X Years Ago Today

[sorcyress]

One year ago today, it was 2008, and I was (shocking nobody who's ever had an extended conversation with me ever) interested in gender and sexuality.

I also believe I originally meant to post up some thoughts on that poll, ages and ages ago, and then got distracted. At the very least, go fill it out for me if you haven't, okay? Or, if you want to do the really quick and dirty version in the comments of this post...

You list as [gender(s)]:
Explain:

You are attracted to people of [gender(s)]:
Explain:

You consider yourself [poly/mono/etc]:
Explain:

You are currently in relatinships best described as [none/mono/poly/complicated/etc]:
Explain:

And, bonus question, since I forgot it in the original poll:
Your preferred pronoun is:

Seriously. This kind of thing fascinates the hell out of me. Babble¹ about gender and sexuality and stuff like that in the comments, please!

~Sor
MOOP!

1: No, really, Har, Dodger, etc. I like hearing people's thoughts, especially about this. I am encouraging long comments, damnit. Don't let yourself be limited by the thought that I'm going to be overwhelmed --if you're that worried, just toss a one line summery at the bottom for ease of skimming. I promise to read the whole thing though.

Comments

[ndkid.livejournal.com]

I list as male. I've never had any real question about my gender because for me, luckily, my gender is tied to my sexuality. I'm not the most male of men, and I've got plenty of qualities our society considers feminine. The notion of being a woman for some stretch of time, and experiencing the physiological aspects of womanhood interest me, but I am aware that I would experience it from the perspective of someone who was born and raised a male, which would inherently make it a different experience than if I'd been female from the start.

I am most generally attracted to people of a female gender, but there are exceptions. To date, however, I have never been attracted to any born a member of the male sex. I keep hoping to meet a male or even a post-op female who does it for me, but it hasn't happened yet.

I consider people, including myself, poly, in much the same way that I consider people, including myself, omnivores; deviation from that state is a choice, not a matter of natural states. I'm willing to haggle about the possibility that females are primed, evolutionarily speaking, toward monogamy. But, if we take polyamory to mean "multiple simultaneous romantic attachments", I have never been presented with a compelling argument for the notion that romantic love is, unlike every other form of love, singular.

I am currently in no capital-R-Relationships. I find that, in my life, at least, good communication limits the possibility of Relationships ever being complicated.

I don't really have a preferred pronoun. I called my mom "sir". My hair is sufficiently long that I've started to get called "ma'am" by people with poor eyesight. I consider male pronouns more correct than female ones, but if someone liked using feminine pronouns and wasn't causing anyone else confusion in the process, I don't think I'd mind.

[londo.livejournal.com]

I consider gender to be a bullshit social construct, and don't know why people pay so much attention to it.

[jannyblue.livejournal.com]

You list as [gender(s)]: Female.
Explain: I've got 2 X chromosomes and a vagina, textbook female. I've got some "masculine" personality traits, but I never think of myself as male, beyond occasionally saying "I'm the closest thing my mother has to a son" (I did all the yard work and other stereotypical "boy" chores as a kid)

You are attracted to people of [gender(s)]: I am sexually attracted to males. I have never found myself sexually attracted to a female. (For platonic-friend relationships, I am attracted to geeks of any gender.)
Explain: Despite many people's assumptions to the contrary, I have no interest in any vagina that is not my own. "Since when are you heterosexual?!?" has been asked of me more than once, but I suspect it was largely wishful thinking on the part of the person who asked.

You consider yourself [poly/mono/etc]:Serially monogamous.
Explain: I only ever have 1 mutually-exclusive "romantic" relationship at a time, but I tend not to be single for very long after the end of one. The longest I ever went with just "casually dating" was about 8 months.

You are currently in relatinships best described as [none/mono/poly/complicated/etc]: Monogamous*.
Explain: Been with Rob and nobody else for... wow. 2 1/2 years. It's been only 2 years officially as his "girlfriend", though. For the first 6 months we weren't technically exclusive (though we were so by default).

There's a star on the label because are certain things that he has permission to do that would be 'over the line' in some mono-relationships, but A) I know all about what he's doing with the whipped cream/other aerosol food products B) He knows very well what the limits are and he respects them.

And, bonus question, since I forgot it in the original poll:
Your preferred pronoun is: She. Her. Female-specific pronouns. I will call other people whatever they tell me to, because it doesn't really matter.

(I'm aware that mine are probably the most boring "vanilla" answers you're likely to get.)

[thorog.livejournal.com]

Male/Female/Mono/Mono/him

Boring!

[herbertinc.livejournal.com]

You list as [gender(s)]: Female
Explain: Despite common misconception, I am, in fact, wholly female, both physically and mentally.

You are attracted to people of [gender(s)]: Sexually, male. Romantically, both.
Explain: Despite another common misconception I am in fact heterosexual. Girls are very pretty and fun to fool around with, but I don't think I could want to have sex with one. However, mental and emotional attraction I find are without physical-gender bounds, due to that Nifty is genderless.

You consider yourself [poly/mono/etc]: Mono-flexible.
Explain: I don't think I am capable of having multiple serious emotional relationships, at least not with my current energy levels. However, I am generally a flirty and affectionate person, and can deal with both monogamous and open relationships.

You are currently in relationships best described as [none/mono/poly/complicated/etc]: etc.
Explain: Ask me if you don't already know the answer.

And, bonus question, since I forgot it in the original poll:
Your preferred pronoun is: Herbert.

[kirby1024.livejournal.com]

I list as Male, 100% cisgendered. I enjoy cross-dressing every now and then, I like doing things like getting full waxing, I'm enjoying having long hair, and use a mixture of three shampoos and three conditioners to keep it soft and silky. I like the feel of my skin when it's been cleansed and moisturised, and I enjoy cooking, and doing housework. It's taken me quite some time to get to this point, and I don't think I'd be nearly as far into it if I didn't have help from my not_in_denial.

One of the things that has come out of this is an understanding that these things don't make me less male. In fact, not even that being a bit femme is compatible with being male, but that being femme is being male to me. My masculinity naturally contains these things that might otherwise be considered feminine, but these are major parts of my masculine identity. Doing these things keeps me in touch with my masculine side, not my feminine side.

A few people have commented from all this that I'm a bit genderqueer, but I've never felt entirely comfortable taking up that identity for myself. I don't feel like I'm outside the gender binary. I'm just a rather unconventional man, with an unconventional masculinity.

I am attracted to Men and Women, with a bias towards men. I identify as bisexual, and at least for the moment I think that defines me quite well. I'm not omnisexual, and my sexual identity isn't non-gender defined (my boyfriend is quite different, actually - his sexual identity is Dominant. He couldn't give two figs about a person's gender, so long as they're Submissive). I have two very different target ranges - I go for masculine men and feminine women. I'm a big fan of bears as a rule (although I like the shaved muscle-men as well). I've noticed that I get attracted to angry men. But I like femme women as well. I like feminine curves. I'm not particularly attracted to butch women or high-femme men, although exceptions abound. This is more a guideline than a hard-and-fast rule, since a lot of my actual desire tends to spring from personality anyway.

With this said, I'm not comfortable around women. My upbringing, through no fault of anyone, built up women as these strange alien things, and I'm quite uncomfortable around women I don't know. This, as you might expect, seriously reduces my woman quotient at any given time. Once I get to know women, this goes away, but it does mean that picking up at a bar is likely to end in disaster for me. So, my sexual behaviour these days is very male-skewed. It's just easier for me to be sexually comfortable with women.

