Results 1 to 24 of 24

Thread: Would her internal organs and DNA bother you?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    The Dude Abides
    Posts
    10,980
    Ok, it's an androgen insensitive male. I've heard people say they think Ann Coulter is one too.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    3,584
    Quote Originally Posted by Honkey_Kong View Post
    Ok, it's an androgen insensitive male.
    Male humans aren't born with natural fleshly vaginas that automatically lubricate in response to romantic/sexual arousal.

    By your logic, you would gladly suck the penis of an XX chromosome person who has hypersensitivity to androgens and was born with ovaries and a penis (because she's female, right?). Would you want her to be cut first though before you suck it?

    When romantic conversation leads to foreplay and sex, I'm not thinking about internal organs and DNA. Humans didn't even know about DNA up until about 70 years ago.

    And even if I had a weird fetish where I anesthetise my girlfriends and cut open their abdomen, I probably wouldn't immediately realise that the small little ball thingie is a testicle rather than an ovary (not that there's a massive difference between the two human gonads anyway).

    And if I could go back in time to when Jamie Lee Curtis was 18 and ejaculate in her vagina, I gladly would. I wouldn't wank for 3 days before it.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    The Dude Abides
    Posts
    10,980
    Quote Originally Posted by Fluidic Kimbo View Post
    Male humans aren't born with natural fleshly vaginas that automatically lubricate in response to romantic/sexual arousal.

    By your logic, you would gladly suck the penis of an XX chromosome person who has hypersensitivity to androgens and was born with ovaries and a penis (because she's female, right?). Would you want her to be cut first though before you suck it?

    When romantic conversation leads to foreplay and sex, I'm not thinking about internal organs and DNA. Humans didn't even know about DNA up until about 70 years ago.

    And even if I had a weird fetish where I anesthetise my girlfriends and cut open their abdomen, I probably wouldn't immediately realise that the small little ball thingie is a testicle rather than an ovary (not that there's a massive difference between the two human gonads anyway).

    And if I could go back in time to when Jamie Lee Curtis was 18 and ejaculate in her vagina, I gladly would. I wouldn't wank for 3 days before it.
    No, I didn't say that. I said that he was an androgen insensitive male. You were the one who did those mental gymnastics.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    3,584
    Quote Originally Posted by Honkey_Kong View Post
    No, I didn't say that. I said that he was an androgen insensitive male. You were the one who did those mental gymnastics.
    Okay let's say we define male human as follows:
    Human with penis and the male gonads (i.e. testicles)

    And we define female human as follows:
    Human with vagina and the female gonads (i.e. ovaries)

    A human with a penis and a beard and a deep voice is definitely a male irrespective of what's in his sack.

    A human with a vagina and breasts and smooth legs is definitely a female irrespective of what's in her abdomen.

    I think that you are irrational to place more importance in the internals than the externals. 99% of us never see the internals apart from surgeons and Mexican cartel members.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    The Dude Abides
    Posts
    10,980
    Quote Originally Posted by Fluidic Kimbo View Post
    Okay let's say we define male human as follows:
    Human with penis and the male gonads (i.e. testicles)

    And we define female human as follows:
    Human with vagina and the female gonads (i.e. ovaries)

    A human with a penis and a beard and a deep voice is definitely a male irrespective of what's in his sack.

    A human with a vagina and breasts and smooth legs is definitely a female irrespective of what's in her abdomen.

    I think that you are irrational to place more importance in the internals than the externals. 99% of us never see the internals apart from surgeons and Mexican cartel members.
    A man is genetically a man at a chromosome level just like a woman is genetically a woman at a chromosome level.

    Now just because a woman is technically a woman, it doesn't mean necessarily that I'm going to treat her as such. The same isn't true for a man. If he appears like a woman, he's still getting treated as if he's a man.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •