Type Mating Calls

[GuavaDrunk]

Responding =/ mating or intention to mate. Your place in heaven is safe. Nothing wrong with responding to a (fellow? trolol) human's signals.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

Well I don't think I am. In HS there's all this social pressure to be straight, and that's compounded by the place I grew up that sort of had not just a negative view of homosexuality but an evil one.

Trust me I know exactly what that feels like! I dropped out of school because of it. I didn't think it was right that I was emotionally tortured for something so silly as liking guys - but that's high school for you. They'll find any identity (not just gay)/sense of being in somebody and Gaslight you for all of eternity until you self-destruct. The funny thing is I know people thought I was weak for not sticking it out. But the truth is that it's actually the opposite... I needed to clear the homophobic demons in my head especially since I knew that my true self was a gay guy...

sometimes the most powerful thing a person can do is run away.

Now I know that I'm probably not gay, and even if I was that doesn't really change who I am. Now I'm slightly more comfortable admitting that I like things like sappy love stories and Matthew Mcconaughey films.

aww that's so cute. i would love to watch a romantic soap opera with you. have you seen the gay love story between Christian and Oliver? They're two normal dudes and they're not over the top gay. But even if you are I don't see the big deal anyway... anyway they're really cute and subtlety gay and their relationship is one of real love and passion.

http://www.youtube.com/user/ichglotzutube

[Kalinoche buenanoche]

In my opinion, EIEs dress for others (because they're the ones who will see it) and LSEs dress for themselves (because they're the ones who will feel it).

the LSEs i've been exposed to were totally into getting positive feedback on the way they looked.Actually,in this area they are very close to EIEs but i find that LSEs are more uuhh pure/sincere when it comes to asking for that feedback.Also,they enjoy publicly checking themselves in the mirror whereas i think that EIEs keep it shorter because they are more aware of the labels that could be put upon them if they be seen doing it.That or Si polr.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

omg i get puppy dog hearts in my eyes when a Se-ego guy talks about his gayness.

homosexual duality FOR THE WIN.

[Galen]

i don't believe in homosexuality.I think that the vast majority of gays are actually bisexual who ended up being so hardcore about their gayness because of the gender roles and the conditioning.Sexuality is more about chemistry.That is,you may fall head over heels for a "less typically feminine" woman at some point in your life.Now,I am sure that you have already met "less typically feminine" women and maybe many of them but try to avoid thinking in groups.it will only take a person =O

yeah uh no

[Galen]

yeah uh you've closed that little heart of yours to possibilities.it's a fortress that only has one door opened.the back one. =O


not that there's anything wrong with that. <3

In my life I've been attracted to two women solely for their personalities, never has it been for their physicality.

Physical attraction and emotional attraction are two separate continuums. Emotionally I'm probably 80% - 85% homosexual, much more comfortable being emotionally open to men. Physically, 100% men, the physical female form does nothing to me whatsoever. So total I guess 90 - 95%, which I would hardly call social conditioning or "keeping it simple." Since when being gay simple anyway?

I also like this scale, I'd be somewhere between 20/80 and 10/90
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...yScaleOfTropes

[DirectorAbbie]

In my life I've been attracted to two women solely for their personalities, never has it been for their physicality.

You think women are attracted to male bodies? Male bodies aren't very attractive. But I love male personalities.

[Galen]

Male bodies aren't very attractive.

I disagree

[Scapegrace]

You think women are attracted to male bodies? Male bodies aren't very attractive. But I love male personalities.

How are your parents going to react to the fact that their daughter is a lesbian?

[Scapegrace]

Galen, there is still hope for you. Come to Jesus.

[Galen]

Galen, there is still hope for you. Come to Jesus.

Jesus is a cunt

[Kalinoche buenanoche]

But I love male personalities.

INFjs can be fairy-like

[Creepy-pokeball]

You think women are attracted to male bodies? Male bodies aren't very attractive. But I love male personalities.

You need to get out more. Women can be just as sensually lustful as men.

[Creepy-pokeball]

Months ago, when I questioned it.

That was before I even attempted to know her and I switched it weekly. Keep up with the times, woman.

[duality is cringe]

don't give a shit about this thread, but I endorse galen's blasphemy.

[DirectorAbbie]

How are your parents going to react to the fact that their daughter is a lesbian?

I'm not. Female bodies may be nicer, but I already have one. And I generally get along easier (though not necessarily better) with men than women.

