 

[Silhouette]

That's because other peoples sex lives are really none of your business. As long as they are consenting adults, to each his/her own.

I think the state of Michigan thinks differently. When two people come to adopt as a married couple, it then becomes everyone's business whether or not a child is deprived of either a mother or a father in that arrangement. When children are at stake, your unresolved substantial and disruptive subconscious issues become everyone's business: at the very least the business of the adoption agent screening the prospective applicants. Michigan Allows Adoption Agents to Opt-Out of Adoption to Gay Couples US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Rexx Taylor]

Lesbians are nuts,there is no other explanation.


Brittney Griner Files Annulment Papers Day After Wife Announces Baby

WNBA star Brittney Griner filed for an annulment of her marriage to fellow WNBA player Glory Johnson yesterday, one day after Johnson announced that she was expecting a child. There is a lot going on here, so let’s refresh our memories with a timeline.

Brittney Griner Files Annulment Papers Day After Wife Announces Baby

it would of been a little more humorous if it was two guys.

 

[Silhouette]

it would of been a little more humorous if it was two guys.

Not to mention stunning, since men cannot become pregnant.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

it would of been a little more humorous if it was two guys.

Not to mention stunning, since men cannot become pregnant.

what? I thought that in this world, men could get pregnant, well according to liberals.

 

[Silhouette]

it would of been a little more humorous if it was two guys.

Not to mention stunning, since men cannot become pregnant.

what? I thought that in this world, men could get pregnant, well according to liberals.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

it would of been a little more humorous if it was two guys.

Not to mention stunning, since men cannot become pregnant.

what? I thought that in this world, men could get pregnant, well according to liberals.

yup, as of today, we are all equal. great! i have always wanted to see the inside of a ladies room.

 

[Silhouette]

I just wish that butch lesbians would stop acting so surprised when their mannish-loving girlfriends ditch then for the real deal; finally expressing their obvious closeted attraction to men instead of women. Like duh!