>"lesbian" character fantasizes about crush
>crush looks extra masculine
I don't understand this. If she was really a lesbian, wouldn't she be attracted to her feminine traits as apposed to her supposed masculine traits?
OH MY SHISHTER
I'd suck on a manly akari dick, no homo.
>wouldn't she be attracted to her feminine traits as apposed to her supposed masculine traits?
When a faggot is attracted to a trap he is attracted because of his feminine traits.
The vast majority of lesbians have one bulldyke/butch partner and one "girly". The idea that both partners be girly is a hollywood/anime invention.
Though even in anime you still oftentimes have one partner be the "prince", and sometimes it's even portrayed realistically with one butch partner (ie Uranus and Neptune).
So what you're really saying is that lesbians don't exist? Are gay men also closet heteros because they do some bearmode X lispy feminine faggot?
It's an arbitrary dichotomy that didn't even always exist. It's not some natural law.
You also seem to have this social justice warrior mentality of having to police everyone's thoughts.
>It's an arbitrary dichotomy that didn't even always exist.
It exists in every creature that does not reproduce asexually.
>It's not some natural law.
>X/Y chromosomes are not some natural law
This is how delusional you are.
More like a closeted homo.
>cites article with no sources
This whole "homophobes are secretly homosexuals" meme dates back to a study published many decades ago that never even made it past peer review. The entire "experiment" was so scientifically lacking that it was laughed at by anyone who actually read it. The sad part is, some retards only read the tagline and believed that shit.
This is why they say a little knowledge is a bad thing.
In what way is it arbitrary? The two sexes evolved because sexual reproduction lead to higher genetic diversity than asexual reproduction. The split between asexual and sexual reproduction happened before life had even evolved to be multi-cellular. Heterosexuality is inherent in every living thing that isn't a single-cellular life form. I would hardly call that "arbitrary". That's just you twisting reality to appease your delusion.
I didn't say anything about sex or reproduction. I said that the concepts of "heterosexual" and "homosexual" are arbitrary. You think this dichotomy has always been around and in exactly the same form, but it hasn't. Japan for example didn't have the dichotomy before the Westerners showed up in the 19th century. In the early to mid 20th century it was still considered normal for girls to have same-sex romances.
But yeah, you're definitely in the closet.
>Stop arguing semantics like a little bitch.
Get a load of this faggot. You must be furious.
>I said that the concepts of "heterosexual" and "homosexual" are arbitrary.
And you still haven't proved a reasoning for this bullshit. I told you the reasoning why heterosexuality is NOT arbitrary, but you refuse to provide your own reasoning. If you cannot even do that much, you are just admitting your retarded beliefs are just delusion with no basis in reality.
>you're definitely in the closet
The fact that you repeated this garbage after you've been told why its wrong shows your willful ignorance and the full extent of your delusion.
>And you still haven't proved a reasoning for this bullshit.
I already said several times that this dichotomy has not always existed, because it hasn't. It also doesn't explain being attracted to traps. On one hand someone is attracted to them for being feminine, and on the other hand he is attracted to them because they have a penis. But at the same he isn't attracted to masculinity, and in all likelihood he is also attracted to vaginas. Trying to explain this through the heterosexual-homosexual dichotomy is just trying to fit square pegs into round holes.
>The fact that you repeated this garbage after you've been told why its wrong shows your willful ignorance and the full extent of your delusion.
If you weren't in the closet you wouldn't be so desperate and angry.
I never said I don't know what janny means. Go back to Reddit please.
>I already said several times that this dichotomy has not always existed, because it hasn't. It also doesn't explain being attracted to traps. On one hand someone is attracted to them for being feminine, and on the other hand he is attracted to them because they have a penis. But at the same he isn't attracted to masculinity, and in all likelihood he is also attracted to vaginas. Trying to explain this through the heterosexual-homosexual dichotomy is just trying to fit square pegs into round holes.
Nigger, its the masculine/feminine dichotomy that hasn't always existed, not heterosexual/homosexual. Masculinity and femininity are largely cultural. Heterosexuality is natural. Homosexuality is the fault of a broken or delusional human being.
I already provided reasoning by pointing out that this dichotomy has not always existed, and that it doesn't explain everything its supposed to.
It's pretty obvious that you're so deep in the closet you can talk to Aslan. That's why this is making you so upset.
Only a janitor can delete post, so how exactly have I been deleting posts? Maybe try going back to Reddit, newfriend?