I consider myself Polyamorous. Both me and not_in_denial are firm believers in Polyamory, and now that both of us have a bit more of a handle on our issues, we're starting to branch out a little (the last two years have had the occaisional night with someone else, together, but nothing else). I've picked up a play-partner for BDSM activities, and he's picked up a possible new subby for his play as well. The relationships haven't gone sexual yet, but we have played sexually with others on one-time bases (usually with the other present in some capacity). It's been quite interesting as I've had to start actually putting a lot of skills to work that I've not needed to deal with throughout most of the relationship.

My Preferred pronoun is Male-set standard. I've really had no need for anything else.

Some views on Sexuality

[kirby1024.livejournal.com]

Just because you wanted people to yap on a little as well, I thought I'd bring up some of my views on sexuality in general.

I tend to look at a person's sexuality as three different components: Their sexual identity, their sexual orientation, and their sexual behaviour.

Sexual Identity is what you consider yourself to be. In a lot of ways, it's what you answer when someone says "so, who are you?". There's a lot of baggage attached to one's identity that is often not connected to the actual sexual acts - just look at the baggage around the "dyke" identity. When one assumes the dyke identity, it goes way beyond just sleeping with other women - there's often an entire social attitude that goes with it. Other identities have just as much baggage, like "bear", "queer" and "twink" - there's not just the sexual nature of these identities but the attitudes and social expectations that arise from these identities. Also, these sorts of issues often stop people from acquiring an identity - for example, the connotation of "bisexual" stopped a lot of people from taking that identity, especially if they were involved in the queer scene - bisexual was (and still is, to an extent) a dirty word, considered a "slut" and a "fence-sitter", and there's a great deal of antipathy aimed at bisexuals. So many didn't identify as such, they chose "queer", or "gay", or "lesbian".

Sexual Orientation is who you're attracted to. This is probably the simplest one (it's the direct analog of the question you place in the questionnaire), but it's important to keep it separate. Why? Because the Identities you choose often don't encompass the full range of your sexual orientation. They're often a bit more restrictive (for example, there are more than a few dykes out there who are attracted to men, but don't act on it because their identity restricts them in that regard). Further, the converse is true - a lot of people's identities push them into engaging in acts that don't fit their identity (thus, engaging in behaviour at odds with their orientation). There are so many added attachments to people's sexual makeup that we can't just use Orientation as the be-all, end-all.

Sexual Behaviour is what/who you do. It's such a simple thing, yet when you combine it with the above three, you can arrive at very odd places. More importantly, I think you need to keep this one separate because, f'rex, Monoamorous bisexuals usually have a behaviour that's quite different from their Orientation or Identity. Further, many people have engage in behaviour that's outside the scope of their orientation, once or twice, and this often freaks people out, because they believe that their behaviour is identical to their orientation.

It's my belief that these three sexual attributes are freely variant - they don't all have to match. Further, it's also my belief that none of these three sexual attributes are static. And I know that makes me very controversial in this political climate, but I honestly don't believe that our Orientations are completely static throughout our whole lives - they do change, in some cases quite frequently. And this is not to say that we should force change, absolutely not. People have a right to their own sexual expression. But I get a little annoyed at people who claim that sexuality is set in stone - that just doesn't match up to my experience. At the very least, the gender I lean towards changes from time to time - sometimes I like women more, sometimes I like men more.

I get a feeling that this sort of divide is probably useful in defining gender as well - I think gender can probably be divided into Identity, Orientation and Behaviour as well. I'm less inclined to force it though - I've not had as much experience in gender as I've had in sexuality.

[swingerzetta.livejournal.com]

I find myself thinking that what I have to say in this subject aren't going to be terribly interesting because it's not an issue that has a very big impact on my life. Har has encouraged me to post anyway and let you decide if what I have to say is interesting or not, which I suppose is fair.

I am male, mostly because I was born into a male body. I don't particularily feel like I belong to either gender, similar to how I figure I'm Human just because that's what all the evidence suggests. Often I regret that I am male, it seems like being female would suit my own interests and personality better... I would enjoy not having to worry about social matters pertaining to my interests (Fashion, jewelry making, etc. I am aware that the Perfessionals in these fields are usually men, actually, but for casual interest purposes it'd be easier to express these interests as a girl, seems to me)
It would also be nice to have female body parts, for social reasons as well. I imagine I would be more comfortable with myself if I could assume that other people wouldn't be actually Offended by a garment malfunction. I guess what that comes down to is that I'm not comfortable seeking out a sexual connection with someone, if I was a girl I'd have people doing that for me. I'd have boobs to flaunt, and people to flaunt them to!

As for sexuality, it's a small issue in my life, as well. There is attraction, but no real Drive. Any desire to have sex is more a desire for closeness and acceptance by the members of society than for actual physical pleasure or whatever people go and have sex for. I enjoy the physical experience of sexual stimulation, in as far as I can experience it on my own, and mental sexual stimulation enhances that... for this reason I think it would be fun to include someone else in this activity in some way or another, if I could beat the shiness that usually gets in the way. but again, that's just a strategy for enjoyment, and attraction to the notion of acceptance, not an actual DRIVE.
I enjoy seeing attractive people in the same way that I enjoy seeing attractive landscapes, for the most part. I enjoy seeing attractive bodies for generally the same reason, although at some point sexual attraction might kick in. Hell, when it comes to nakedness, the Acceptance button as mentioned with sex gets pushed again. Someone letting you see them partially or fully naked is someone Accepting you. Not only are people attractive and sexually attractive, it feels very validating to be given permissions that The Public is not allowed to have. (For this reason, going to a strip club, or watching porn, doesn't interest me at all, and yet I'll (usually jokingly) demand sexy pictures from my friends)

My comment exceeds the maximum character length, so more will be posted in a second comment

[swingerzetta.livejournal.com]

And the third subject, Amore. Well, this one I think I have even less to say. It has occurred to me that I've never been In Love, and that there is a difference between Love and In Love. for the sake of clarity I'm going to define Love as Complete Acceptance of someone, accepting all their faults and all their values, and deciding to ally with them in some form of another just as they are. In this way, I can fully say that I love my friends, you folks, And I love my family. Not just your good qualities, but you as wholes. As for In Love, I shall describe that as being in a state where mutual Love between two parties is the core and defining feature of the relationship that exists between them. Almost, in love for the sake of being in love... I think my definition for In Love requires the existence of a traditional-style relationship. the one real relationship I had was really more friendship based, not centered around being In Love. I am not sure if I am inclined to have an In Love relationship at all. There is no attraction in it for me. I am much more interested in becoming the non-romantic life partner of someone awesome who may not fall in love with me than trying to find someone to be traditional romantic life partners with. As for polyamory, well, I would not reject such an idea, it just seems, you know, even more unlikely than ending up in a relationship with One person, so I doubt it'll ever apply to me.
I do know that I'm perfectly fine with open relatioships, I guess that reveals things right there. But then....

I guess since I have such trouble applying relationship ideas to myself, I could talk about my impression of relationships in general.
From what I've seen, relationships among humans are a social phenomenon, rather than a... physiological one. We are designed to be attracted, and, sure, feel love for people, but the long-term, exclusive bonding that happens looks to me like something that society collectively decided. The rules around relationships, who you can sleep with, for example, come in the form of an unspoken Agreement about how people behave while dating. This reminds me of our conversation about the distinction between Dating and Going Steady, which has fallen out of the public agreement. When two people date, they are trained by Society to automatically assume that this means that they won't do anything sexual with anyone else. no kissing, no having sex, no looking at other people naked, etc. Some people take this farther than others, which results in dissagreements and jealousy.
If one person figures Relationship means no making out with other girls, but going to the bar with a woman friend is okay, and the other person takes Relationship to mean that time is not to be spent with any other girl alone, they will feel Jealous when they realize some other girl has been doing what they assumed was their exclusive right to do.

