Gay Marriage

[wake and bacon]

[quote='Coatl]well your a douche bag.[/quote]
[quote='Coatl]If y'all would actually debate and not make personal fucking attacks everything would be fine.[/quote]
[quote='Coatl]this is just gonna turn into a shit-fight now (and don't fucking blame it on me!)[/quote]

:lol:

 

[ohayoco]

As a heterosexual transgender male I thought I'd offer a different perspective on this topic. While I'm not gay, the TG community shares a lot of the same social problems the gay community deals with. I'm not gay, nor do I desire sexual reassignment, but I have a couple friends who are absolutely sure that I'm gay or want to become a woman, despite evidence to the contrary, probably because they are bound to typical societal notions of sexuality and gender.

I was raised in a very female-oriented house with my father off at work most of the time. I had urges to dress up from a very early age, and no doubt the overwhelming feminine presence in my life had something to do with it. But....I know plenty of people raised in a similar environment who are not crossdressers. It's interesting the nature vs. nurture polarity going on in this thread. Interesting because despite this community's obvious intelligence and open-mindedness the opinions still are very polarized and starting to get pretty nasty.

It's my opinion that nature vs. nurture, at least in this case, is a false choice: I believe that I have a genetic predisposition towards transgenderism, and my environment while growing up nurtured and brought out that side of me. I think the same thing happens to those who are gay. It seems to me that if anyone understands that life doesn't deal in absolutes it would be the psychedelic community. Why can't it be both? Why are some people here so absolutely sure that it is one or the other?

Welcome, Hyperquill! I completely agree with you. To be honest I think what is happening is a little bit of dumbing down for the sake of clarity. A bit like how in science class they teach you that light always travels in straight lines, because that's all you need to know at that level in your education. Someone who then progresses into more advanced physics later finds out that actually there are rare occasions where it isn't so clearcut- light bending around a massive object in it's gravitational field (or whatever it is that makes it happen!). But the basics are still largely valid.

I can imagine upbringing playing a small part, but without a genetic disposition or certain things happening in the womb, I can't imagine upbringing having that much effect, unless it was extreme. There could be research to be looked at in this area: for example, it is often cited how paedophiles were abused themselves as children. I'm NOT comparing any other sexual preference with this type ethically, but obviously a lot of research has been done in this area that could shed light on this discussion too. [EDIT: I've just realised the abuser is usually a family member so there could be a genetic component for all I know] Paedophilia and zoophilia may be more like fetishes, and I think I heard that fetishes do seem to be developed, rather than be set at birth. And although the object of attraction shifts with paedophilia, does the gender of said object? I haven't read any papers so I personally couldn't say.

I would look at it this way: gay men are brought up straight. Some of them do try to do what they're 'meant' to, having girlfriends and even having sex with them. But however much they try, their heart is never in it. They're brought up straight, but the upbringing doesn't work in turning off their attraction to men and men alone. I would agree that a bisexual person brought up by a gay couple, rather than a fire-and-brimstone Christian couple, would be more likely to enter into same-sex relationships. But that doesn't alter their preferences, it just helps to realise them. And as there is no ethical argument for the prohibition of homosexuality, there isn't an issue here with regard to the sexuality of parents anyway, even on the offchance that it could have some effect.

Another example would be a female friend of mine who was abused as a child by a male adult. She told me at first that she was lesbian. When I got to know her better, she explained her past to me, and she told me that she was actually bisexual, but because of the abuse she suffered she had a fear of touching men that she couldn't get over, so she could only bring herself to pursue her attraction to females. I would say this is comparable to how a bisexaul Christian is brought up believing that to pursue their attraction to the same sex would be sinful, so may choose to ignore that side to them... even deny it so vehemently that they lash out at other gay and bisexual people to alleviate their own unnecessary guilt. This would be most comparable, for example, if a parent beat them whenever they disobeyed 'the commandments of god' via their parents.

As for your situation, I can understand you identifying, but despite your enjoyment of crossdressing, you still turned out straight, didn't you? Lots of crossdressers are completely straight, the comedian Eddie Izzard being the most famous one that I can think of. Incidentally, I was brought up in a female household too, and I do find that I am generally happier in the company of women. But that's given me a great advantage over other men in the game of coupling haha!

At the end of the day though, most of this thread is irrelevent to the question of gay marriage, because it shouldn't matter what gender someone is or isn't... it is sexual discrimination to say that a couple consisting of two sexes can have tax breaks etc, but a couple of the same sex can't. Discrimination on the grounds of gender and sexual preference is illegal, and what silly old laws remain need to be changed.

