Anonymous7: @Anonymous: @Froggy: Just like mermaids are actually just fish, succubi are just bats with tits and centaurs are the exact same thing as horses right?
It's hilarious how often people's sense of imagination dies a horrible death as soon as there's a dick in the equation.
Froggy: @Anonymous: Mermaids tails, succubus wings and centaurs legs are not their sexual organs.
There's the thing : Your sex is defined by your sexual organs. Your gender, well, it seems nowadays that it can be defined by whatever the fuck you want. You can be a starship imperial destroyer demisexual dragonkin reincarnated Dalaï-Lama pan-sexual special snowflake, and you expect people to take you seriously.
But if you have male sexual organs, then your biological sex is male. There's no imagination in the equation, you have nothing to say to change that, you can't label you as something else. It's biology.
What if a male had an operation to grow a pair of tits. Would he become a female ? No, he'd be a male with tits. What if he had an operation to replace his dick with a Vagina ? Then he'd go from male to transexual-man / female, even though he'd not have the possibility to bear children.
Male and Female have tits. Male tits are smaller, don't contain the fat that female tits does, and even though they can sometime secrete some kind of substance, are not made to breast-feed children or secrete milk. Tits don't define one's sex, they're just a nice thing to wblblblblbl your face into while coiting.
Got a penis, then your sexual organs are of a male, and thus your sex is male. Got a vagina, then your sexual organs are of a female, and thus your sex is female.
It's simple, no ? And yet you come with your ridiculous example, making a fool out of yourself trying to be all "Ah-ha, those poor anti-futa are so stupid, let me enlighten them with my wisdom and my complete off-topic mumbo-jumbo.". I mean, you can like futa eh, i'm not telling you "Stop liking what i don't like !", but if you want to defend it, at least make sense.
Anonymous8: @Froggy: You completely missed the fucking point. I compared them to mermaids and succubi and all that shit because they're as much fantasy and unrealistic as any of those creatures, but you don't see anyone who hates them trying to imply they're something they aren't.
You went off on this hilariously off-topic tangent about a bunch of shit I didn't even argue for or even endorse (and I wouldn't either because I find the concept of otherkin and transtrenders fucking stupid too).
Futanari is not transgenderism. They're related, but they're not the same thing. You're trying to apply reality's rules to something that was never intended to be realistic to begin with.
Froggy: @Anonymous: Well then, maybe if you'd have not choosen a bad and wrong example, or expressed it in a bad and wrong way, i'd have not missed your point.
As for my off-topic tangent : I was trying to explain to you the difference between your poorly constructed example and the reality of biology.
Something have a penis : unless it's part of another kind of reproductive system like a fungus or some shit, it's male.
Not a man. Male.
That's all i'm saying. Something have a MALE wee-wee, then it's a MALE poochy-poo.
Dick => Male.
I'm not saying "Dragon would no fly because of gravity" or trying to reduce your fantastic kingdom of imagination pornography, just saying that something with male sex organs is male.
I'm not saying that you can't enjoy your image of a gnoll getting gangraped by tentale monsters with 78 eyes and Barrack Obama where their mouth should be. Just that if that tentacle monster have a dick, it's male.
But seems you don't want to understand what i'm saying, and think that if you decide it, it wont be as such.
An y'know why i'm writing thesis on this porn pic about those guys genders ? Because i was just answering to : "Pah ! A woman with a dick is not a man ;)".
And then, you came talking about magic poney-men.
NephtheStampede: There's actually some in between sexes as well, not common, but more than you may think. Not to mention, really, more than the presence of a penis, the chromosomal makeup of the person determines the sex. Someone can be born without a penis but have a male Y chromosome. Physical sex is determined at a certain point during fetal development, and all sorts of shenanigans can ensue at that stage. Male or female, at a certain point, you had a cloaca like a fish. Food for thought.
Froggy: Yeah, during the development of the foetus, we can see it taking many form that we might have attributed to other species. We look like a dolphin, a monkey, etc.
It's true, what you way about the chromosomal arrangement of one giving one's "genetic I.D. card" for a lot of things, but it is also true that the number of people being born with "scrambled" chromosomes, or with a penis while being "chromosomicly female", is rare enough to not be considered a norm.
Anonymous9: @Froggy: You're still not getting the point.
I mentioned succubi and mermaids, because you can take the same argument you're making (dick = male) and use it for them. "That's not a succubus, it's got bat wings which means it's a bat. That's not a mermaid, it's got a fish tail which means it's a fish."
