[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/lit/ - Literature


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: images.jpg (6 KB, 296x170)
6 KB JPG
imagine a situation where a man has sex with someone he perceives as a woman, but that person is actually another man or a very feminine trans person, and he isn’t aware of it at the time. From his personal perspective, he's not gay. But from an external point of view—based purely on facts or definitions— he is.

Please recommend me books on this (reality vs perception) ? also what to read to understand time ?
>>
I assume this mythical passing tranny only exists in the platonic realm.
>>
>>25236223
This is a linguistic problem, rather than a metaphysical one.
Let's assume 'gay' simply means homosexual. We use the word homosexual to refer to both a sexual orientation (a sexual preference for the same sex) and also to refer to a kind of action (sexual activity with a member of the same sex). The man has committed a homosexual act, but not because he has a homosexual orientation.
>>
>>25236270
I would also go further and say that gay men typically are not attracted to mtf trannies/traps/etc precisely because of their feminine presentation.
>>
>>25236270
Ok so what if we replace "he's gay" by "he commited a homosexual act" ? Because i think the example was more about the metaphysical pov than the linguistic pov ?
>>
>>25236504
Well I suppose we could distinguish it by reference to his mental state versus the physical action. What was occurring in his brain was heterosexual - motivated by sexual interest in the opposite sex - but his body was engaged in a sexual act with a member of the same sex
>>
>>25236223
Wrong. The dick does not care about context. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, then it's not gay. It's that simple.
>>
>>25236514
so perception overrules reality ?
>>
Men are not afraid of being ‘gay’ exactly but of being effeminate. It used to be that a man's masculinity was contingent upon whether he took the active or passive role in sex. So he could fuck whatever he wanted and be masculine. But if he was fucked or gave oral sex to a woman, he was gay. I wonder what changed. Maybe Christianity
>>
>>25236514
You should stop fucking ducks, Anon
>>
>>25236513
so can you have the same response if the man goes to fuck another man (this time knowing it is a man) while imagining it's a woman ?
>>
>>25236525
Lets put it this way then: Imagine you're a vegetarian, and someone hands you a vegetarian sandwich. Only afterwards, does the other person tell you, "actually, I snuck meat in there!" Did you break your oath as a vegetarian?
>>
>>25236534
No.
>>
>>25236223
>>25236525
You know what? I change my mind. The premise itself is faulty.
Perception and Reality exist at the same time. Therefore arguing which is more "true" depends entirely on the framework of the question, and the answer is subject to change.
>>
>>25236810
Eating meat in this scenario is the same as the homosexual act, the vegetarian didnt break his oath but still committed the act
>>
>>25236829
Examples ?
>>
>>25237505
If the vegetarian is eating meat without knowing it, then he perceives himself as eating a vegetarian meal, and in reality he is not eating a vegetarian meal. These two things are happening at the same time. Subjective truth and objective truth.
>>
>>25237651
Thus my question / example on the gay dude. What is reality or what is truth in a way (or what truth is superior to the other) ? Do you have any resources to understand this better ?
>>
>>25237699
Well it depends on his reason for not wanting to fuck a man and his audiences perception of homosexuality (or whether there is an objective moral code regarding same-sex acts). From a Christian perspective he would probably not be guilty of sodomy since he did not wilfully commission it, even though his act was contrary to natural law. He’s not culpable, essentially. From his point of view, if he doesn’t want to fuck men simply because he doesn’t find them desirable, then there’s nothing really bad about fucking a man who looks like a woman. If on the other hand he believes that it somehow reflects upon his masculinity, then he might fret about it. But I also think that seems irrational
>>
Unhhhhh
Yeah
Unhhhhh
Check this out
Yeah
Okay
My name is anonymous
My brain is a chud metropolis
Of tranny sausages
Mom says i'm closeted
In her basement leavin deposits
In white tube socksses
Being outside makes me cautious and nauseus
What is the cause of this
A coward's synopsis



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.