Christian fundamentalists have no right to bemoan the use of the word marriage, because it isn't their word. Couples of other faiths get 'married' too, as do atheists and agnostics. Marriage is a concept used by almost every culture in the world. Pagans got married long before Christians did. I'd be really interested to hear if the European pagans or anyone else ever had same-sex marriages, but I expect that information has been lost in the midsts of time and destroyed by the perversion of Christianity that also saw the loss of much of our native entheogen plantlore.

Incidentally, I was taught at school that 1 in 10 people have a gay experience in their lives. Now, I'm sure that some of these were just open minded and curious, and I'm sure that some people never live out their desires due to their religion, but it does make you wonder... that's a awful lot of gay and bisexual people being discriminated against.

 

[970Codfert]

Christian fundamentalists have no right to bemoan the use of the word marriage, because it isn't their word.

That's always been one thing I didn't understand. Who ever the gave the christian church, or the gov`t the authority to define the word marriage?? I was raised in a VERY fundamentalist Christian home. My parents are terrified by homosexuals, they used to rant about "the gay agenda" as if gay people were an unruly mob to be feared. REALLY REALLY messed up thinking. It's SO sad. Christians like that cannot be reasoned with. It's insane really.

 

[Infundibulum]

After reading and re-reading this thread I decided to remove 'Coatl from this discussion.

The rest can continue this discussion as they were doing, I see no offense in it.

Thanks Traveler!!!!

 

[HyperQuill]

Welcome, Hyperquill! I completely agree with you. To be honest I think what is happening is a little bit of dumbing down for the sake of clarity. A bit like how in science class they teach you that light always travels in straight lines, because that's all you need to know at that level in your education. Someone who then progresses into more advanced physics later finds out that actually there are rare occasions where it isn't so clearcut- light bending around a massive object in it's gravitational field (or whatever it is that makes it happen!). But the basics are still largely valid.

Thanks for the welcome ohayaco

You appear to have a far less cynical approach than I've been taking, bravo! I tend to see it as a tool for the establishment (particularly the Evangelical conservatives) to divide the popular vote, like abortion or gun control.

Has anyone seen "Jesus Camp"? It's a documentary about a highly politicized Evangelical childrens' bible camp. Seriously it is one of the most disturbing and heart-wrenching things I've ever seen. The things they told these kids makes me burst into tears every time I see it. They tell them how they are horrible, sinful, evil little pieces of shit, and that the only thing they can do is take Jesus as their savior and pray for forgiveness and hope they don't spend eternity in hell.......But these people are already living in hell: they believe that they're in a holy war with Islam, and not unlike the Israelis they raise their kids with the mindset that they're soldiers. I never once in the movie saw a shred of real love - for each other, their children or their god. I must recommend it, however I should warn that I feel a little poisoned for having seen it. If you do though you'll quickly see that this large portion (up to 25%) of the US population does not employ rational thought, and they are determined to take over the world. One woman even said that their side needs to boost their population enough to regain control of the presidency and legislature. Creeeeeeepy!

Maybe the fight for gay marriage needs to coincide with a fight to expose the Evangelical movement for what it is: ignorance, fear and hatred for 99% of the world population. A friend recently brought up an interesting point in that we have too much freedom of speech, riding it as a political platform just like other Bill of Rights issues. He mentioned that Germans don''t allow free speech when it comes to national socialism, because it only produces ignorance and hatred. Maybe the gay marriage issue would have better results if people shifted the popular argument from the need to obtain equal rights for everyone, to the argument that nobody has the right to spread hate...

 

[polytrip]

Christian fundamentalists have no right to bemoan the use of the word marriage, because it isn't their word.

That's always been one thing I didn't understand. Who ever the gave the christian church, or the gov`t the authority to define the word marriage?? I was raised in a VERY fundamentalist Christian home. My parents are terrified by homosexuals, they used to rant about "the gay agenda" as if gay people were an unruly mob to be feared. REALLY REALLY messed up thinking. It's SO sad. Christians like that cannot be reasoned with. It's insane really.

People who consider homosexuality to be a threat are obviously secretly gay or bisexual themselves or have at least homosexual feelings to a much greater degree then they dare to admit.
The idea realy seems to be that gay people want to turn everybody into homosexuals and that once society developes a tolerant aproach towards gay people, everybody is at risk of being turned into a homosexual. So the idea these people hold, seems to be that it is at least a very tempting thing to be gay and that it is apparently easier to be turned into a gay parson that the other way round. People who are extremely hatefull towards homosexuals often implicitly admit that they're not as straight as they pretend to be when you listen close enough to what they actually say.

 

[Spock's Brain]

Does anyone think that someone who is trans-gender (has genitals of both genders) is born that way? Or did they learn to become that way by their enviroment?

Do you think that for as few transgender people there are that are overtly possessing features of both sexes, there must be many more that similarily possess "features" of both gender's, even if not outwardly physical such as possessing genitals of both sexes?



...were they also born that way? It's not that difficult to figure out.

 

[amor_fati]

Does anyone think that someone who is trans-gender (has genitals of both genders) is born that way? Or did they learn to become that way by their enviroment?

Do you think that for as few transgender people there are that are overtly possessing features of both sexes, there must be many more that similarily possess "features" of both gender's, even if not outwardly physical such as possessing genitals of both sexes?



...were they also born that way? It's not that difficult to figure out.

If I'm not mistaken, transgender does not entail hermaphroditism, or at least not necessarily. I recall a story on NPR about this, and I believe that it sometimes occurs quite early in development. Transgender simply means that one is born as one gender but behaves as another, correct?

 

[Spock's Brain]

Does anyone think that someone who is trans-gender (has genitals of both genders) is born that way? Or did they learn to become that way by their enviroment?

Do you think that for as few transgender people there are that are overtly possessing features of both sexes, there must be many more that similarily possess "features" of both gender's, even if not outwardly physical such as possessing genitals of both sexes?



...were they also born that way? It's not that difficult to figure out.

If I'm not mistaken, transgender does not entail hermaphroditism, or at least not necessarily. I recall a story on NPR about this, and I believe that it sometimes occurs quite early in development. Transgender simply means that one is born as one gender but behaves as another, correct?

Right, I meant hermaphrodite.

 

[HyperQuill]

Actually, transgenderism is an umbrella term for anyone who doesn't follow normal gender roles. What you're referring to polytrip is transexualism, which falls under that umbrella. From what I understand, hermaphrodites reside at the fringes of the definition, mainly because their situation relates to the physical sex whereas transexualism/crossdressing/transvestism/androgyny/gender dysphoria, etc... relate to one's emotional state about their gender.

I can give some more clear-cut definitions if anyone would like, but there's not a whole lot of agreement to who falls under what, even within the tg community, so it would be more my opinion than fact. Generally, regardless of how one identifies, the issue usually does surface very early in life (I've been crossdressing most of my 30 years - probably starting around age 5)

 

[ohayoco]

You appear to have a far less cynical approach than I've been taking, bravo! I tend to see it as a tool for the establishment (particularly the Evangelical conservatives) to divide the popular vote, like abortion or gun control.

I was only talking about a little 'dumbing down' for clarity from the pro-gay marriage camp.
Whereas the homophobic camp, well, you've described the extremists perfectly.
There are also 'borderline' homophobes who have been conditioned by society through childish schoolground jibes (teenage boys seem to love calling each other gay) and later adult jokes, but many of these people I doubt would have a problem with gay marriage etc, many interacting civilly with gay people, but they're just squemish about getting hugged by a gay man etc because it 'grosses them out' (or 'threatens their masculinity' for the ones who are geninely homophobic rather than plain thoughtless). Then there are the thugs who aren't motivated by religion but still want someone to hate.

I would love to hear more about transgender issues, because I don't actually know anyone from these groups (at least I'm not aware of it!) Please could you explain the situation with 'androgyny' and 'gender dysphoria'? I honestly thought androgeny was a fashion thing, like Boy George and David Bowie!

As far as I know, there are these categories, broadly speaking, with crossover I'm sure:

These are the more clearcut to me, that people seem to be born into:
-Straight
-Bisexual
-Gay
-Asexual (these people may form relationships but have no interest in sex WHATSOEVER)

Then those who physically defy the usual two genders:
-Hermaphrodites, who are born with both male and female sex organs. Historically I think these people were operated after birth so as to be raised as girls, which has caused some distress for those who may have preferred to be boys?

