"Lesbians are not the same as ? males" - The IC.....
Options
Arya Tsaddiq
Members Posts: 15,334 ✭✭✭✭✭
Due to the recent emergance of our IC lesbians, a dicussion happened where certain posters basically said being a lesbian is not the same as being a "? " male. Basically @xxCivicxx and @dnb
What do you all think?
What do you all think?
Comments
-
? ? is ? ? .
-
Homosexual is Homosexual
-
I swear to ? , if this dumb ? does numbers...
-
Homosexual is Homosexual? ? is ? ? .
CS....why is there even confusion about this?
-
Billy_Poncho wrote: »I swear to ? , if this dumb ? does numbers...
Watch -
before i say lock this moronic thread, i think there point was there is nosuch thing as lesbianism since they still take ? ...albeit a plastic one.... anyway lock this ?
-
-
I think the difference is females can't use their sexual organs to the extent males can. Females got their fingers, toes, tongues, ? and stuff but with males it's ? .
-
Billy_Poncho wrote: »I swear to ? , if this dumb ? does numbers...
You know it will.
? gonna be droppin scientific research articles, titangraphs, personal experiences, etc. -
Elzo69Renaissance wrote: »before i say lock this moronic thread, i think there point was there is nosuch thing as lesbianism since they still take ? ...albeit a plastic one.... anyway lock this ?
For real...i only made this thread so the posters that dont think it's the same can argue their point without derailing another thread.
-
I've ? enough lesbians to know that the majority will choose up on the right male
I'd rather females munch on eachother while waiting for the male as opposed to racking up high body counts with sub-par males -
BiblicalAtheist wrote: »I think the difference is females can't use their sexual organs to the extent males can. Females got their fingers, toes, tongues, ? and stuff but with males it's ? .
Women are "built" for ? . So they cant be "? " just because of how they choose to ? , even if they are attracted to the same sex?
I need someone to make this make sense.... -
I've ? enough lesbians to know that the majority will choose up on the right male
I'd rather females munch on eachother while waiting for the male as opposed to racking up high body counts with sub-par males
What does this even mean bruh? Lol -
Aryeh_Tsaddiq wrote: »BiblicalAtheist wrote: »I think the difference is females can't use their sexual organs to the extent males can. Females got their fingers, toes, tongues, ? and stuff but with males it's ? .
Women are "built" for ? . So they cant be "? " just because of how they choose to ? , even if they are attracted to the same sex?
I need someone to make this make sense....
No. Women are built to be penetrated. Men do the penetrating. Women can only ? with not sexual things, fingers, toes, tongues etc. Men are using sexual organs in none sexual places. Men and women can both be ? but I thought the topic was why is it different, so I said my thing about organs and ? . -
I've ? enough lesbians to know that the majority will choose up on the right male
I'd rather females munch on eachother while waiting for the male as opposed to racking up high body counts with sub-par males
what? -
That's the only thing I've come up with why it's different for men than women when ? .
-
None of that ? changes the fact that ? ? is ? ? . Male or female..you can't be cool with one and not the other unless you're totally fine with supporting a hypocritical double standard.
-
None of that ? changes the fact that ? ? is ? ? . Male or female..you can't be cool with one and not the other unless you're totally fine with supporting a hypocritical double standard.
we do this everyday one way or another -
I've ? enough lesbians to know that the majority will choose up on the right male
I'd rather females munch on eachother while waiting for the male as opposed to racking up high body counts with sub-par males
Why you ? so many lesbians bruh
My ? hitting lesbian bars looking for a Manny fresh. -
Aryeh_Tsaddiq wrote: »
I really don't understand how 2 sentences are confusing you lol -
BiblicalAtheist wrote: »Aryeh_Tsaddiq wrote: »BiblicalAtheist wrote: »I think the difference is females can't use their sexual organs to the extent males can. Females got their fingers, toes, tongues, ? and stuff but with males it's ? .
Women are "built" for ? . So they cant be "? " just because of how they choose to ? , even if they are attracted to the same sex?
I need someone to make this make sense....
No. Women are built to be penetrated. Men do the penetrating. Women can only ? with not sexual things, fingers, toes, tongues etc. Men are using sexual organs in none sexual places. Men and women can both be ? but I thought the topic was why is it different, so I said my thing about organs and ? .
This is a good point too
Lesbians still use ? objects for sex -
BiblicalAtheist wrote: »Aryeh_Tsaddiq wrote: »BiblicalAtheist wrote: »I think the difference is females can't use their sexual organs to the extent males can. Females got their fingers, toes, tongues, ? and stuff but with males it's ? .
Women are "built" for ? . So they cant be "? " just because of how they choose to ? , even if they are attracted to the same sex?
I need someone to make this make sense....
No. Women are built to be penetrated. Men do the penetrating. Women can only ? with not sexual things, fingers, toes, tongues etc. Men are using sexual organs in none sexual places. Men and women can both be ? but I thought the topic was why is it different, so I said my thing about organs and ? .
I get what you are saying. Men have to be aroused to perform, and that doesn't necessarily apply to women. But im looking at it like any consensual sexual act with someone of the same sex is homosexual sex in my eyes. Technicalities aside. A woman performing oral sex another woman is the same thing as a man doing it to another man. -
I've ? enough lesbians to know that the majority will choose up on the right male
I'd rather females munch on eachother while waiting for the male as opposed to racking up high body counts with sub-par males
Why you ? so many lesbians bruh
My ? hitting lesbian bars looking for a Manny fresh.
Nah no butch lesbians
I'm in atl, there are a lot of lesbians out here lol -
Aryeh_Tsaddiq wrote: »BiblicalAtheist wrote: »Aryeh_Tsaddiq wrote: »BiblicalAtheist wrote: »I think the difference is females can't use their sexual organs to the extent males can. Females got their fingers, toes, tongues, ? and stuff but with males it's ? .
Women are "built" for ? . So they cant be "? " just because of how they choose to ? , even if they are attracted to the same sex?
I need someone to make this make sense....
No. Women are built to be penetrated. Men do the penetrating. Women can only ? with not sexual things, fingers, toes, tongues etc. Men are using sexual organs in none sexual places. Men and women can both be ? but I thought the topic was why is it different, so I said my thing about organs and ? .
I get what you are saying. Men have to be aroused to perform, and that doesn't necessarily apply to women. But im looking at it like any consensual sexual act with someone of the same sex is homosexual sex in my eyes. Technicalities aside. A woman performing oral sex another woman is the same thing as a man doing it to another man.
I don't disagree with that at all, I just thought it was to offer thoughts on why it is seen as more offensive than lesbians. -
None of that ? changes the fact that ? ? is ? ? . Male or female..you can't be cool with one and not the other unless you're totally fine with supporting a hypocritical double standard.
Double standards are a part of life. On topic, I know a gang of "ex-lesbians". They are basically getting ? by a replica ? . They're straight but just confused. ? be honest...lmao. Chick's can explore and experiment. Men can't. Is it a double standard??Yep. Such is life. Both are ? , but it's levels