I guess that's about all I can think of on the subject. I suppose I had more Thoughts than I figured... it's simply Experience I don't have much of. I always have thoughts to spare.

[macaroniandtuna.livejournal.com]

I did that one, but I'll do it again. Why not.

1) Male. Because that's what I am physically and because I have no interest aside from a passing curiosity (just for a day or something) at being female.
2) In my head at least, "people I'm attracted to" = sex, not gender. For the sake of answering the question, though: Almost exclusively female. Sexually, the rare (very rare, so rare it'll never happen and I'm okay with that) male.

Other thoughts: I can't name anybody specifically (and even if I could I wouldn't, 'cause that'd be mean), but I kind of feel like a lot of people who identify as "gender=other" are doing it out of something resembling Special Snowflake Disorder, ie, as really nothing more than "I'm special and unique!" and as attention-seeking behavior. I think gender, like sex, is a (fairly short) linear spectrum with just two poles, not a multidimensional one.
3) Mono. Poly fascinates me, and perhaps someday, but the way I see it poly is like graduate-level relationship management, and, well, based on past performance, I'm not there. No idea if I'll ever be there, and if not that's okay. (I am of course aware that lots and lots of poly people see "poly" as as much a part of their identity as they do who they're attracted to.)
4) None. The timing is impractical, what with me about to graduate and not be here anymore, if you want a good reason. If not...secret. Ask if you like, but I won't write it in public.
5) He/Him, Manipulator of Time, Space, and Jelly-Filled Donuts.

opinion contradicted by evidence

[woozle.livejournal.com]

"I think gender, like sex, is a (fairly short) linear spectrum with just two poles, not a multidimensional one.

For most people, this seems to be the case, but it also seems to be pretty clearly not the case for a small but significant portion of the population.

It's easy to confuse normality with universality.

Re: opinion contradicted by evidence

[macaroniandtuna.livejournal.com]

What evidence? Please to be showing me.

It is easy to confuse the two, but that's not what I'm doing. Also I read that with a fairly condescending tone to it, I don't know if you intended that.

Re: opinion contradicted by evidence

[woozle.livejournal.com]

(Hmm, and here I thought I was being diplomatic...)

There are a large number of traits associated with gender. They are "associated" because, for a majority of the population, a genetic male will have mostly male traits and a genetic female will have mostly female traits.

If you were to plot a scattergram showing the location of each individual (in some large population) in a multidimensional space with one dimension for each of these traits, there would be heavy clustering around two points which would more or less describe the archetypical male and female -- and the line in between these two clusters would also be more densely populated than other areas of the space.

Perhaps this is what you mean by stating that there are only two poles, with a linear spectrum between them. Such a graph would appear as two fuzzy dots with a fuzzy line connecting them. Most people would be in those dots or near that line -- sure.

What it sounded like you were suggesting is that everybody -- or most people, at least, with not enough exceptions to be worth considering as a group -- would be right on a straight, fairly narrow line between those two points, and that the points would be only slightly fuzzy at best.

If you are actually saying the latter, then I'll need to go fetch my evidence, but maybe I just misunderstood you.

Re: opinion contradicted by evidence

[macaroniandtuna.livejournal.com]

Actually I'm not sure which of those I'm saying. I guess to say for sure I'd have to know what that second dimension is and how any outliers would lay very far at all from the line, and perhaps the problem is that I'm unable to think of anything.

Re: opinion contradicted by evidence

[woozle.livejournal.com]

The claim I'm defending is that it's "multidimensional", by which I mean "many dimensions", not just two.

Somewhere I started making a list, but I've no idea where it is at the moment, so this is just off the top of my head:

The basics - physical gender, sometimes confusingly called "sex": chromosome configuration (XX/XY/other), genital configuration (not always clear-cut), chest configuration (including functionality of mammary glands), amount of subcutaneous fat, skeletal shape (hip size being the most obvious detail, but there are others), hormone levels, facial and non-pubic body hair amounts, physical strength (especially upper-body).