>I already provided reasoning by pointing out that this dichotomy has not always existed
That's not reasoning you dumb motherfucker, that's trying to back up an unsubstantiated claim with another unsubstantiated claim, that just means you are spouting double bullshit.
If it's some ironclad natural law then why did it come into being only recently, and not everywhere at once? Do you think natural laws just drop from the sky at random intervals and in random locations?
>why did it come into being only recently, and not everywhere at once?
What the fuck are you talking about? You're just making shit up at this point.
Homosexual and heterosexual are words that describe an action. They are not social constructs. They are not open to debate. They are an observation of the natural world. Observations of the natural world are called laws. So yes, by definition it is a natural law. Homosexuals fuck things of their own gender. Heterosexuals fuck things of different gender. If you mean the words came in to being recently that may be true, but only because man creates words to describe things that occur or exist.
>What the fuck are you talking about?
I am talking about the heterosexual-homosexual dichotomy being a recent invention and not existing everywhere at once.
>They are not social constructs.
That's precisely what they are.
Having fun in your closet?
I'm amazed by how deep in the closet you are. I'm also puzzled as to what exactly you're doing on /a/. Anime isn't exactly known for its heterosexuality and traditional gender roles.
Do you even realize where you are and what kind of people post here? Do you really think people here give a shit about your "REEE DEGENERACY" ramblings when they're busy masturbating to traps and lolis and ordering hug pillows from Japan?
I don't care if you love dicks or not, but if you start spouting irrational bullshit and start trying to justify delusions with more irrational bullshit I am going to call you out on it.
Every human being has an effect on others. No matter how small, if enough people do it then it adds up to something big. Don't go thinking that you are worthless and that your actions have no meaning or effect because that is absolutely untrue.
>Every human being has an effect on others.
My cat has an effect on me and she is quite possibly the #1 best cat in the whole world, but I'm still fairly sure she's a complete political non-entity.
A political non-entity is not the same as a non-entity. If a cat improves your life, then the quality of the world is improved by the cat's existence. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, as they say.
>I don't understand this.
masculine/feminine dichotomy is very baked-in to the human psyche, so lesbians frequently recapitulate it with butch/femme roles. As do gays. As do straights.
The more you know.
Lesbians often go for mannish women. Most lesbvian couples are not two feminine women being feminine together just like most gay couples aren't two meaty muscle men working out before fucking.
>It's just history
I'm not asking for history, I'm asking for logic. Saying something is OK because it happened historically is the appeal to tradition logical fallacy. When you are committing a logical fallacy you are not using logic.
Plenty of things could theoretically lead to the downfall of society without being political entities themselves. When you don't care if your neighbor is behaving immorally and take no steps to correct the behavior, it is a net negative effect on the world. If enough people have this mindset, things can degrade very quickly.
So you admit it's historically true. Then what are you still trying to argue about? And who are you to demand logic from other people when your own logic has already fallen apart?
Admit that homosexuality has occured historically? Yes, of course. I haven't tried to deny that even once. I merely claim it is absolutely irrelevant. If someone behaves immorally in the past it is not justification to behave immorally in the future.
>Then what are you still trying to argue about?
My initial argument, which has yet to be refuted, is that men who find dicks attractive are homosexuals. Anyone who finds a dick attractive and claims they aren't is delusional.
Admit that the dichotomy has historically not always existed.
>My initial argument, which has yet to be refuted, is that men who find dicks attractive are homosexuals.
And yet some of those men are only attracted to femininity and have no interest in masculinity. It's almost like your theory is deeply flawed or something.
>Anyone who finds a dick attractive and claims they aren't is delusional.
Come out of the closet already.
>GAY PEOPLE ARE EVIL AND RUINING SOCIETY
Oh shit, I thought I stepped into /v/ for a second
Homosexuals are weird like this. I've met gay men who would only date feminine fuccbois and lesbians who were dating butch women who were damn near indistinguishable from another man. Side note:
Why is it always the women with huge tits that dress up like guys?
It's not really masculine, more just androgynous.
It's a parody of classic shoujo yuri where one girl would be an athletic princely type who often dressed in male clothing and used masculine pronouns because you know Japan's big on its pronouns and suffixes.
Bisexual reporting in.
Most women are bi with a heavy preference for men.
Only raging bulldykes are "gay" and I've even seen them enjoy dick for a while.
Think of how bisexual men like traps. Best of both worlds in their eyes.