joydivision_27 (imported) wrote: Sun Oct 25, 2009 3:20 pm Personally, I identify as a gay man - and I've come to the conclusion that the idea of 'vaginoplasty-only' is probably more of a fetish/fantasy for me than an actual deep-seated identity.

To this only yourself can answer, as nobody else can tell (for definite) who you are. Your perception of yourself may be correct, or it may be not correct (as it was the case with some of the people I know).

In a way you look similar to the original poster of this thread, this is why I thought that you may be TS, and that you just did not come to that conclussion yet. At least you show some of the traits attributed to TG.

Sympathetic psychoteraphist (if you can afford them) may help you find what the actual cause is for you wanting to have vaginoplasty.

Maybe you just want to have vagina because it is a fantasy (i.e. you do not actualy want it). Maybe it is expression of your identity, that you are not ready to accept in your conscious space (i.e. you are TS, but try to avoid admitting it as this would turn the whole of your world upside down).

.. or maybe you are somewhere in the middle - i.e. guy who really wants to have vagina (not mangina, as there are no such thing ).

In any case it would be good to find this out before (and if) you proceed with irreversible body alterations.

evai1234 (imported) wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:34 am (not mangina, as there are no such thing ).

I have been laboring under a delusion - many gay bottoms I know think they have a mangina. Turns out it is only there bums.

Very good.

kristoff wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2009 5:38 pm I have been laboring under a delusion - many gay bottoms I know think they have a mangina. Turns out it is only there bums.

I was talking about anatomical definition, not about definitions of sub-cultures.

evai1234 (imported) wrote: Tue Oct 27, 2009 4:55 am I was talking about anatomical definition, not about definitions of sub-cultures.

Lighten up, girl. You take yourself too seriously, you'll have an aneurism.

I have a question.

I understand about gay men's need of penetration. It's normal, so wanting a vagina to feel the partner's penis inside our body is nothing wrong.

My question is why you have to be bottom? What do you mean by that?

When we are making love with our partners, it doesn't matter what position we are in, does it? Sometimes we can on top; sometimes we can be bottom; other time we can be side by side, right? As long as our vagina is filled with our boyfriend/husband/significant other's penis, it's good, isn't it?

Is it really necessary to lie under our partner (bottom) all the time?

Please enlighten me.

symempathy (imported) wrote: Mon Nov 01, 2010 8:09 pm I have a question.

I understand about gay men's need of penetration. It's normal, so wanting a vagina to feel the partner's penis inside our body is nothing wrong.

My question is why you have to be bottom? What do you mean by that?

When we are making love with our partners, it doesn't matter what position we are in, does it? Sometimes we can on top; sometimes we can be bottom; other time we can be side by side, right? As long as our vagina is filled with our boyfriend/husband/significant other's penis, it's good, isn't it?

Is it really necessary to lie under our partner (bottom) all the time?

Please enlighten me.

Rather literal, aren't we?

symempathy (imported) wrote: Mon Nov 01, 2010 8:09 pm I have a question.

I understand about gay men's need of penetration. It's normal, so wanting a vagina to feel the partner's penis inside our body is nothing wrong.

My question is why you have to be bottom? What do you mean by that?

When we are making love with our partners, it doesn't matter what position we are in, does it? Sometimes we can on top; sometimes we can be bottom; other time we can be side by side, right? As long as our vagina is filled with our boyfriend/husband/significant other's penis, it's good, isn't it?

Is it really necessary to lie under our partner (bottom) all the time?

Please enlighten me.

Symempathy,

The term 'bottom' has little or nothing to do with the actual position during sex; rather, it comes from the BDSM lifestyle, where a 'Top' (i.e., Master or Dominant) is the 'giver', and the 'bottom' (i.e., slave or submissive) is the 'receiver'.

In the gay idiom, the 'Top' uses his penis, and the 'bottom's' anus is penetrated.

Are you enlightened now?

-YPA

In any relationship mf ff mm the be all and end all is not penetration there is a lot more to a relationship that penitrave sex there is love and companionship so i would say that not everyone will desire penitration

YourPhriendlyAuthor (imported) wrote: Tue Nov 02, 2010 9:12 am Symempathy,

The term 'bottom' has little or nothing to do with the actual position during sex; rather, it comes from the BDSM lifestyle, where a 'Top' (i.e., Master or Dominant) is the 'giver', and the 'bottom' (i.e., slave or submissive) is the 'receiver'.

In the gay idiom, the 'Top' uses his penis, and the 'bottom's' anus is penetrated.

Are you enlightened now?

-YPA

Thank you for your explanation.

I still want to know why there is Master and slave. If it's just purely physical sex, I have nothing to say. However, if penetration is a form of expression our love, no one should feel like a slave or master, shouldn't they?

Perhaps I don't entirely understand what you are trying to say. Anyway, I'm hopelessly romantic. I don't need a man to treat me like a prince, but I want him to respect me. Hence, I feel slightly weird when there is a dominant role and submissive one in a relationship.