You're making that argument here in regards to the dick. Why you're incapable of seeing that futanari do not follow realistic rules and so don't adhere to the reality of male and female genitalia is perplexing. This is a pornographic fetish that has women growing dicks for all sorts of outlandish reasons ranging from vindictive genies to magical fruit and mad scientists.
I'm not contending that something with male sex organs in real life is sexually male. I know this. I'm not arguing this. I'm arguing that that is completely and utterly irrelevant when it comes to pornographic art in the same way mermaids and succubi not actually existing has no relevance on myths and stories with them.
Futanari makes no pretensions to be anything other than fantasy, so coming at it with a reality based argument is not going to work and anyone who tries is either going to look like a nitpicker with a grudge or someone who hates the fetish and wants to categorize it as something it's not to piss off people who do.
Looking at this pornographic animation of two versions of the same fictional woman from a video game that contains a story where she constantly fucks with time, space and various multiverses to the backdrop of a flying city and coming away with "has dick; must be male," is exactly the same thing as watching a bunch of wizards and dragons duke it out and then bitching about how unrealistic the dragon's breath was. It's nitpicking from someone who found something they didn't like. That's really it.
I think we were having two completely different arguments here, because I'm not arguing what is reality or not. I'm arguing the merits of using reality to judge something that says right on the box that it's not trying to be at all.
Your example would work if i, myself, was saying "Futas girls have dicks, so they're in fact walking dicks.", as you're in your example reducing those creatures to one of their attribute.
I'm not saying that. I'm just responding to a guy saying that they are not male for having dicks by saying that yes, they are.
I'm not hating on futa pics, i'm not bashing the sand-castle that is your futa fetish with my big bully feet, i'm just stating a thing.
The rules in a fantasy universes are not non-existant, they're different. There the "my clitoris is now a dick" version of the futa girls, the "i have balls and a dick instead of a vagina" version of a futa girl, etc etc. All of them have a reason to be so, i get that.
Colson_14: Have got to agree with Froggy... you can have bat wings or fish tails, but that doesn't change your sex based on our 'human' biological reactions to it. Adding sexual organs does, however. So futa is a completely different kind of fetish than any other in that regard. Nothing against it or those that like it, but it's fundamentally different because of our biology.
Anonymous11: @Froggy: You obviously didn't understand my analogy if what you got out of it was "Futa girls have dicks, so they're in fact walking dicks." The point of the analogy was "If they have a part of something X, then they must be X."
And you're still not getting that while a penis equals male (not man) in reality, it does not here and it does not for futanari in general. A chick who went to bed normal and woke up with a dick didn't magically change sex, she merely grew a dick.
If this animation were a vid of real life shemales or characters that happened to be shemales then you'd be right. They'd be sexually speaking, male. But this is precisely my point. They're not realistic, so having a dick doesn't mean anything beyond them simply having a dick.
A dick in fiction is just a dick, it doesn't mean anything else.
@Colson_14: You're making an arbitrary demarcation between sexual organs and other defining characteristics. There's no difference in saying "This has a dick. Males have dicks. Must be male," versus "This has bat wings. Must be bat." A key defining feature of the male sex in real life is a penis. A key defining feature of bats in real life are bat wings. It's the same thing, just different parts.
You're nitpicking. Succubi and futanari are both made up fantasy, they don't have to follow reality's rules here. A chick having a dick in this context doesn't make them male anymore than a succubus having wings makes her a bat.
Colson_14: Definitely wrong.. my point is that due to the nature of a human's biological reaction to seeing the penis, which in the case of someone who identifies as straight and male, like me, is nothing, and therefore gets nothing from seeing a futa girl, versus someone who biologically reacts or is stimulated in some way by seeing a penis, (those wou like futa), you're going to start to see where this unravels pretty quickly for ya... horns and wings and shit you could see at a halloween party, they are just flavor.. a big fleshy, real penis on a 'girl' changes that entirely whether you like it or not and will change our fundamental reaction to whatever we originally thought 'she' was. Nothing arbitrary, this is BIOLOGY<, and that is where your 'fantasy' argument falls through. It's the same way I identify and am stimulated by seeing a vagina on a 3d model, because if the model didn't have that part that I identify with realistically, it would not stimulate me in any way.
Anonymous12: @Froggy: I know it's wrong, because it's based on the line of thought you were applying to this animation that I was ridiculing.