Those who feel they were born the wrong gender:
-Transsexuals, pre-op
-Transsexuals, post-op
(Does the pre/post-op distinction define the 'type' of transexualism, or is it just to do with whether the individual can stand or afford to go through with the procedure? Do transsexuals come as gay, straight, bisexual and asexual? Such as a man feeling like he is a woman, transforming himself into one by operation, but still fancying women, so becoming a lesbian? Or a woman transforming herself into a man, to become a gay man? Or do they only transform themselves to fit into a straight role? Excuse me if I'm using the wrong words- I'm not sure of the terminology.)

Then there are these two which I am guessing are extreme fetishes developed after birth:

-Zoophilia (love of animals)
-Paedophilia (as a child we all fancy children, but a few unfortunate people, often having suffered abuse themselves, continue the attraction into adulthood)

I think this is a fetish developed after birth:

-Crossdressing (With no desire to become a different gender, but just enjoying looking like one)

And I'm pretty sure these definitely are mostly-developed fetishes:

-Rubber & PVC / sadism / masochism / foot fetish / duodephilia (love of trees) / various roleplay etc etc
(Let's be honest many red-blooded men have a streak of mild sadism, at least I do quite like a bit of harmless consensual sadist sexual play every now and then. I'm guessing it's a dominance thing, whether this is genetic or learnt or both I don't know)

Hyperquill you're right, that's quite a spectrum. Please could you enlighten me where I'm unsure or need correcting? This is getting really educational now!

 

[HyperQuill]

Well, androgyny as I understand it is a matter of how one presents themselves to the rest of society. It's an attempt to appear "genderless", as in presenting yourself in a way so other people can't really tell if you're a man or woman. There is definitely a fashion aspect too! When money and time are in abundance I present myself this way on occasion: Thin eyebrows, ladies jewelry, a little eyeliner, less often I'll wear something female too but this tends to really put people on edge. Androgyny also is very dependent on the person's body and facial structure. No matter how much makeup you use, if you're built like a man you look like a man.

As a side-note, there's an interesting and universal phenomenon about crossdressing in that it comes in cycles. For me, there are times when I'm all man and wouldn't have it any other way. If I stay stuck in this mindset for too long though, the neglected feminine aspects of my personality start screaming "let me out"! Just like anything else though it's about maintaining a balance. If I've been camping in sand and mud, hiking with the boys for a week all I want to do when I get home is shower, shave, and put on something pretty (and vise versa). Most of the time however both sides play a role at any given time.

Gender dysphoria is simply confusion or dissatisfaction with one's own transgender issues. It's often used in place of transgenderism, but this is wrong because not every tg is dissatisfied with their situation. Personally, I love being transgendered and feel as if I've been given a great gift, so I'm not dysphoric about it in the slightest.


You seem to have quite a bit of insight already - most people have never even heard the term asexual before in that context. Those four definitions you presented seem to cover the spectrum, though (and this is just my opinion) I think 'straight' and 'gay' can be a bit misleading themselves. This is because I think everyone is bisexual, leaning toward straight or gay - sort of like the liberal/conservative scale of political leanings. Anyone claiming to be totally one or the other may have some issues (or maybe not, but then again vehement communists and fascists do tend to have issues....)

Pre/post op just relates to surgery one may have had. There are many people who are pre-op and choose to remain so for whatever reason (often financial). Some choose to have breast implants but not change their penis into a vagina. Still others are only satisfied with a complete transformation. Yes, TS's do all fall into the four categories you mentioned, though defining themselves can be a challenge. You hit the nail on the head there, and for some people this is a great source of dysphoria.

-Paedophilia (as a child we all fancy children, but a few unfortunate people, often having suffered abuse themselves, continue the attraction into adulthood)

That's one hell of a fascinating insight! I'd never thought of it like that before.

I should mention that crossdressing is also a blanket term, used interchangeably with transgenderism. Most people (including myself) who identify as crossdressers though feel as you've described. There is definitely a fetish aspect to it, especially at a young age. As one gets older though the sexual side diminishes in deference to the emotional side which manifests as a general feeling of well-being, reconnecting to oneself, etc... Maybe crossdressing is a little like psychedelics, lol!

You bring up something interesting regarding S&M: Most crossdressers (again, myself included) tend to be more on the submissive side, though this isn't exclusively so. It may be biological but I think cultural factors are more at work here.


Whew, hopefully that clears some stuff up. I just smoked the spice and may still be a little 'out there' so feel free to ask for some more clarification! ...I was soooo close to breaking through for the first time too (after about a dozen attempts)... practice makes perfect, though I am getting a little tired of hanging around in 'purgatory'

 

[ohayoco]

Thanks, that's really enlightening.