Behavioral characteristics: "girlyness" (e.g. liking flowers, ponies, kitten) vs. "manlyness" (e.g. liking motorcycles, trucks, guns), passivity vs. aggression, emotional vs. analytical, cooperation vs. confrontation, empathy vs. control, nurturing vs. self-interest...

Attractions: the main two dimensions here are whether you're attracted to men and whether you're attracted to women. (There's a high degree of inverse correlation, and most male-bodied people are attracted to women only, but I should think that the obvious exceptions to this rule alone would prove my point.)

I could go on, but that's the stuff that's easier to explain.

Re: opinion contradicted by evidence

[kirby1024.livejournal.com]

Well, the very simple version is that there's a whole bunch of people around that consider themselves both male and female. And, more importantly, that these two genders don't cancel each other out, but exist independently and without conflict.

Put simply, by defining male and female as opposing ends of a line you make the explicit assumption that they're polar opposites, whereas the evidence I have seen seems to indicate that it's perfectly acceptable to say, have a man who is totally masculine and totally butch, with a fully active femininity. Nothing, I think, about male or female naturally opposes each other at all.

And the reason that I think that this breaks the genderline is because even if you say that a male and female dominant person falls straight in the middle of the spectrum, you've just wiped out the natural position of a person who doesn't cleave to either gender.

I think that at the very least male and female are two axes, not two poles. I'm also fairly certain that there could be other axes that exist, but of course the ones that I think of most people wouldn't exactly consider gender-related (although I think they are to many people's genders - things like sexual identities and BDSM identities).

[rrainew.livejournal.com]

lesseee-
list as female-
attracted to - mostly male, female always an option
i tend to be serially monogamous, mostly due to sloth-more than one at a time is too much work, and i tend to overfocus
current relationship- with my vibrator
pronoun-your highness will do nicely (i know, i know, that's not a pronoun)
i have lots of thoughts on this, which mostly boil down to, who cares? as long as everyone consents, and there is no harm done, physically, emotionally, mentally or spiritually, do whatever you can handle w/ grace and ease.

[tirerim.livejournal.com]

Filled out the poll. If you want to know more, just ask -- I like talking to you.

As for pronouns, if for some reason I'm talking about myself in the third person, I use male pronouns. I don't really care if other people get confused, though. (In fact, if people are confused about my gender, I usually figure that I'm doing something right. Again, I see no conflict between this and having a well-defined personal gender.)

[harena.livejournal.com]

My comment keeps getting longer & longer & longer so i'm probly going to relegate it to an email to send (i'm only on the first one & half questions on the survey!). i hope that's okay. Anyone who is interested in knowing my responses, i'd be happy to send it to them as well... You all what know me, know where to find me & the rest, well, Just ask! ^_^

. o O (i think W's about to send a biggie your way, though!)

anserz

[woozle.livejournal.com]

(By the time I noticed the "fill out poll" link in the original post, I had already written most of this.)

1. "list"? Everyone thinks/assumes I am male, and since currently the only indicators which say otherwise are psychological (and not glaringly obvious -- I mean, it took me over 30 years to figure it out, and I have much better access to the inside of my head than other people do), I don't fight it... but very long ago, long before I knew anything about transgenderism or gender dysphoria, I decided I was at least "not a man". It doesn't yet feel right, though, to say I am anything... but nonetheless, I let people assume I'm male. I will refuse to register on web sites where an answer to this question is required, however, if it involves both business and social interaction. (If it's a social site, I might go in as female, but I don't think this has actually happened yet... Oh, yeah, Plurk. Which I never use. On sites where I'm just an account number, I'll put down "male" because that's what's on my driver's license.)

