Question for the heterosexual men of AF

[FFaith]

Its the whole "don't think about pink elephants" thing. You can't just tell someone to not think about something. I mean, duh. It's in the brain or it's not. I don't have any control over that baseline of bubbling constant thoughts, and neither does anyone else.

Yes but not liking pink elephants or penises are equally irrelevant to not being attracted to someone without a penis.

You may THINK that not being attracted to one of those could mean a person with a penis is no longer attractive to you, you may think that 'they used to have a penis' means they are no longer attractive, but your brain isn't actually referencing the person you mistakenly claim to be unattracted to, your brain is referencing something else you're unattracted to that no longer applies to them. And the disonnect and the motives behind it is what I find suspicious. Why is "used to have a penis" considered relevant?

Like I said, imagine in the far future where the operation was so perfect it instead became an atom for atom swap, the DNA got swapped, the chromosones got swapped and the biologicallly male body changing to a woman's transition was so perfect the woman was physically identical to a woman born a woman, atom for atom, chromosone for chromosone, 100% convincing and able to have kids.

You find them super hot, fall in love with the, fuck their brains out, consider their personality attractive. Their vagina feels real because it's physically identical to a woman who had never been needed to transform like that, and you get them pregnant. You then discover they had the atom for atom swap and are like "YUCK! They were different before!"

I fail to see how such a reaction is motivated by anything other than phobia and bigotry..... you ARE still attracted but you think you're not, so why are you self-deceived? What motivates that self-deception?

And I fail to see how if an imperfect operation in today's world is convincing enough that you wouldn't know the difference until you're told the difference... I fail to see how it's any different to the other scenario I described in any way that's relevant to my argument.

But if plenty of people who are your intellectual superior hasn't caught on to the logical specifics of what I'm driving at, then I very much doubt that you'll get where I'm coming from when you are a dude who doesn't even grasp the usefulness of basic logical fallacy spotting lol.

For me it's not about the fact that they used to have a dick. It's that they still have one in a way, but only it's reversed inside out. If I was attracted to their vag at first, and later find out it's not what I thought, it was merely a mirage all along. I didn't know what I was looking at before. I'm hetero, but if I was offered a million dollars to either suck a dick or eat out an artificially created vag, I'd probably choose to suck the dick instead. The idea of a dick getting chopped up and reversed is really that gross to me, and I can't help how I feel about that. In your future scenario where a perfect vag could be created, I could accept that, because I don't care about what genitalia they used to have. That's not it. I care about what they have now.

I'm not pretending either. You sound like a fundy theist who can't get past their narrow, simple minded view of the world, who claims that atheists really believe in God deep down, but are just pretending not to because they're mad at God. Most people are not pretending when they say that they find the idea unappealing. I just think you don't understanding the complexities of human sexuality very well. You are taking your own view on sexuality and applying it to everyone else, but not everyone is the same as you.