>> |
Ehhh.....
>>666334 How does one define homosexuality?
Tricky.
You see, there are two definite and distinct ways to define it. Attraction to those of the same gender, and attraction to those of the same sex.
If you're a complete moron, allow me to explain to you the difference. Sex is a genetic construct. It's unchangeable--at least, given modern technology. One's sex has nothing to do with one's sexual characteristics, one's mannerisms, or anything psychological or visibly physiological, save for the influence it has upon those. However, psychology and visible physiology can be altered indeterminate of one's sex, and are therefore clearly non-determining factors of one's sex.
Gender is a psychological construct. It is influenced heavily by one's sex, but is perfectly capable of opposing it. Gender, as a psychological construct, is capable of change, though as a fundamental part of one's sense of self, it is extremely difficult to do so.
One's gender can be female, while one's sex is male, or vice versa; it is a rather rare occurrence, but far from unheard of.
If you define homosexuality as attraction to the same sex, then the concept of "futanari" lies entirely outside of that consideration--insofar as the English-speaking world understands the term. Futanari, ie, a girl (lets just keep that word for the sake of simplicity right now) with a fully functioning penis and womb, one capable of becoming pregnant, and producing a normal amount (or much more) of ejaculate, does not exist as a biological being, and only on paper. It therefore has no sex, and an attraction to futanari is, as defined by sex, neither heterosexual nor homosexual.
What you seem to be leaning toward, however, is homosexuality in perception, ie, a psychologically based idea of homosexuality. In other words, we should focus on how futanari fits into homosexuality if we define such as attraction to one's own gender.
|