Music Banter - Male Gender Roles and How They Specifically Affect Men

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)

- Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/)

- - Male Gender Roles and How They Specifically Affect Men (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/81929-male-gender-roles-how-they-specifically-affect-men.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhateverDude (Post 1586723)

Caninephilia, perhaps? A more specific subsection of bestiality?

Bestiality is an issue of consent. A dog might not object to sex with a human but it's still taking advantage. I liken it to taking home women who are too drunk to say no or think about whether or not they actually want to sleep with you.

I'm not dodging anything I just don't see the relationship between bestiality and a person identifying as a gender different from what's considered the norm of their sex.

The point was that you can't just claim to be anything, whether it be dog, llama, or a living piece of granite. You are what you are and making a claim doesn't change that.

What are you saying? That someone assigned male at birth can't be female? I think the notion that there's a difference between a person's sex and their gender are two different things is lost on you guys.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord (Post 1586725)

And I'm pretty sure you have my points confused. The OP was about gender roles, but my later posts were about sex. I'm all about not conforming to gender roles, if that's your disposition.

Gotcha.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhateverDude (Post 1586723)

I'm not dodging anything I just don't see the relationship between bestiality and a person identifying as a gender different from what's considered the norm of their sex.

Get off the technicalities of the question. It isn't about fucking dogs. Gender is a way to define masculine/feminine traits and sexual attraction. The long list of definitions I posted early are some of the ones acknowledged, but with the current system there is a possibility for infinite gender identities because it's entirely personal(not enough time for science to explain/understand it). So, where/when, if ever, do you draw the line? Who gets to decide?

If someone is born and truly believes they should have been an animal instead of human how is that less valid then someone born male but feels they should have been a female?

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhateverDude (Post 1586728)

I acknowledged that difference in my very first post of the thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhateverDude (Post 1586728)

You are forever my little sister and I adore you!

Please always remember that. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhateverDude (Post 1586728)

That is not at all what I said. I explicitly said otherwise. Read my post again.

All I am saying is that for someone who is born male to claim to be a female, whatever internal, biological traits that define gender have to actually make them female. If those traits are in fact male, but the person claims otherwise, then they are delusional.

It may not be as black and white as male/female only, but biology is what determines gender, not words.

0/10, dig the Batlord but probably wouldn't share a drink with :(

Quote:

Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls (Post 1586729)

So, where/when, if ever, do you draw the line? Who gets to decide?

I'd draw the line where there's a lack of consent or risk of developmental harm.

Quote:

If someone is born and truly believes they should have been an animal instead of human how is that less valid then someone born male but feels they should have been a female?

I wish I had an answer for that but you're breaching on territory I don't really understand- all this calls to mind is furries but I'm not sure that's what we're talking about. The only response I really have is that one is significantly more likely than the other to occur.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladyislingering (Post 1586735)

0/10, dig the Batlord but probably wouldn't share a drink with :(

Either make a point or go away.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhateverDude (Post 1586736)

I'd draw the line where there's a lack of consent or risk of developmental harm.

I wish I had an answer for that but you're breaching on territory I don't really understand- all this calls to mind is furries but I'm not sure that's what we're talking about. The only response I really have is that one is significantly more likely than the other to occur.

Forget about ****ing. If I said I was a dog, would you accept that I was a dog?

@WD - It's all good dude nvm.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord (Post 1586734)

That is not at all what I said. I explicitly said otherwise. Read my post again.

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls (Post 1586729)

I acknowledged that difference in my very first post of the thread.

I missed the part where you guys announced that, sorry.

Quote:

All I am saying is that for someone who is born male to claim to be a female, whatever internal, biological traits that define gender have to actually make them female. If those traits are in fact male, but the person claims otherwise, then they are delusional.

It may not be as black and white as male/female only, but biology is what determines gender, not words

How does biology define gender? Biology is neutral, all it does is determine a person's sex. Gender is how we interpret a person's sex.