Talk:cotton ceiling

"social"?
The barrier in question is not 'social' all. It relates to one's sexual orientation (i.e. heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual). E.g.: the reason why a lesbian doesn't want to engage in sexual play with a trans woman has nothing to do with some 'social' norm, she's just not attracted to male bodies. Any suggestions for rephrasing? 2A02:1812:169E:3D00:C073:790A:B27A:6EA8 12:43, 13 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Attraction is social. It's not because (say) the physical genitalia are a barrier. Equinox ◑ 14:01, 13 July 2022 (UTC)


 * I imagine that "barrier" was chosen for consistency with and its derivatives (e.g. ). The term "cotton ceiling" as it was originally conceived refers to trans people being viewed as less attractive on a cultural level due to otherization and negative stereotypes. Compare to how cultural attitudes can shape the perceived desirability of racial minorities, disabled people, or fat people. This term wasn't originally used to refer to an individual orientation or preference that does not encompass trans people. It's taken on that meaning in GC circles, but that would be a separate sense, and would need to be independently attested. WordyAndNerdy (talk) 02:12, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
 * 'The term "cotton ceiling" as it was originally conceived refers to trans people being viewed as less attractive on a cultural level due to otherization and negative stereotypes. Compare to how cultural attitudes can shape the perceived desirability of racial minorities, disabled people, or fat people.' 
 * > I suppose my objection still stands. You only replaced 'social' by 'cultural' and you give examples of sexual preferences. But 'cotton ceiling' refers to the reluctance to engage in sex because of incompatible sexual orientation - it refers to sex (biology), not gender (psychology/social norms/metafysica). (Even if some gender ideologists want us to believe there's no difference between preference and orientation)
 * Any suggestions for rephrasing? 2A02:1812:169E:3D00:F14F:F5E9:FB4C:9AF6 11:50, 15 July 2022 (UTC)


 * It's possible for a person to change their sexual orientation in their lifetime. So this seems to be a social-cultural thing, not pure biology. Equinox ◑ 11:56, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * No it isn't. 2A02:1812:169E:3D00:F14F:F5E9:FB4C:9AF6 12:07, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * We could omit the word 'social'? 2A02:1812:169E:3D00:F14F:F5E9:FB4C:9AF6 12:13, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It is per definition, since it is just an orientation, i.e. a hobby. If I don’t play golf you don’t call me a golf-player, likewise if I don’t seek to burgle bums I am not a homosexual. Sexuality is a choice—it is based on inclinations of the flesh, but so is eating, and obesity is also a choice, and if you have chosen to eat different and have had success to lose and keep your condition the inclinations will have changed due to new conditioning and ensuing composition of your body and intellect. This is to say that all sides have something true. Even if you are strictly biologist note epigenetic factors. All the relevant factors are manipulated by society and an individual’s desire and decision to blend into it in a certain way; the question is whether you are more led by desire or by decision. Fay Freak (talk) 12:23, 15 July 2022 (UTC)


 * No change is needed. Equinox ◑ 13:52, 15 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Imagine comparing sexual orientation to playing golf. This is why radical trans activists are so utterly despised by the normies - your ideology is insane rape culture pushing bullshit. You have caused catastrophic harm to trans rights across the board. Fucking shame on you.--2A00:23C4:3E08:4001:CD2E:1BFC:1FBC:B1A8 22:02, 6 December 2022 (UTC)