Those four definitions you presented seem to cover the spectrum, though (and this is just my opinion) I think 'straight' and 'gay' can be a bit misleading themselves. This is because I think everyone is bisexual, leaning toward straight or gay - sort of like the liberal/conservative scale of political leanings. Anyone claiming to be totally one or the other may have some issues (or maybe not, but then again vehement communists and fascists do tend to have issues....)

I think it's just easier to say "I'm straight" or "I'm gay". If you're attracted to people of both sexes I'd say you're bisexual, but if someone had just tried it out once from curiosity I'd say they could still be straight/gay, but sexually open enough to give something new a try to see if they like it. Maybe everyone is bisexual to some degree, and that the degree is on a spectrum. But there seems to be a big gap between people who have tried it out or fantasised on one occasion, and people who we would refer to and understand as bisexual. So the terminology marks the difference here. And there's an even bigger gap between people who are straight and people who are gay. I had sex with a vacuum cleaner once, but that doesn't make me a vacuumophile! It was just available and I was a horny teenager.

Using myself as an example: I'd have sex with any adult I found attractive. I've always said I'd have sex with a tranny if (s)he was hot. I wouldn't say that's gay, because I would be attracted to a female form after all, even if it could be seen as a gay act on a technicality. I don't ignore men because they're men, but because they're unattractive to me- I don't have sex with girls I find unattractive either. I'd have sex with an animal if I found it sexy and it was consensual! But I have never walked down the street and seen a guy (or an animal) and wanted to have sex with him (/it). If I did, I'd try it out for sure. I hang out on a mixed scene so it's not like I haven't had offer or opportunity. So, I consider myself straight.

 

[ohayoco]

I've been thinking about this and I've come up with some more examples in addition to my last post. I've actually had sex with women I wasn't attracted to on a couple of occasions. They were being forward and staying over at my house anyway, and I did out of a mixture of 'politeness'- because I wasn't fussed and it was easier to accept than deny them- and because while I didn't fancy them, I wasn't against the idea of having sex. While women have sex with men out of politeness all the time.

I watched a documentary on the porn industry, which claimed that some men who act in gay porn actually consider themselves straight. They say they just do it for the money. Now I can't imagine these people all being repressed and in denial of their sexuality! The fact that they can obtain an erection is I think somewhat irrelevent to the sex of their fellow actor, because many male porn stars find it difficult to achieve erection with actresses too- being unattracted to someone (or just not in the mood to have sex with them) is not confined to just one of the sexes. Escorts can also be straight, male and female, but still offer their services to same sex clients. I watched another documentary where men said that they were straight but worked as gay escorts. I imagine the same goes for some female sex workers too.
Finally, we've all heard about what goes on in prison. While it could be argued that men who switch to homosexuality in such conditions are bisexual, there's a question mark there because they do claim to be straight and revert to being straight once they are out in the world again (so I hear). This is my weakest example because these people are probably not as open-minded as those in my other examples, but I'm presenting it as a possibility. After all, after a few years of gay sex, wouldn't you imagine that these people would eventually accept their bisexuality and continue it once they're free? And if sexuality could be learnt to any significant degree, one would imagine that repeated gay acts would instigate learnt behaviour.
Haha there are also the stories about fishermen having sex with skate (a type of fish that apparently has a mouth like a vagina), and shepherds with sheep, that sound like sexual acts of convenience, but I don't know if this really happens! (although I can imagine it has done, given the innate curiosity of the human being).

In all these examples I am saying that people are having sex with people that they're not attracted to. I entirely agree with you that many people are bisexual and ignoring one aspect of their sexuality. But my own personal experience and those of others make me think that it doesn't apply to everyone, and that even someone who has performed a 'gay act' may still classify as straight. It's who or what you are attracted to that defines your sexuality, not what you do. Someone might try ice cream to see what it tastes like, but then decide they don't like it. Or maybe they already know that they don't like ice cream, but they're starving and there isn't any other food around to be had! :lol:

Perhaps the problem here is that people find it hard to detach themselves from the way they feel. So bisexual Christians may believe everyone is bi. Straight Christians may believe everyone is straight, but that some are 'fooled by Satan' into 'disobeying god'. Some bisexual people believe everyone is bi, and that validates their own position. But straight people believe they are straight. Do gay people believe they're gay? Or just bi but prefer same-sex?

