A good thread die for chinese 055 destroyer.

>>34393510
Source?

>>34393556
Looks like a destroyer

>>34393510
Finally a warship I can cosplay my chinese ass in

Heres a link:

https://m.weibo.cn/u/1633782373?uid=1633782373&luicode=10000011&lfid=1076031633782373&featurecode=20000180

>>34393510
>>34393556
>>34393597
>>34393506
>>34395706
wtf is wrong with you people?

>>34395733
>you will never pretend to be a trap waifuship, and secretly impregnating the other actual waifuships with your viral 130mm high explosive loads behind the admirals back

>>34395780
Is the admiral on the poopdeck at that time?

File: __akizuki_kantai_collection_drawn_by_masaru_jp__54f49ed5f4e7d88ae310f6d10e15436f.png (2MB, 1200x1600px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1200x1600px

>>34393506
Cute Duki OP

File: best botes.jpg (1MB, 952x1500px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 952x1500px

Is this the bote thread?

File: USS Iowa.jpg (273KB, 1000x1430px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 1000x1430px

>>34393506
>>34393510
All warship waifus are futas or traps anyways.
I don't see anything new here.

Why do you think everyone love Iowa-chan? She's unrivaled in the cannon size department.

File: 1497628312741.jpg (81KB, 497x732px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 497x732px

>>34397487
Her tits are her cannons. She ain't got no dick.

File: 1.jpg (460KB, 1280x1809px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 1280x1809px

>>34398228
I can't post it on a blue board anon but she's the biggest of all girls, only Bismarck-chan gets close to her size.

File: Ping Hai Yasoshima rebirth as 055.jpg (620KB, 690x3802px) Image search: [Google]

620KB, 690x3802px

Ping Hai/Yasoshima-chan has been reborn as 055 - after more 80 years.

File: 1496101978460.png (447KB, 875x629px) Image search: [Google]

447KB, 875x629px

>>34398283
no. benis is not good on woman. women should only have a gootie, a pooter and breasts.

>>34397487
>All warship waifus and admirals are futas anyways.
This is best canon.
>>34398283
That doujin was alright

File: iowa.jpg (958KB, 1240x1754px) Image search: [Google]

958KB, 1240x1754px

>>34398228
>nicknamed The Big Stick
You can't deny it for much longer anon

>>34393510
>that below the water line bulge
accurate representation of bulbous hull

File: sonar.jpg (112KB, 960x1080px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 960x1080px

>>34393510
>first Chinese warship with an actual modern large size sonar
>immediately made a trap by lewd artists

Suffering.

>>34399638
Don't shoot the messenger, anon.
Just accept all Kancolle girls literally have cocks and the artist loves futas because he's a depraved otaku.

File: 3b0.jpg (149KB, 800x1131px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 800x1131px

>>34393506
>You can't deny it for much longer anon
That's what you think. Iowa with a pooter is best Iowa.

>>34399887
If a warship exists
Know that there is a hentai waifu version of it floating around on the internets

File: 1497933944878.gif (3MB, 323x386px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 323x386px

>>34399936
It can't be.... It's impossible.... All these wasted years... thinking they were dickless... What is the meaning of life now...

This thread is fucking shit.


Fuck off anime faggots.

File: maxresdefault (1).jpg (45KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 1280x720px

>>34400045
We have an expression in prize fighting: "Everyone has a plan until they've been hit." Well my friend, you've just been hit. The getting up is up to you.

>>34400078
>he says as he is currently browsing on an anime image board

File: 826c2bede02a4501b0a8b641b3f4decb.jpg (173KB, 1536x806px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 1536x806px

>>34400239
It's time

File: 63627299_p0 (1).jpg (265KB, 1000x1250px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 1000x1250px

>>34399887
My Renhai-chan is a girl (female)!

>>34400045
>>34400472
It's just a dick, it's not the end of the world.

>>34400732
>Just a benis

File: nagatoandmutsuarebigger.png (464KB, 707x695px) Image search: [Google]

464KB, 707x695px

>>34398283
>implying
Both Mutsu and Nagato are easily bigger than Bismarck and Iowa.

