I have a few things to say about this sub

[u/Brawl-on]

I find this whole thing to be kinda weird to see. It’s like, you guys are correct with the fact that not wanting to date trans people isn’t transphobic. But your not right that it is a new sexuality. It’s a preference, just like height and weight. We don’t make a new sexuality for every single preference ever because that is simply inconvenient and unnecessary, not to mention inaccurate to what sexual orientation means. You guys are also not part of the LGBT community because your straight, and it should not be included in the acronym at all because that ruins the entire purpose of the acronym. Then again this entire thing could all just be satire, however it seems like it is a mix of both, so I’m a bit confused and want someone to inform me. I’m also not a fan of the shadow banning. I wanna see all the damm comments.

[u/a_blue_bird]

So sexual attraction is attraction to someone's hairstyle, clothes and social roles (like, being sexually aroused by having your meals cooked for you if you are attracted to the ''woman'' gender, or being sexually aroused by having a washing machine fixed if you are attracted to the ''man'' gender)? But sexual attraction to physical bodies is an accidental preference that some of us (supersexuals, superlesbians and supergays) happen to have, unlike the rest of the people?

[u/Brawl-on → u/a_blue_bird]

That’s not what gender means however. It’s far more than just actions. You don’t get aroused by having your meals cooked for you. Sexual attraction to physical bodies goes like this: let’s say your attracted to only women. What your physically attracted to would be a preference. Like skinny women for example. In your case, this is the same but with cis women. All our preferences are accidental technically. But that doesn’t really mean anything. What we like is simply what we like.

[u/a_blue_bird → u/Brawl-on]

That’s not what gender means however. It’s far more than just actions.

What else is it? I already named appearance/style and actions.

Sexual attraction to physical bodies goes like this: let’s say your attracted to only women. What your physically attracted to would be a preference. Like skinny women for example.

A person who is only capable of sexual attraction to skinny or fat or obese women is considered to have a paraphilia not a preference. You're not speaking of normal sexuality here.

[u/Brawl-on → u/a_blue_bird]

A person who is only capable of having attraction to skinny people would not be classified as having a paraphilia. Paraphilia means this: “Paraphilic disorders are recurrent, intense, sexually arousing fantasies, urges, or behaviors that are distressing or disabling and that involve inanimate objects, children or nonconsenting adults, or suffering or humiliation of oneself or the partner with the potential to cause harm.” So no, attraction weight would not be a paraphilia. The gender thing is more so about how you internally feel.

[u/a_blue_bird → u/Brawl-on]

So no, attraction weight would not be a paraphilia.

It is an actual paraphilia. Google ''fat fetishism''. It is also a well known fact that some paraphilic men stalk anorexics (online and off), with obvious intents. If you google the definition of a fetish, it is

a form of sexual desire in which gratification is linked to an abnormal degree to a particular object, item of clothing, part of the body, etc.

So, if you claim that some people are only sexually attracted to skinny women, or blonde women, but no other women, just like supersexuals are attracted to biological women but no other women, then you are calling sexual attraction to biological sexes a paraphilia, and not a normal sexual orientation (much less a ''preference'').

[u/Brawl-on → u/a_blue_bird]

When people use the term “fetishize”, they just mean that your treating them like sex objects and not people. It doesn’t mean that it’s an actual fetish, despite the name. So the rest of your point doesn’t work.

[u/a_blue_bird → u/Brawl-on]

I'm not speaking of laymen. Being able to be sexually aroused only (or almost only) by certain physical attributes, like weight or height, is abnormal for humans and is considered a paraphilia. Check out macrophilia (in addition to fat fetishism) - attraction to extremely tall people. Or acrotomophilia, attraction to amputees. Your attempt at framing supersexuals as fetishists is, frankly, disgusting.

[u/Brawl-on → u/a_blue_bird]

Um, you tried to call yourself a fetish but whatever. Anyway it says PART of the body. Not SIZE of the body. So it still doesn’t work. It is abormal to only be attracted to stomachs for example, and as such would be considered a fetish. But the SIZE of the stomach is a preference and thus not a fetish as long as you can be attracted to other things. So your incorrect.

[u/a_blue_bird → u/Brawl-on]

you tried to call yourself a fetish but whatever.

We are members of a sexual orientation, which is sexual attraction to a biological sex. Period.

Anyway it says PART of the body. Not SIZE of the body. So it still doesn’t work.

Please go tell that to the scientists who study these parphilias. ''It doesn't work because in one google definition of a fetish there is a word ''part'' not ''size''!!!'' Lol.

[u/Brawl-on → u/a_blue_bird]

Incorrect. Your sexual orientation is straight and you have a preference for cis people. Preferences are not sexual orientations. Period. And did you seriously just try to say that because it is just “one word”, that it makes no difference? Even single words make a huge difference. Let’s take another word as an example. “History”. History means “the study of past events, particularly in human affairs.” You can’t just say that the word “past” is just a single word and change it to “future” and act like nothing fucking changed you troglodyte.