If I don't know it's a guy, he's functionally a girl, therefore the left doesn't apply. Now I just need to pull another bullshit philosophy argument to counter the one on the right.
You’re not attracted by those who looks and acts like a girl.
If you really wanted to counter that, are straight people really attracted to everyone who looks and acts like a girl?
I never thought about that. Thanks!
You could argue the tomboy defense in the right side of it...
This is literally just a repackaging of "are traps gay". The homophobia and transphobia don't go away because you said "femboy" instead of "trap"
Glad someone's saying it, big agree, the current obsession with "femboys" is literally the same shit with a different name, it's even using the exact same anime/game characters that people were calling "traps" a few years ago
(Edit: before someone complains, obviously I'm not against the existence of femboys, I'm against people spreading the same harmful "trap" memes wordswapped to "femboy", and how people still use it to describe characters who aren't even boys and are often closer to trans women or nonbinary)
Fuck it. I’m tired of being straight, where the femboys at
I am so fucking tired of all the memes saying we are literally the same as women. I know that on r/femboy everyone is a trans woman, but some of us are actually male. I'm a trans man that likes to dress cute, that doesn't mean I'm functionally identical to a woman, femboy doesn't mean "looks like a woman" and if all you like is "femboys" you can't notice are male until you get to the penis congratulations you're just attracted to trans women
trans women 🤝 trans men
Hating ~~trap~~ "femboy" memes
It is the problem of attempting to describe the world with just yes/no statements without context. It works ideal with mathematics, but not in our complicated world.
As a straight, I can say they can be attractive.
I guess it depends. You can find a particular femboy not attractive and it would route you to another place like "you might still be gay".
Any inference is valid if its conclusion is known to be true a priori
Not really; an argument is valid if the conclusion is true only when the premises are valid. I believe the argument can be best constructed as follows:
Therefore, you're gay
Not only is this a valid argument because assuming the premises, the conclusion must be true, it's formally valid because it follows the form
Therefore B
And this argument is valid for all choices of A and B. It doesn't really have anything to do with the conclusion being true.
In other words, the argument is valid but not sound.
Yeah exactly
My statement refers to the construction of ==> from truth tables as a logical gate:
By counting the entries of the table, we see that if Y is True, then (X ==> Y) must always be True no matter what we substitute for X. The joke is that this means we assume foreknowledge of the reader being gay
Ah I see what you mean; you're right. Though an argument being valid and an implication being true are different things, so I think we misunderstood each other's meaning.
You cannot decide my sexuality for me
is this like some kind of implied being gay is bad/worth mockery thing like all the rest of these memes are or what
For the dankest of all memes
