[CandyKing]

I'm not, I quoted dictionaries, and looked up several sources just to make sure before I stated it, plus in rl I have just not heard the word bandied out just for non-attraction. The Warlock is just being hilariously offensive at anyone who doesn't 100% agree with his opinion, like they can't wrap their heads around someone NOT being attracted to a TG because they are a TG. like somehow they have some kind of obligation to be physically attracted to them, and are unable to distinguish between being able to acknowledge someone as hot as opposed to wanting to have a relationship, blaming anyone who thinks someone is hot but yet is not attracted is a homophobe. Dickish to the max.

Personal preference dictates alot of things, some things we just are not attracted to, that's why most people don't frequent every board on this forum, I agree with Warlock and Rachel for the most part other than their hilariously inept attempts to shove it in peoples face that "YOUR WRONG AND YOUR BAD".

If you want an idea of how ridiculous this is, replace TG with something else. Not physically attracted to dogs, keychains, etc. Most things you would find ridiculous if you substituted them, and thus it is not a very compelling argument, because there are alot of things you are FINE with substituting in, and they all make "sense". This isn't even anti-TG, this is just anti-emotional hate spewing. Just read Warlocks last response.