[Saberstorm]

I am a guy, and I have to say, male bodies do nothing for me.

[Scapegrace]

I'm not. Female bodies may be nicer, but I already have one. And I generally get along easier (though not necessarily better) with men than women.

You realize that being female and thinking that the female form is nicer than the male form makes you something other than heterosexual, right? You might be bisexual with a slant towards men, but you are certainly not a 0 on the Kinsey scale.

It is not normal heterosexual behavior to be attracted to someone of the opposite sex for their personality alone.

What I am suggesting here is that you should look into meeting some butch lesbians.

[DirectorAbbie]

You realize that being female and thinking that the female form is nicer than the male form makes you something other than heterosexual, right? You might be bisexual with a slant towards men, but you are certainly not a 0 on the Kinsey scale.

It is not normal heterosexual behavior to be attracted to someone of the opposite sex for their personality alone.

What I am suggesting here is that you should look into meeting some butch lesbians.

You obviously don't even know what a relationship is. It is not about being physical; it is about being committed. You are disgustingly shallow. Nobody should try to be a homosexual just because they aren't "sensually lustful" towards the opposite sex.

I'm about as comfortable with a woman as with a cat. Touching them is no big deal (though if touched wrong they may scratch or bite). Being underclothed around them is a little weird, but it doesn't mean anything. I am uncomfortable touching guys because it would mean something. Yes, aesthetically, women have nicer bodies, but I'm not drawing a picture. And if I were, I could just use a mirror.

[Scapegrace]

You obviously don't even know what a relationship is. It is not about being physical; it is about being committed. You are disgustingly shallow. Nobody should try to be a homosexual just because they aren't "sensually lustful" towards the opposite sex.

I'm about as comfortable with a woman as with a cat. Touching them is no big deal (though if touched wrong they may scratch or bite). Being underclothed around them is a little weird, but it doesn't mean anything. I am uncomfortable touching guys because it would mean something. Yes, aesthetically, women have nicer bodies, but I'm not drawing a picture. And if I were, I could just use a mirror.

I've been in a committed relationship for seven years. I'm pretty sure I know better than you what it's like and what is important in one. If you think that the physical aspect isn't tremendously important you're fooling yourself. I am not "disgustingly shallow" you are hopelessly naive and confused about your sexuality and it's going to make you miserable.

To be in a committed, loving, satisfying, relationship with a man you need to be physically attracted to him and him to you or you're both going to be miserable. It's a horrifically cruel thing to do to ask a man to be in a relationship with you if you can't love him emotionally and physically. I'm not asking you to try to be homosexual. You clearly exhibit homosexual desires.

You know why you feel different around men than you do around women, or cats, or house plants? It's because of you upbringing. You can reproduce with a man. And I'm willing to bet that you are a good Christian girl who thinks being in a relationships is all about glorifying God and having babies. It's not.

You. Like. Women. You prefer them physically and I am 95% sure you will find that you prefer them sexually too.


And guess what? There isn't a damn thing wrong with that. The problem is people making their lives and the lives of other people miserable by refusing to admit what they actually are.

[Creepy-pokeball]

wtf is underclothed, lol.

[Galen]

I'm invading this argument

You obviously don't even know what a relationship is. It is not about being physical; it is about being committed.

This is a very old-world conception about relationships and romance. Truth of the matter is, people have sex. People have sex because, beyond baby-making, it is an enjoyable thing to do when with a loved/liked one. Sure, entire relationships based around sex tend to peter out into nothing after a short period of time. But if relationships were simply about commitment to one another then you could say that your job is a relationship with your boss, or your devotion to feeding your pets every day so they don't starve is a relationship. Sure this is true literally, but there's 0 depth to this kind of relationship.

The best description of intimate relationships I've seen pins down relationships as having three parts: physical attraction, emotional attraction, and commitment. With just commitment but without the other two, you fall into either cohabitation or a loveless relationship. Unless you simply don't want physical or emotional release (very rare), then you can't deny these aspects of a romantic relationship because they're vital to its well-being.

Nobody should try to be a homosexual just because they aren't "sensually lustful" towards the opposite sex.

Nobody should try to be any sexuality, that results in either overcompensation or massive repression in either case.

I'm about as comfortable with a woman as with a cat. Touching them is no big deal (though if touched wrong they may scratch or bite). Being underclothed around them is a little weird, but it doesn't mean anything. I am uncomfortable touching guys because it would mean something. Yes, aesthetically, women have nicer bodies, but I'm not drawing a picture. And if I were, I could just use a mirror.