File: chinese bote-girls 052D Liaoning.jpg (205KB, 1000x500px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 1000x500px

>>34400506
I thought PLAN DDGs were brown girls?

File: 052C.jpg (306KB, 960x1280px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 960x1280px

>>34401280

>>34395780
Senya Sabou assures this inevitably ends with you getting raped into a cocksleeve by some girl with a giant cock.

>>34400045
Don't worry, anon, the carriers don't have dicks.

>>34395232
>Turrets
>Triple turrets no less
>On a modern warship
Not only will they never get used, they're a massive danger to everyone on board. I hope this is a shop.

>>34400732
You know who else said that? Stalin's mother.

>>34401703
Well, someone had to take all those massive girl penises in the series.

File: DDc7_7XVoAAw3WF.jpg (143KB, 1200x801px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1200x801px

>>34401730
kek, it is a shop.

>>34395733
Aren't asians funny

>>34401703
Nope just looked at manga referenced above. Pretty sure I saw a carrier with a cock. All hope is lost

Subs>Surface shits>>>>>>>>>>>Carriers

File: 1461458444224.jpg (871KB, 1200x850px) Image search: [Google]

871KB, 1200x850px

>>34401905
Because subs are lolis?

File: cryingwojak.jpg (80KB, 626x750px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 626x750px

>>34402093
Let me guess.
They are traps too?

File: IMG_0618.jpg (713KB, 2592x1936px) Image search: [Google]

713KB, 2592x1936px

>>34395232
It looks like an Arleigh Burke.

Why no drawings of an Arleigh Burke-chan?

>>34402155
Duh.

>>34402155
No. They're obviously futanari like everything else.

File: 0c5.jpg (565KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

565KB, 1920x1080px

>>34402155

File: 1497621836300.jpg (413KB, 1646x900px) Image search: [Google]

413KB, 1646x900px

>>34402155
According to this thread they have to be...

File: 1438291648509.webm (1MB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x720px

>>34402155
With big cannons.

File: 1495000611911.png (2MB, 1890x908px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1890x908px

hello i heard this was the boteslut thread

>>34402155
Futas aren't gay, their dicks are just well developed clits.

>>34402318
She reminds me of the club president from futabu.

>>34402190
thanks for the wallpaper

File: 1358058907969.jpg (106KB, 372x359px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 372x359px

>>34402391
>their dicks are just well developed clits.
>Feminine benis

>>34395232
>who you callin pinhead?

>>34402426
sauce on this cutie?

>>34402565
google says "prunus girl" (and yes, that's a trap). I'll have to read this later myself also

File: 1358044122358.jpg (46KB, 499x463px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 499x463px

>>34402565
Prunus Girl

>>34402391
When they're drilling a man's ass it's still pretty gay.

>>34402950
That's literally being pegged by a girl.
It's not gay because it's just like if you got fucked by a strap-on.

You need a man fucking another man to make it gay not a girl fucking a man that's hetero.

The only way for them to be gay is if you were a girl.

>>34403034
Thet saonds purty ghey

>>34403069
>Having sex with something that has XX chromosomes is gay.

Futanari are hermaphrodites, and thus neither male or female.
Traps are male.
Ergo, traps are homosexual, but futanari are heterosexual if you're a male.

>>34403142
hermaphrodites are gay though because the penis is masculine, traps aren't gay because the benis is feminine

>>34393510
I recognize that bulge

>>34403681
https://www.google.com/search?q=homosexual+definition
adjective
1.
(of a person) sexually attracted to people of one's own sex.
noun
noun: homosexual; plural noun: homosexuals
1.
a person who is sexually attracted to people of their own sex.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/homosexual
Definition of homosexual
1
: of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex a homosexual man was involved in a homosexual relationship
2
: of, relating to, or involving sexual activity between persons of the same sex homosexual acts

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality
Homosexuality is romantic attraction, sexual attraction or sexual behavior between members of the same sex

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/homosexual
Sexually attracted to people of one's own sex.
Involving or characterized by sexual attraction between people of the same sex.
‘homosexual desire’
A person who is sexually attracted to people of their own sex.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/homosexuality
sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one's own sex.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/homosexual
a person who is sexually attracted to people of the same sex and not to people of the opposite sex

http://www.yourdictionary.com/homosexual
adjective
The definition of homosexual is people who are sexually attracted to individuals who are the same sex, or it is something related to sexual attraction to someone of the same sex.
A man's sexual attraction to another man is an example of something that would be described as a homosexual attraction.
A bar that is primarily frequented by gay men and gay women is an example of a homosexual bar.
noun
Homosexual is defined as a person who is sexually attracted to someone of his or her own sex.