@Colson_14: You're wrong from the get go by saying straight men don't biologically react to seeing dicks. You might not be into them, but that's scientifically false since seeing a big dick is one of the visual cues of impending sex. There's a reason people like big dicks in heterosexual porn and it's not just because the actresses might prefer it. Watch any blowjob scene and you'll find the dick is as much the focus as the actress.
And no, it doesn't change the analogy because people can exhibit sexual attraction to any part of the body, not just genitalia. In fact, the body usually has much more to do with attraction and stimulation than genitalia. That's why you, I imagine, prefer pussy on a woman and not on a cuntboy or watching a woman with big bouncy tits and not a man with the same.
Genitalia is not an end-all, be-all. It's one part of the body and yes in real life sex is determinate on which set someone has, but this isn't real life boyo. Repeat after me. This isn't real life, this isn't real life. It's fantasy.
Colson_14: I may not have been clear with what I meant. The only way straight men react to seeing a penis is in an indirect way.
By that, I mean a dick by itself will do nothing for a straight guy.
The only way it can do something for a straight guy is seeing it in some sexual relation to a girl, now moving further, there is a certain 'utility' to seeing a penis in porn, in my experience, it's to imagine it's my own.
That the guy is me, and the pretty girl is the one doing stuff to it/ it doing stuff to her, etc. And I would daresay that is how most straight guys watch straight porn, that is the mechanism.
I'm just saying, your wires are crossed if you are DIRECTLY stimulated by seeing a penis on an object of affection/sexualization. Now if you're imagining the dick is YOURS in this situation, then you are further on the spectrum than you could hope to realize. Somewhere in there, you aren't as straight as you think.
That's literally all I am saying. it may not be real but your stimulation to seeing it attached to something directly sexually arousing to you most definitely is.
Anonymous13: @Colson_14: No actually just the act of seeing a hardening cock, while not a conscious or overt attraction still signals the same visual cues since you associate that with imminent sex. It's the same reason straight women can get aroused just looking at another woman get aroused, because the subconscious association with that and sex makes that arousal possible.
While there are plenty of people who self-insert in porn, I don't think it's in overwhelming numbers or to a degree that anything that deviates breaks immersion.
You do also realize that futanari is most popular with straight men yes? If you actually think about it, it makes perfect sense. Most gay men in general are not attracted to women so attaching male genitalia to a woman makes the same amount of sense as attaching female genitalia to a man in regards to appealing to straight men.
Yes, the arousal of seeing it attached to women is real. What's your point? It may be an odd fetish to you, but how does that mean anyone who likes it has their "wires crossed," or is "on the spectrum?" Straight women are the biggest fans of cuntboys, but does that have any effect on their real sexuality or orientation? You're still equating a body part with what it comes from in real life. To go back to my earlier analogy, just because you like mermaids doesn't mean you want to fuck a fish. Having a real attraction to tentacle fucking doesn't mean you want to fuck squids.
I think this is the crux of the divide between people who can accept futanari and people who can't. One group sees body parts as just parts that take on the quality of whatever body they're attached to. "Those aren't bat wings, those are her wings; those aren't goat horns, those are her horns; that's not a man's dick, it's her's." The other group seems to think body parts have inherent qualities all their own and change anything they're attached to.
Both groups are right and both are wrong depending on the context. I'd say the former is wrong when it comes to real life as what kind of parts something has determines what it is while the latter is wrong when it comes to fiction since there's no realistic bounds that need to be adhered to.
That's why this argument between futanari detractors (or even just people who are trying to classify it as something others disagree with) and futanari fans never goes anywhere. They're arguing passed each other. One group sees the dick as a male only thing while the other finds that irrelevant when that dick is attached to a female person.
It makes sense in context. Suspension of disbelief and taste in fiction to begin with are all subjective, so it's not that surprising the root of this argument comes from different standards. I don't think anyone here is going to change anyone else's mind on this.
Futanari (ふたなり?, seldom: 二形, 双形, literally: dual form; 二成, 双成, literally: [to be of] two kinds), is the Japanese word for hermaphroditism, which is also used in a broader sense for androgyny.[1][2]
Beyond Japan the term is used to describe a commonly pornographic genre of eroge video games, comics and anime, which includes characters that show both primary sexual characteristics.[1] In today's language it refers almost exclusively to characters who have an overall feminine appearance. In that case the term is also often abbreviated as futa(s), which is occasionally also used as a generalized term for the works itself.[2]
Futanari, when first created, were - mostly - female characters with both female and male sexual organs. Hermaphrodite, so.