2. Female, but only within a certain range of attributes. (Do you really want to know all this stuff? Yes, I suppose you do... ok, then...) I tend to be attracted to girls with a certain maleness in their appearance and demeanor... physically: not "butch", but angular; mentally: hmm, hard to describe... "practical"? ...but also empathetic. I'm anti-attracted to make-up, perfumes, most jewelry, and conventional female fashion. Am I babbling yet? Jenny (http://wiki.hypertwins.org/Category:Jenny) was almost exactly the epitome of what I'm attracted to (in a sense, she was my "one true love" -- but sex was never really a goal, even with her; intimacy, yes, but not sex). It's probably relevant to mention that the friends I tended to feel most comfortable around in kindergarten were girls (mostly of a somewhat tomboyish bent).

3. Well, the usual suffix there is "-sexual" which of course implies "sex" which I finally realized I don't like (given physical misconfiguration), though of course there's also "-amorous", which only implies "love", and most of the time I don't know if I actually even do "love". "Mono" can apply because historically, I have never actually had more than one intimate relationship at a time, but I gradually came around to realizing that poly makes a lot more sense for me, once I got over... a lot of mistaken ideas about it.

Side note: I don't understand the point of "dating" as distinguished from "going places with someone you'd like to know better and become more comfortable with, possibly eventually leading to intimacy but not necessarily, depending on how the chemistry works out".

4. "Complicated"; a two-person relationship trying to become a more-people relationship, where the obstacles to doing so are primarily logistical (rather than emotional).

5. I don't have any that feel comfortable. Perhaps "you", with the optional prepended honorific "hey". I often use "it", as that feels the most accurate. "He" is understandable, and "she" is okay too though I have this odd idea that I... haven't earned it, or that it's not fair to adopt it until it's correct in objectively observable ways (either by physical modification or else some sort of psychological test which makes the truth unambiguously clear... and I doubt there is any such test).

Well, if you insist...

[dodger77.livejournal.com]

I can't remember if I took your poll or not. Oh well.

I list as male. Telemarketers always call me ma'am though. I must have a feminine sounding voice or something.

I am attracted to females.

I assume I'm monogamous. I've never actually been in a relationship before, so I guess it's possible that I'm an uber-polygamist, but it seems unlikely.

I am not currently in a relationship. Although, I suppose that's obvious by now...

Preferred pronoun: he. (Stupid telemarketers...)

[leiacat.livejournal.com]

I list gender as either "female" when required to pick from the commonly acceptable ones. I am very, very comfortable in my female-sexed body, and identify with it sufficiently that the first fits. However, the OS that I run, the socialization bits, tend to function such that a blind test pegs me a guy 9 times out of 10.

When allowed to define my own gender, I list as "geek", because I think the geekish brain-OS has more in common with other geeks of either sex than with un-geeks of the same sex.

I am attracted largely to male-sexed people, and to a smaller degree to female-sexed ones. I generally say that I'm geek-sexual, in that what I'm attracted to is largely geekiness. The gender identification of people I'm attracted to does not seem to be a determining variable.

I consider myself to be poly. I cannot wrap my brain around the notion of promising to not fall for other people just because I have fallen for one.

I am currently in one long-term serious relationship with a person who is monogamous. The relationship is poly, despite the fact that it's been a while since I've been involved with anyone else to any more than casual degree.

My preferred pronoun-set is female-standard. I am willing to use "zie/zir" if needed for obfuscation purposes.

[madbodger.livejournal.com]

I identify as male, and look and dress as such. But my interests, emotional state, and ways of expressing myself are much closer to what most people think of as "feminine". And I'm fine with that. Given that, the usual male pronouns suit me fine ("he", "him", "his", etc.) Though "squeeing fangirl" is applied to me rather a lot, and I enjoy that too.

I'm attracted to interesting people more than anything else. I do seem to prefer female people to some degree. My preferences do vary with gender (I like curvy females and skinny males). Androgynous, mixed, or bizarre sexuality is very appealing to me.