>Traps are men
>Therefore sexual attraction to traps whom are men makes you gay if you are also a man
>Futa are hermaphrodites and thus straight

>>34403711
>believing in definitions from Jewgle
look at this futa loving faggot

It's funny, but in Russia warships have always been "boys", not "girls." So no problems with bulbs

>>34404109
Not an argument. Also
>ignoring the 6 other sources that all say the same thing

>>34405431
You only showed him the definition of homosex, which is to be attracted to a member of one's own sex. Traps look to men like they're a member of the opposite sex, so it's not homo to be attracted to them. If you like them specifically because they're men and not because of their looks, then you might call it gay.

>>34405600
>You only showed him the definition of homosex, which is to be attracted to a member of one's own sex. Traps look to men like they're a member of the opposite sex, so it's not homo to be attracted to them.
Wrong, it is solely based on sex, not how much they look of a sex. Traps are by definition male and thus gay to be sexually attracted to.
>If you like them specifically because they're men and not because of their looks, then you might call it gay.
If you like traps at all, you are gay.

File: useless item.png (152KB, 429x630px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 429x630px

>current year
>not appreciating female-shaped hermaphrodite on female

LMAOING@URLIFE

>>34393510
SAUCE ?

>>34405633
You're arguing semantics. If something looks like a female and you fuck it, it doesn't make you gay if it turns out to be male.

>>34406024
Except it literally does by definition. It's okay to be gay or bisexual dude, no need to make "1 + 1 = 3" tier arguments to deny it.

>>34406046
Then the definition is flawed.

>>34406046
>>34406046

Futanaris are girls though.
I don't even get why you two are arguing.

They aren't even transgender aka male taking female hormones to modify their body into a female shape.

They literally have a vagina, uterus and all that nice stuff.
A futa is as much of a woman as your mom.

>>34406058
>1 + 1 = 2
>NO 1 + 1 = 3
>Actually you are wrong because 2 is literally defined as the sum of 1 and 1
>THEN THE DEFINITION IS FLAWED
nice "argument"
>>34406061
Futanari are by definition hermaphrodites.

>Futanari (ふたなり, seldom: 二形, 双形, literally: dual form; 二成, 双成, literally: [to be of] two kinds) is the Japanese word for hermaphroditism
Really makes you think.

>>34406024

You're technically right because that would be "femmesexual" but the larger problem is that people are still using "gay" as a derogatory term

>>34406062
The definition is flawed since it talks about attraction to one's own sex, and attraction is dependent on looks. If the object of attraction doesn't look like one's sex, then it isn't attraction to one's own sex.

You're arguing semantics.

>>34406086
Except the object of attraction is quite literally of one's own sex.
In addition, one's sex is objective, while features of masculinity and femininity are subjective and can be changed by societal views unlike one's sex.
One can equally say that fucking a masculine male isn't homosexual as they are attracted to their femininity, as it is entirely subjective.
The only thing flawed here is your argument. You're arguing something that is grounded in fact and objectivity to be changed into something that can be changed at one's whims.

>>34406111
Obect of attraction has the appearance of an opposite sex, though, and attraction is dependent on appearances and not an objective definition of sex.

Femininity isn't entirely subjective.

File: Screenshot_20170630-115656.png (696KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

696KB, 1440x2560px

>>34393506

Post em

>>3440615
>Obect of attraction has the appearance of an opposite sex though
And yet it is still the same sex.
>and attraction is dependent on appearances and not an objective definition of sex.
Attraction is dependant on appearances, but sexuality is not.
>Femininity isn't entirely subjective.
>implying
What determines femininity and masculinity?