The ones we're talking about here don't have a vajayjay, just a dick and balls.
Froggy: Though, this one being hiden under her robe, we could give her the benefit of the doubt. But most if no all sfm porn including "futas" have them bearing plain dicks.
hardyasdfY: futa is hot, I wanna see a girl suck her own dick and get off on her own dick.... But her pussy has gotta be dere too. It's the allure of the pussy that makes it sexy, as well as the sexy female body. the male dick is just for turning her on, even if it's her own! heh.
And yes what anon 13 said I too agree with.
Also there is something else that a lot of straight guys have it's called Gynophila and its when a guy is attracted to the female form in general. (yes bi's can have it too and sometimes there are just gynos too) Gynophila is why people 'fall' for traps before they realize it's a dude.
(although most traps are drawn so thats cheating [draw girl, remove pussy put dick, cheater!] real traps hardly exist unless they are Asian mostly Thailand LOL)
I can "feel it" and understand it in multiple ways so most (internet-based) if any generalization is bullshit. You gotta have context to mean anything.
But do you know something I can tell you the truth even if it's a little generalizing.. It's all about fetish. 100% fetish there is no gender preference only fetish preference. ONLY. xDxD generalizing huh w/e haha
Anonymous14: I'm a pure straight guy but I love to fap to fantasy futa girls(only fantasy), I don't think it's gay because I still hate real faggots and shemales, they still make me feel very repulsive and disgusting and NOT arousing at all.
Btw, a girl with dick(and vagina) makes her a "hermaphrodite"(futanari), NOT man, in case anyone confuses.
Comments
Pah ! A woman with a dick is not a man ;)
If a woman have male reproductive organs, she's a male.
Have vagina? Woman
Simple as that.
It's hilarious how often people's sense of imagination dies a horrible death as soon as there's a dick in the equation.
There's the thing : Your sex is defined by your sexual organs. Your gender, well, it seems nowadays that it can be defined by whatever the fuck you want. You can be a starship imperial destroyer demisexual dragonkin reincarnated Dalaï-Lama pan-sexual special snowflake, and you expect people to take you seriously.
But if you have male sexual organs, then your biological sex is male. There's no imagination in the equation, you have nothing to say to change that, you can't label you as something else. It's biology.
What if a male had an operation to grow a pair of tits. Would he become a female ? No, he'd be a male with tits. What if he had an operation to replace his dick with a Vagina ? Then he'd go from male to transexual-man / female, even though he'd not have the possibility to bear children.
Male and Female have tits. Male tits are smaller, don't contain the fat that female tits does, and even though they can sometime secrete some kind of substance, are not made to breast-feed children or secrete milk. Tits don't define one's sex, they're just a nice thing to wblblblblbl your face into while coiting.
Got a penis, then your sexual organs are of a male, and thus your sex is male. Got a vagina, then your sexual organs are of a female, and thus your sex is female.
It's simple, no ? And yet you come with your ridiculous example, making a fool out of yourself trying to be all "Ah-ha, those poor anti-futa are so stupid, let me enlighten them with my wisdom and my complete off-topic mumbo-jumbo.". I mean, you can like futa eh, i'm not telling you "Stop liking what i don't like !", but if you want to defend it, at least make sense.
- Reply
You went off on this hilariously off-topic tangent about a bunch of shit I didn't even argue for or even endorse (and I wouldn't either because I find the concept of otherkin and transtrenders fucking stupid too).
Futanari is not transgenderism. They're related, but they're not the same thing. You're trying to apply reality's rules to something that was never intended to be realistic to begin with.
As for my off-topic tangent : I was trying to explain to you the difference between your poorly constructed example and the reality of biology.
Something have a penis : unless it's part of another kind of reproductive system like a fungus or some shit, it's male.
Not a man. Male.
That's all i'm saying. Something have a MALE wee-wee, then it's a MALE poochy-poo.
Dick => Male.
I'm not saying "Dragon would no fly because of gravity" or trying to reduce your fantastic kingdom of imagination pornography, just saying that something with male sex organs is male.
I'm not saying that you can't enjoy your image of a gnoll getting gangraped by tentale monsters with 78 eyes and Barrack Obama where their mouth should be. Just that if that tentacle monster have a dick, it's male.