I consider myself poly. I tend toward comfortable relationships. When someone is happy with just occasional hugs, that's what we end up doing. When people really enjoy non-sexual shared showers, that will tend to happen. I enjoy most forms of interaction, and I enjoy other peoples' pleasure, so this is no surprise.

I tend have long-running relationships. As to the above, they tend toward what the people involved enjoy and find comfortable. There are occasional pleasant surprises when new activities (e.g. kissing) become such. I seem to be happier with a reasonable number of people I really know and enjoy than a huge gaggle of random acquaintances. This does make it painful for me when I fall out of touch with someone, though.

[lolnowhereman.livejournal.com]

1) Born female, mentally mostly female, though I do have sociatally viewed 'male' traits. I am comfortable with said traits. I do cross-dress occasionally.

(Yes, sociatally is not a word, despite Firefox not knowing it.)

2) I am attracted to any/all genders, though so far I have been attracted only to males and females. Though now, one considers himself questioning as to gender and sexuality.

3) *sighs* This is very long and complicated, with an equally long and complicated history that would take a while (in person, with the necessary hand-gestures) to communicate to you. Suffice it to say that this is unknown for now.

4) I am (mostly-) happily single.

5) On the matter of who I am...well, you will not recognize the LJ name as it is not my personal LJ, it's one I use for an RP on here. But I'm a friend of Talis, etc's, and you have my hug button (which is fine with me). That should be enough. : )

[lolnowhereman.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, the Real Question #5: I prefer female pronouns, though whatever you call me is fine.

[ncarraway.livejournal.com]

Ok, I thought I'd take a swing at this one.

You list as [gender(s)]:
I had my gender crisis in ninth grade or so, and I'm mostly comfortable with the maleness these days. I'm a feminine guy, and I prize that part of myself, but I've pretty much come to terms with being a feminine guy. If I could clap my hands and have a female body, I'd do it in a heartbeat, but I imagine that eventually I'd clap back again. Another friend of yours mentioned that things like cooking or doing housework are part of his masculinity; I guess I kind of feel the same way. I'm least conflicted about gender roles when I can just be a man doing domestic things, especially with someone I love playing the "woman of the house". It might be feminine, but it's not meant to be womanly, if that makes sense.

That's one take on it. On the other hand, my relationship with gender is tied in deeply with my sexuality. There seems to be some deep level on which I cannot believe that men are attractive. So, I see my own feminine qualities as my recommending traits: I emphasize a slender frame and long hair, and as you might remember, I'm keen to point out that personality tests can't place me in either gender. One might argue that my eagerness to identify with femininity comes from a dislike of or discomfort with masculinity.

It might get more directly at my gender identity if gender were totally stripped of its connection with sex and understood more in terms of active/passive or dominant/submissive. That might capture with better resolution the ways in which I complicate my gender status. It might also be really hot. I'll leave that open to debate.

You are attracted to people of [gender(s)]:
I'm attracted to people who look female, generally speaking. I like curves and soft faces. Having tried to enjoy a couple of lads, I suspect I'll never break out. I'm just not into male bodies. I could hardly give a damn about gender, really: act however you like, identify however you like, but facial hair and a male frame are deadly turn-offs. The way I see it, I have a woman fetish.

You consider yourself [poly/mono/etc]:
I'm poly, but I feel a little weird about turning it into identity politics. I know at least one person who wields her minority statuses like a weapon - "I am pan! I am poly! I am underprivileged and marginalized, now back off before I hit your ass with my minority whip!" - and that doesn't appeal to me. On the other hand, it feels like my most legit reason for a presence in the queer community, so I appreciate it as an identity issue for that reason. It's nice to be more than an "ally".

You are currently in relationships best described as [none/mono/poly/complicated/etc]:
Poly! ... but although my girlfriend is seeing someone long-distance, I'm not currently attached to more than one partner, just because them's the breaks.

Your preferred pronoun is:
"He", definitely. I won't be offended by neutral pronouns, if anyone wants to try working them into general use, but I am grammatically male and fine with it.