>>34406158
>>34406186

File: chrome_2017-06-30_17-31-44.png (134KB, 228x733px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 228x733px

>>34406175

>>34406186
>And yet it is still the same sex.
That doesn't look like it, which is the important bit.
>Attraction is dependant on appearances, but sexuality is not.
Sexuality is dependent on attraction, though, so ultimately it too is dependent on appearances.
>What determines femininity and masculinity
Presence of certain physical traits.

>>34406504
Presence or absence, I should say.

The point is, I'd consider someone who's attracted to a woman who looks like a man more gay than someone who's attracted to a man that looks like a woman.

>>34406504
>That doesn't look like it, which is the important bit
Which is as about as relevant to sexuality as is finger length, whether they are wearing hat or not, and other such things. As in, not at all.
>Sexuality is dependent on attraction, though, so ultimately it too is dependent on appearances
And sexual attraction to males regardless of appearance makes one a homosexual if they too are male.
>Presence of certain physical traits
Which are entirely subjective and have no concrete and objective way of being defined.
>>34406535
>The point is, I'd consider someone who's attracted to a woman who looks like a man more gay than someone who's attracted to a man that looks like a woman.
And you'd be wrong. Also, tomboys exist and are clearly an object of sexual attraction to what can be defined and can obviously be observed to be heterosexual males.

>>34406614
>Which is as about as relevant to sexuality as is finger length, whether they are wearing hat or not, and other such things. As in, not at all.
It's extremely relevant, because everything is dependent on appearances and attraction to them.
>And sexual attraction to males regardless of appearance makes one a homosexual if they too are male.
Attraction to female physical appearance isn't homosexual in the least.
>Which are entirely subjective and have no concrete and objective way of being defined.
Physical traits are not subjective.
>And you'd be wrong. Also, tomboys exist and are clearly an object of sexual attraction to what can be defined and can obviously be observed to be heterosexual males.
Tomboys are not women that look like men, they're women that look like women but act in a boyish fashion.

>>34406062
>Futanari are by definition hermaphrodites.

Futas in japanese culture are literally girls with a dick.
They have female personalities, look like females, the only "male" thing in them is the penis and they still have the entire female reproductive system.

They are literally dickgirls, trying to put real world scientific bullshit to prove a point doesn't turn them into men.

There's no hairy muscular bearded futas that look like the Kenshiro from fist of the north star.

They are all girls like >>34399990

>>34406691
Except I literally never stated them to be men. In fact I've stated the exact opposite. And the Japanese literally define it as hermaphrodites mate.

>>34406657
>It's extremely relevant, because everything is dependent in appearances and attraction to them
And what they are is defined by what they are sexually attracted to. A man who fucks animals is still committing bestiality regardless of how human it looks to the man, much like a man who fucks underage children is a pedophile is still a pedophile no matter how much he claims they look like adults.
>Attraction to female physical appearance isn't homosexual in the least
Sexual attraction to men regardless of how you perceive them is though.
>Physical traits are not subjective
Yet perception of them and what they are classified under is. The Greeks thought small penises were of ideal masculinity, fast forward to today and they're what trapfags call feminine penises.

>>34406761
>And what they are is defined by what they are sexually attracted to.
That's exactly it. They're attracted to women, which is why they feel attraction towards men that look like women.
>A man who fucks animals is still committing bestiality regardless of how human it looks to the man
If you found an animal that looked exactly like a human and fucked it, you aren't attracted to animals, you're attracted to humans. Bestiality also has a separate definition.
>much like a man who fucks underage children is a pedophile is still a pedophile no matter how much he claims they look like adults.
Explicitly incorrect for two reasons. One, paedophilia is exclusive or primary attraction towards prepubescents. If one fucks a kid but is also attracted to adults, he isn't a paedophile by definition. Second, since paedophilia is attraction towards prepubescents, if the child looks like an adult she or he isn't prepubescent. Ephebophilia would be more applicable here.
>Sexual attraction to men regardless of how you perceive them is though.
You aren't attracted to men, you're attracted to women.
>Yet perception of them and what they are classified under is. The Greeks thought small penises were of ideal masculinity, fast forward to today and they're what trapfags call feminine penises.
The greeks were also openly homo.