Moving onto learnt behaviour. The human mind is immensely powerful- just look at how people develop beliefs, neuroses and fetishes. When I was young I fancied a lot of women. My tastes have really narrowed and I would say that I now find very few attractive, in I would imagine a similar fashion to how a fetish could emerge (although fetishes do seem to emerge from childhood so the comparison is weak). I now don't find even beautiful women attractive if, for example, they're dressed in a way I don't like, such as in the clothes of a subculture whose values I don't agree with. I have also completely lost my libido in one difficult period of my life. So I do think that the mind has the ability to alter one's sexual attraction to some extent. But for the reasons above, and because gay people who try to make themselves straight usually fail, I don't think everyone is born bisexual, and I don't think such behaviour can be learnt... only realised.

I am absolutely fascinated by deviancy! Most of my friends are socially 'deviant' in some way. As I imagine are many of those in the suburbs... once the net curtains are drawn! I'll stop hogging the debate form now on, now my ramblings have been immortalised!

 

[○]

Figured i'd jump in on this thread and add a little side experience...kind of off topic and kind of not.

There was a night awhile back when me and a good friend of mine (which has accompanied me on all my experiences with psychs) each took three grams of some really nice mushrooms and during the middle of the trip we were standing up and looking at the sky (which was insane with the way the clouds, stars, and moon were). We were standing and he puts a hand on my shoulder and says "I could seruiously kiss you right now". I was like "woah" ( i'm not homophobic in any way/shape/ or form) and i kind of stepped back...I was just really shocked he said that. We are both males, and he has had more girlfriends than anyone I have ever known. I was not disgusted or frightened in any way by what he said, just very surprised.

I'm kind of wondering why he had said what he said. Him and I are still very tight by the way. I was kinda moved by it in a sense lol

 

[MalargueZiggy]

My thoughts on these issues:
- Sexuality is a spectrum, I think there are grades of attraction from all sides, it just depends on how far down the scale you are, how willing you are to cross into 'bisexual' territory or if you stay firmly on one side (whether that's what is commonly called gay or straight). I.E if you're comfortable kissing another man, or would go further etc.

- Gender is not defined by your physical appearance, it's psychological and cultural. To view gender by your chromosomes or genitals is incredibly reductive, this ties in with the concepts of sexuality above.

- What people do in the privacy of their own homes should not be anyone else's business. If you bring God into it, let the individual bring him/her/it into it themselves. All sexual practises should be legal as long as they involve consent.

- The concept of 'gay marriage' is misleading. Two consenting adults should have completely equal rights under law. Before they brought in what are called civil partnerships here, someone could be in a faithful relationship for 25 years, and then when their partner died they had no right to any of their estate etc. This is clearly against the basic human right of complete equality for all. Personally I think that the semantic squabbling that goes on about gay marriage (particularly in America) is merely a smokescreen from the religious right to stop equality. They think that it condones by law an immoral act, why wouldn't they oppose it in any way they could? The solution is the complete absence of organised religion from ordinary people's lives, and basic equality in all legal senses to all people. Terminology comes later, and if the religious right don't want the unions to be conducted in churches, then that's up to them to decide, but they shouldn't be able to stop simple legal equality.

Ohayoco/Quill: Here's something you might find interesting to your discussions of gender. I've got a friend, male, "straight", who considers himself to be a lesbian comfortably at home in a man's body. Because he's attracted to women and physically a man, you might call him straight, and objectively he is, but the issue is more complicated than that.

It's not that he wants a sex change, I guess it means that he identifies with what you can call the 'cultural concept of womanhood' whilst happy to physically remain a man. He retains an interesting mix of feminine and masculine features. It's not campness at all, and I hesitate to call him metrosexual, it's different, difficult to describe without giving you a very detailed rundown about all his features.

---> So, psychologically speaking he is feminine (although not a woman per se and not anything people may assume is a gay man), physically speaking he's a man, and hence his approach to his sexuality.

Basically the point I'm trying to make is that sexuality and gender are not cut and dried, and that transgender/androgeny do not always equal the desire to change your "physical gender" although sometimes this is the case obviously.

It's all psychological. Bearing all of this in mind I find it impossible to believe that you are "born gay". I believe that you're born with a certain genetic makeup (and your sexual preferences are almost certainly part of this), but different parts of this are brought out through the way you are brought up.

Hope any of that makes any sense to anyone!