If you're certain about your non-attraction to women, you may be somewhere in the 90-10 or 80-20 of the scale I linked earlier.

[Scapegrace]

wtf is underclothed, lol.

[Raver]

I don't think Abbie is gay or bisexual because she's not attracted to men physically imo. That's jumping the gun to one very unlikely possibility. She's probably just asexual and you can read more about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality

She probably falls into the category of heteromantic. "Heteroromantic: romantic attraction towards person(s) of a different gender – the romantic aspect of heterosexuality." I could be wrong about this, but I don't think it's fair to call someone homosexual or bisexual simply because they lack physical attraction to the opposite sex.

[Galen]

I don't think Abbie is gay or bisexual because she's not attracted to men physically imo. That's jumping the gun to one very unlikely possibility. She's probably just asexual and you can read more about it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality

lol this seems like an even larger leap of logic than calling her gay


Funny side-story though, back in college I had this interchange with a girl I knew:

"So, I saw you talking with Elise the other day"
"Yeah?"
"So...?"
"So?"
"Are you two going out?"
"No"
"Oh come on, you've got to be into her"
"Well I'm not"
"What are you, asexual or something?"
"Kind of"

[DirectorAbbie]

lol this seems like an even larger leap of logic than calling her gay

No; it's actually closer to the truth. I can't be physically interested in a person without first being emotionally attached to them, and that's not easily accomplished.

[Galen]

No; it's actually closer to the truth. I can't be physically interested in a person without first being emotionally attached to them, and that's not easily accomplished.

Ah, this would make you demisexual.

[Roro]

Jadae is EIE.

I agree with you that he's not Te-ego, but he is definitely Si > Ni. That must mean Alpha SF. I have a hard time seeing him as extroverted, too.

Male bodies aren't very attractive. But I love male personalities.

Agreed, but mostly on the first part about male bodies not being very attractive. Personalities... hard to say. I like males as friends, but as 'lovers' it's a bit difficult for me to feel we have compatible personalities - unless they are gay or very effeminate men, then I am usually a bit more drawn to them. Then again, it's also difficult to feel as though I am compatible with women, but they're definitely more physically attractive than men.

[Radio]

yeah uh you've closed that little heart of yours to possibilities.it's a fortress that only has one door opened.the back one. =O

HAHAHAHA oh jennifer, never stop posting

[Beautiful sky]

I agree with you that he's not Te-ego, but he is definitely Si > Ni. That must mean Alpha SF. I have a hard time seeing him as extroverted, too.

What things point to Fe ego?

[Taknamay]

I haven't been diligent enough in reading through all of the suggestions. Sorry D:

I will try to organize everything today when I have time and put it all together.

[Creepy-pokeball]

There is a thread for my type, Abbie. So much for your organizational skills, since you seem oh so capable of neurotically discussing that everywhere else.

[Creepy-pokeball]

Robyn, stop being a passive-aggressive twit. You can't even fully define extraversion or differentiate it from other psychological or sociological phenomenon.

[DirectorAbbie]

There is a thread for my type, Abbie. So much for your organizational skills, since you seem oh so capable of neurotically discussing that everywhere else.

Maritsa and Robyn are just as guilty as I.
Would it make you happier if I moved this discussion to a thread where it will get less attention?

[Creepy-pokeball]

Maritsa and Robyn are just as guilty as I.
Would it make you happier if I moved this discussion to a thread where it will get less attention?

por favor, seniorita, and I agree.

[Absurd]

[717495]

You obviously don't even know what a relationship is. It is not about being physical; it is about being committed.

Nobody should try to be a homosexual just because they aren't "sensually lustful" towards the opposite sex.

And I'm willing to bet that you are a good Christian girl who thinks being in a relationships is all about glorifying God and having babies. It's not.

Those who seek the truth will give themselves over to it, and they will be taken by something that never dies.

[Scapegrace]

When did this forum get so many crazy fundies?

[Absurd]

When did this forum get so many crazy fundies?

Well, every thread on here turns into a religious one. So, it's war, isn't it?

[Roro]

Robyn, stop being a passive-aggressive twit. You can't even fully define extraversion or differentiate it from other psychological or sociological phenomenon.

Oh baby, I love it when you talk dirty to me. Do it. More. Plz.

But yeah, more so than you can, dear. To think you typed me about five different types within a span of two days *sigh*