>That's exactly it. They're attracted to women, which is why they feel attraction towards men that look like women.
And they're also attracted to men, making them bisexual.
>If you found an animal that looked exactly like a human and fucked it, you aren't attracted to animals, you're attracted to humans. Bestiality also has a separate definition.
Except they'd still be committing bestiality regardless of how human it looked. Also, like I said, it doesn't matter how human it looks to you or to him, a regular old dog could be considered human-looking to someone and if they fucked it they'd be committing bestiality just as much as someone who fucks an actual human-looking animal.
>Explicitly incorrect for two reasons. One, paedophilia is exclusive or primary attraction towards prepubescents. If one fucks a kid but is also attracted to adults, he isn't a paedophile by definition.
Wrong. It is defined as "sexual attraction to children", a pedophile could be sexually attracted to both child and adults alike and he'd still be a pedophile by definition.
>Second, since paedophilia is attraction towards prepubescents, if the child looks like an adult she or he isn't prepubescent. Ephebophilia would be more applicable here.
It is since what looks like an adult is just as subjective as what looks like a female or male to a person, some dude could say that he believes a toddler looks like an adult. Also, now you're arguing about semantics after bitching at me for supposedly doing the same thing.
>You aren't attracted to men, you're attracted to women.
And also men that you think look like women, which is still sexual attraction to men.
>The greeks were also openly homo.
Which still does not detract from the point that they thought small penises were masculine and the point that what is feminine and masculine is entirely subjective while what is male and what is female is not, along with what is an animal and what is a child.

>>34406863
>>34406940

>>34406940
>And they're also attracted to men, making them bisexual.
Wrong. They aren't attracted to men at all, only women.
>Except they'd still be committing bestiality regardless of how human it looked. Also, like I said, it doesn't matter how human it looks to you or to him, a regular old dog could be considered human-looking to someone and if they fucked it they'd be committing bestiality just as much as someone who fucks an actual human-looking animal.
That's because bestiality is defined as "fucking an animal", it doesn't delve into attraction at all.
>Wrong. It is defined as "sexual attraction to children
http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/GRNBOOK.pdf
>B.
>A persistent or a predominant preference for sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children.
Sexual attraction doesn't cut it, it has to be primary or exclusive.
>It is since what looks like an adult is just as subjective as what looks like a female or male to a person, some dude could say that he believes a toddler looks like an adult.
Look up physical traits tied to adolescence. If some dude claimed that a toddler looks like an adult, it wouldn't be his opinion, he'd just be wrong.
>And also men that you think look like women, which is still sexual attraction to men.
No, it's sexual attraction to feminine form, not men.
>Which still does not detract from the point that they thought small penises were masculine
Greeks were obviously growers, not showers. Also they valued musculature and facial hair, which are traits not present in women.
>what is a child.
And what is a child, then? Since child is defined by "prepubescent" and the beginning of pubescence is subjective, can you actually say what is and isn't a child?

>>34393510
OwO what's this

>>34399887
Everyone knows ladyboys have the biggest bulges in Asia!

>I sparked a massive argument with a single shitpost
/k/ really is the easiest board to troll

>>34407100
>The fire rises

File: 1498455221619.jpg (15KB, 396x417px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 396x417px

>>34407104
Oh something's rising alright

File: 1468408240481.jpg (46KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 600x400px

>>34407100
>single shitpost
>Literally posting about botesluts.
>Thought it wouldn't end up in kancolle futa waifu wars.

Are you new around here?

>>34407050
>Wrong. They aren't attracted to men at all, only women.
Wrong. They are attracted to what is defined as a male. Even if they are also sexually attracted to what is defined as a female, they'd still only be bisexual.
>That's because bestiality is defined as "fucking an animal", it doesn't delve into attraction at all.
And yet you claimed that
>http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/GRNBOOK.pdf
>B.
>A persistent or a predominant preference for sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children.
>Sexual attraction doesn't cut it, it has to be primary or exclusive.
Except you forgot that it says a persistent OR a predominant preference, ergo it doesn't need to be primary or exclusive. Also
https://www.google.com/search?q=pedophilia+definition
>sexual feelings directed toward children.
>Look up physical traits tied to adolescence. If some dude claimed that a toddler looks like an adult, it wouldn't be his opinion, he'd just be wrong.
Yes, just like a person who claims that a male looks like a female and therefore it wouldn't be gay to fuck him would be just as wrong as a person who claims that a toddler looks like an adult and therefore it wouldn't be pedophilic to fuck him. After all, it would be entirely his opinion, and he'd be by definition wrong.
>Greeks were obviously growers, not showers.
[Citation needed]
>Also they valued musculature and facial hair, which are traits not present in women.
A trait also typically not found in human women is a penis, regardless of size.
>And what is a child, then? Since child is defined by "prepubescent" and the beginning of pubescence is subjective, can you actually say what is and isn't a child?
A child is anything that is in the period preceding puberty. Also
>implying the start of puberty is subjective