But seems you don't want to understand what i'm saying, and think that if you decide it, it wont be as such.
An y'know why i'm writing thesis on this porn pic about those guys genders ? Because i was just answering to : "Pah ! A woman with a dick is not a man ;)".
And then, you came talking about magic poney-men.
It's true, what you way about the chromosomal arrangement of one giving one's "genetic I.D. card" for a lot of things, but it is also true that the number of people being born with "scrambled" chromosomes, or with a penis while being "chromosomicly female", is rare enough to not be considered a norm.
"The exception that confirm the rule".
But you made your point.
I mentioned succubi and mermaids, because you can take the same argument you're making (dick = male) and use it for them. "That's not a succubus, it's got bat wings which means it's a bat. That's not a mermaid, it's got a fish tail which means it's a fish."
You're making that argument here in regards to the dick. Why you're incapable of seeing that futanari do not follow realistic rules and so don't adhere to the reality of male and female genitalia is perplexing. This is a pornographic fetish that has women growing dicks for all sorts of outlandish reasons ranging from vindictive genies to magical fruit and mad scientists.
I'm not contending that something with male sex organs in real life is sexually male. I know this. I'm not arguing this. I'm arguing that that is completely and utterly irrelevant when it comes to pornographic art in the same way mermaids and succubi not actually existing has no relevance on myths and stories with them.
Futanari makes no pretensions to be anything other than fantasy, so coming at it with a reality based argument is not going to work and anyone who tries is either going to look like a nitpicker with a grudge or someone who hates the fetish and wants to categorize it as something it's not to piss off people who do.
Looking at this pornographic animation of two versions of the same fictional woman from a video game that contains a story where she constantly fucks with time, space and various multiverses to the backdrop of a flying city and coming away with "has dick; must be male," is exactly the same thing as watching a bunch of wizards and dragons duke it out and then bitching about how unrealistic the dragon's breath was. It's nitpicking from someone who found something they didn't like. That's really it.
I think we were having two completely different arguments here, because I'm not arguing what is reality or not. I'm arguing the merits of using reality to judge something that says right on the box that it's not trying to be at all.
Your example would work if i, myself, was saying "Futas girls have dicks, so they're in fact walking dicks.", as you're in your example reducing those creatures to one of their attribute.
I'm not saying that. I'm just responding to a guy saying that they are not male for having dicks by saying that yes, they are.
I'm not hating on futa pics, i'm not bashing the sand-castle that is your futa fetish with my big bully feet, i'm just stating a thing.
The rules in a fantasy universes are not non-existant, they're different. There the "my clitoris is now a dick" version of the futa girls, the "i have balls and a dick instead of a vagina" version of a futa girl, etc etc. All of them have a reason to be so, i get that.
And you're still not getting that while a penis equals male (not man) in reality, it does not here and it does not for futanari in general. A chick who went to bed normal and woke up with a dick didn't magically change sex, she merely grew a dick.
If this animation were a vid of real life shemales or characters that happened to be shemales then you'd be right. They'd be sexually speaking, male. But this is precisely my point. They're not realistic, so having a dick doesn't mean anything beyond them simply having a dick.
A dick in fiction is just a dick, it doesn't mean anything else.
@Colson_14: You're making an arbitrary demarcation between sexual organs and other defining characteristics. There's no difference in saying "This has a dick. Males have dicks. Must be male," versus "This has bat wings. Must be bat." A key defining feature of the male sex in real life is a penis. A key defining feature of bats in real life are bat wings. It's the same thing, just different parts.
You're nitpicking. Succubi and futanari are both made up fantasy, they don't have to follow reality's rules here. A chick having a dick in this context doesn't make them male anymore than a succubus having wings makes her a bat.
@Colson_14: You're wrong from the get go by saying straight men don't biologically react to seeing dicks. You might not be into them, but that's scientifically false since seeing a big dick is one of the visual cues of impending sex. There's a reason people like big dicks in heterosexual porn and it's not just because the actresses might prefer it. Watch any blowjob scene and you'll find the dick is as much the focus as the actress.
And no, it doesn't change the analogy because people can exhibit sexual attraction to any part of the body, not just genitalia. In fact, the body usually has much more to do with attraction and stimulation than genitalia. That's why you, I imagine, prefer pussy on a woman and not on a cuntboy or watching a woman with big bouncy tits and not a man with the same.
