Wade wrote:
>>It depends on what you seek out as 'female'.
>
>Ah. And what you seek out as 'male'. I said 'woman' and 'man' and I think
>that is more to the mark. It depends on what you seek out as 'male'. And
>androgynes do no seeking. Nothing to seek....
What?! I don't think I spelled it out clearly enough when I gave you the definition of "androgyne". At least, you must be using your own definition, and not mine. You're wrong when you say androgynes have nothing to seek.
>Different cultures have different versions of what to seek, but, so far,
>no androgyne culture (and IMHO there won't be) has shown up and continued
>past the fad stage.
>
>Because, how could it?
Arrrrrgggh. You make me want to beat my head in with some stale knockwurst, Wade. Why do you keep pinning all these observations and conclusions of what 'androgynes' are onto me, when they obviously are *not* true for who I am (a self-confessed one)? Again, you are confusing "androgyne" with "androgynous". Personally, I don't think androgynes have to look sexually ambiguous.
~kjs (who is used to being hit on by dirty old men)