You fags always start arguing about "futas is gay/not gay"

Christ who cares? Just jack off.

>>34407156
>implying arguing isn't a fun and engaging activity to do
It's almost like you want me to argue with you or something so you can join in the fun. :^)

File: heOVtLf.jpg (133KB, 600x839px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 600x839px

>>34407156
These boat waifus bring all kinds of emotions from the hearts of the fellow /k/ommandos. Mostly lust and shame.

File: 1498117316430.png (185KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 640x360px

>>34407156
>just jack off

Implying i'm not jacking off to the argument itself

>>34407191
Haha nice pic

>>34403034
The things some ppl will rationalize are truly astounding.

>>34407222
That anon is right tho.
Man + woman hetero.
Man + man gay.
Woman + woman gay.

The kind of sex act is not really related to being gay or not. same way as eating some girl ass is not the same as eating a dude ass but in your autistic virgin mind it must be.

>>34407222
A man who gets fucked by a female via strap-on would be by definition heterosexual. However, that man would be considered feminine as he is under a feminine position.

>>34407238
>feminine
What if he's a power bottom?

>>34407288
He'd still be pretty feminine for getting fucked.

>>34407154
>Wrong. They are attracted to what is defined as a male
So what if they are? It's the female appearance they're attracted to. If you insist that feeling attracted towards a man that looks entirely like a woman makes one homosexual or bisexual, then we're all homosexual or bisexual and the terms have no meaning whatsoever.
>Except you forgot that it says a persistent OR a predominant preference, ergo it doesn't need to be primary or exclusive.
Yes, if it's persistent enough, then it can be viewed as being primary.
>Yes, just like a person who claims that a male looks like a female and therefore it wouldn't be gay to fuck him
This goes beyond subjectivity. Traps are called just that exactly because they're virtually indistinguishable in appearance from a woman, and you'd find out that they're male after checking below the waist. Can you honestly claim that you can accurately tell every individual's sex by their appearance?
>that a toddler looks like an adult and therefore it wouldn't be pedophilic to fuck him. After all, it would be entirely his opinion, and he'd be by definition wrong.
Are we talking about a child that objectively looks like an adult or just someone's claim that a toddler which actually looks like a toddler looks like an adult?
>A trait also typically not found in human women is a penis, regardless of size.
You're lucky that you haven't seen what roiding women's clitorises end up looking like.
>A child is anything that is in the period preceding puberty. Also
So then the physical traits associated with puberty can also be clearly defined. And so we should also be able to clearly define physical feminine and masculine traits.

>>34407232
This isn't about sex, it's about sexual attraction.

File: __i_class_destroyer_kuchiku_i_kyuu_and_wo_class_aircraft_carrier_kantai_collection_drawn_by_shuuichi__a9261107a74fbc08dcf2fdc5ea24caa3.jpg (353KB, 817x1000px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 817x1000px

Wo is cutest

File: shimakaze.jpg (401KB, 992x1403px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 992x1403px

>>34407432
>Wo is cutest

Shimakaze a best.