Genitalia is not an end-all, be-all. It's one part of the body and yes in real life sex is determinate on which set someone has, but this isn't real life boyo. Repeat after me. This isn't real life, this isn't real life. It's fantasy.
By that, I mean a dick by itself will do nothing for a straight guy.
The only way it can do something for a straight guy is seeing it in some sexual relation to a girl, now moving further, there is a certain 'utility' to seeing a penis in porn, in my experience, it's to imagine it's my own.
That the guy is me, and the pretty girl is the one doing stuff to it/ it doing stuff to her, etc. And I would daresay that is how most straight guys watch straight porn, that is the mechanism.
I'm just saying, your wires are crossed if you are DIRECTLY stimulated by seeing a penis on an object of affection/sexualization. Now if you're imagining the dick is YOURS in this situation, then you are further on the spectrum than you could hope to realize. Somewhere in there, you aren't as straight as you think.
That's literally all I am saying. it may not be real but your stimulation to seeing it attached to something directly sexually arousing to you most definitely is.
While there are plenty of people who self-insert in porn, I don't think it's in overwhelming numbers or to a degree that anything that deviates breaks immersion.
You do also realize that futanari is most popular with straight men yes? If you actually think about it, it makes perfect sense. Most gay men in general are not attracted to women so attaching male genitalia to a woman makes the same amount of sense as attaching female genitalia to a man in regards to appealing to straight men.
Yes, the arousal of seeing it attached to women is real. What's your point? It may be an odd fetish to you, but how does that mean anyone who likes it has their "wires crossed," or is "on the spectrum?" Straight women are the biggest fans of cuntboys, but does that have any effect on their real sexuality or orientation? You're still equating a body part with what it comes from in real life. To go back to my earlier analogy, just because you like mermaids doesn't mean you want to fuck a fish. Having a real attraction to tentacle fucking doesn't mean you want to fuck squids.
I think this is the crux of the divide between people who can accept futanari and people who can't. One group sees body parts as just parts that take on the quality of whatever body they're attached to. "Those aren't bat wings, those are her wings; those aren't goat horns, those are her horns; that's not a man's dick, it's her's." The other group seems to think body parts have inherent qualities all their own and change anything they're attached to.
Both groups are right and both are wrong depending on the context. I'd say the former is wrong when it comes to real life as what kind of parts something has determines what it is while the latter is wrong when it comes to fiction since there's no realistic bounds that need to be adhered to.
That's why this argument between futanari detractors (or even just people who are trying to classify it as something others disagree with) and futanari fans never goes anywhere. They're arguing passed each other. One group sees the dick as a male only thing while the other finds that irrelevant when that dick is attached to a female person.
It makes sense in context. Suspension of disbelief and taste in fiction to begin with are all subjective, so it's not that surprising the root of this argument comes from different standards. I don't think anyone here is going to change anyone else's mind on this.
Futanari (ふたなり?, seldom: 二形, 双形, literally: dual form; 二成, 双成, literally: [to be of] two kinds), is the Japanese word for hermaphroditism, which is also used in a broader sense for androgyny.[1][2]
Beyond Japan the term is used to describe a commonly pornographic genre of eroge video games, comics and anime, which includes characters that show both primary sexual characteristics.[1] In today's language it refers almost exclusively to characters who have an overall feminine appearance. In that case the term is also often abbreviated as futa(s), which is occasionally also used as a generalized term for the works itself.[2]
Futanari, when first created, were - mostly - female characters with both female and male sexual organs. Hermaphrodite, so.
The ones we're talking about here don't have a vajayjay, just a dick and balls.
And yes what anon 13 said I too agree with.
Also there is something else that a lot of straight guys have it's called Gynophila and its when a guy is attracted to the female form in general. (yes bi's can have it too and sometimes there are just gynos too) Gynophila is why people 'fall' for traps before they realize it's a dude.
(although most traps are drawn so thats cheating [draw girl, remove pussy put dick, cheater!] real traps hardly exist unless they are Asian mostly Thailand LOL)
I can "feel it" and understand it in multiple ways so most (internet-based) if any generalization is bullshit. You gotta have context to mean anything.
But do you know something I can tell you the truth even if it's a little generalizing.. It's all about fetish. 100% fetish there is no gender preference only fetish preference. ONLY. xDxD generalizing huh w/e haha
Btw, a girl with dick(and vagina) makes her a "hermaphrodite"(futanari), NOT man, in case anyone confuses.