>>34407383
>So what if they are? It's the female appearance they're attracted to. If you insist that feeling attracted towards a man that looks entirely like a woman makes one homosexual or bisexual, then we're all homosexual or bisexual and the terms have no meaning whatsoever.
It sounds like you're sexually attracted to traps and assume that everyone else must also be sexually attracted to traps.
>Yes, if it's persistent enough, then it can be viewed as being primary.
If a person is sexually attracted to both children and adults for over a year yet are more sexually attracted to adults, it's still persistent yet not primary attraction to children
>This goes beyond subjectivity. Traps are called just that exactly because they're virtually indistinguishable in appearance from a woman, and you'd find out that they're male after checking below the waist. Can you honestly claim that you can accurately tell every individual's sex by their appearance?
My feelings to how accurately I can claim an individual's sex by their appearance is irrelevant to whether or not sexual attractions to traps. And by that logic, we could claim that your average man is virtually indistinguishable to a very masculine woman besides what is below the waist and thus it would not be gay to fuck the average man as they're also a trap.
>Are we talking about a child that objectively looks like an adult or just someone's claim that a toddler which actually looks like a toddler looks like an adult?
And why would that claim be any less invalid than the claims of a man being feminine enough?
>You're lucky that you haven't seen what roiding women's clitorises end up looking like.
And yet it's still not a penis. :^)
>So then the physical traits associated with puberty can also be clearly defined. And so we should also be able to clearly define physical feminine and masculine traits.
Except what is feminine and what is masculine are entirely subjective and change based on the views of society

>>34407232
>>34407397
Which is entirely defined by the sex of the person, not the appearance of a person.

File: Kongou-class modern.jpg (1MB, 2588x1295px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2588x1295px

>>34400506
A ship-girl to surpass the Burke...

>>34402161
No Burke, but Modern Day Kongou. But kek, only baseline 7.

File: buck angel.jpg (82KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1920x1080px

>>34407502
So would you fuck james yeager twin to prove you're a manly man and not a sissy faggot?
It should be hetero by your standards.

>>34407530
A man who's not sexually attracted to ugly women yet is sexually attracted to only women is still a heterosexual. It's called standards. :^)

>>34407540
>It's called standards.
>:^)
2/10wouldnotbangneckbeard.jpg

>>34407556
Don't be so hard on yourself. :^)

>>34407559
>I can't refute the argument I will meme him to death instead.
:^) for you too I guess.

File: halifax3.jpg (45KB, 620x367px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 620x367px

>>34400014
>When your navy is so shitty Japs don't even make R34 of it

>>34407573
Well now isn't that the pot calling the kettle black, last time I checked the post I quoted which was >>34407556 comprised of memes rather than an actual argument.

File: big 2.jpg (669KB, 2206x1280px) Image search: [Google]

669KB, 2206x1280px

>>34407075
Lewd version of China's new Crusier.

File: get.png (376KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

376KB, 400x400px

>>34407596
I'm waiting for you to prove fucking pic is not gay though.
After all it's a ""woman"" amirite? So it's not gay at all.

>>34407618
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as a woman, is in fact, Man/Woman, or as I've recently taken to calling it, mentally ill. Women are not a vaginal system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning Woman system made useful by the breasts, ass and vital system components comprising a full woman as defined by the male gaze.

>>34407618
fe·male
ˈfēˌmāl/Submit
adjective
1.
of or denoting the sex that can bear offspring or produce eggs, distinguished biologically by the production of gametes (ova) that can be fertilized by male gametes.
If Buck Angel can produce eggs, then they are by definition female.

male
māl/Submit
adjective
1.
of or denoting the sex that produces small, typically motile gametes, especially spermatozoa, with which a female may be fertilized or inseminated to produce offspring.
Buck Angel does not qualify as a male by definition, yet does for female. Ergo, they are a female.

ho·mo·sex·u·al
ˌhōməˈsekSH(o͞o)əl/Submit
adjective
1.
(of a person) sexually attracted to people of one's own sex.
So unless you are a female, sexual attraction to Buck Angel is not homosexual.

>>34407651
>If Buck Angel can produce eggs, then they are by definition female.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysterectomy
One of the first things trannies like buck do.

Also cancer patients have to do that sometimes so you're telling me your grandma is not a woman if she can't produce eggs? top kek my dude.

>>34407687
So if Buck Angel has gone through Hysterectomy, they are by definition no longer a female. However, they are also not defined as a male. :^)
Also, it sounds like you're cherrypicking autistically specific scenarios in a vain attempt to prove yourself heterosexual while liking traps when definitions pretty clearly state you're objectively not a heterosexual.