Profile: Spooky

You can call me… Spooky

I identify as… A gothic Homoflexible lesbian. Crossdresser or femme. A lipstick dyke. A PRINCE

As far as third-person pronouns go, … Her or him depending on what I am dressed as.

I’m attracted to… Women for relationships. Sex based on what I feel like. I love femmes that I can protect and take care of. Men that I can use as the male population used me. Only one man I actually care about. Women.. I am your Prince

When people talk about me, I want them to… Understand what they say when they say it. Not to be judgmental and think they know me if they don’t. Not to make assumptions about me and yes their opinions can affect me.

I want people to understand… I am autistic. I like girls. I am me, I am myself. I will be who I want to be. I am a nice person but can be offended. People make mistakes. You get three with me.

About Spooky
Hi, you can call me Spooky. I am pleased to meet you. Um.. I hate these ‘about me’ parts. You got my interests there. I am not only loving, I am intellectual, flirty, romantic and dominant. With girls I prefer to wear the pants. I am not really looking for a full relationship right now. What I need is friends who understand and who I can be close with. I am what I would like to call a ‘lipstick dyke.’ I like to be boyish but not overly rugged and perverse. A gentleman and a lady all in one. I have my girlie times and then my dykish times and finally when the full ‘man-sona’ comes out. Higher Functioning Autistic. I hope you can understand and help me to understand you. My weakness? Blonds, smaller girls.

» Define yourself. «

Posted by on May 4th, 2011 at 08:00 am

Category: profiles 18 comments »

18 Responses to “Profile: Spooky”

  1. Bellatrix

    You sound the best parts of people all wrappednin one. Thank you for being!


  2. Anonymous

    “Men that I can use as the male population used me.”

    Because every member of a perceived population are equivalent, right?

    Without even going into the “two wrongs” argument, it can be said that there’s a word for people who think like that: “Bigot.”


  3. Meee

    I’m going to have to agree with anonymous there.
    That comment about using men did make me sad.


  4. shaedofblue

    Yeah… Unconscious binarism I can live with. I have to. Conscious misandry? Not cool.

    I’d like to note that there is a difference between being wary of a privileged population (totally okay) and using that population’s privilege as an excuse to be abusive towards people (totally un-okay).


    Tommy replied:

    I’ve never used anyone like that, and I would not like to be used (unless BDSM is involved).


    Chuck replied:

    Wellll….I feel I must point out that a great many males and quite a few females (and otherwise-gendered persons) would not mind at all being used for sex! I know many (most?) of my straight male friends chuckle lecherously with delight at that notion, lol…really though, it all depends on disclosure. If someone were to make it clear to me that they were only interested in “using” me, for no-strings-attached one-night-stand sex, I then have the choice to accept or decline that arrangement. Personally, if I’m attracted to the person, I will quite happily accept (assuming I am single at the time). It’s only when deception comes into play- which is not mentioned by the original poster, so there’s not really a reason to assume that it’s being utilized- that there are problems and a negative connotation to this. By that I mean, if a person leads another person on by pretending they are interested in a longer-termed or more serious relationship, but really only inteads to “use” the person for sex. That can lead to hurt feelings and heartbreak and is definitely not cool.
    Now, of course if you’re talking about BDSM (yay!!!) then “using” someone can have a whole other meaning, he he, but again- as long as there is disclosure and it’s consensual, it basically amounts to the same thing in my mind.


    Anonymous replied:

    The poster implies very strongly that they have no regard whatsoever for the “male population” (save for one nameless individual), that they feel personally “used” by men as a whole and that they enjoy the prospect of exacting the same treatment back. I personally feel this sounds more like misguided revenge than a mere sexual policy, and that there is adequate reason to draw such a conclusion based on the information we have been given.

    At the same time they proclaim a unilateral love for girls. There isn’t anything remotely wrong with this in a romantic/sexual context, but to hold absolute indifference towards an entire social category whilst simultaneously upholding another separate one really is sheer, dehumanizing bigotry.

    Unless of course those of us who assumed this really are mistaken and the original poster would like to clarify their position more adequately for us.

    Chuck replied:

    I guess my point is that, to some extent, when it comes to sex, the motivation behind the “using” is irrelevant. If the end result is something pleasant for both parties, and there is full disclosure as to the nature of the arrangment, it is still “win-win”.

    Being used for sex is different than being used for money, or free rides, or medical experimentation (unless that’s your kink!) in that it’s actually giving you a benefit instead of taking one away. If I want no-strings attached sex, and you want no-strings attached sex, so we have amazing, hot, mind-blowing no-strings attached sex together for one night….does it really matter to either of us why the other person wanted to have no-strings attached sex? If we’re not going to sit around discussing our motivations for it as friends over coffee afterwards, how will either of us even know what the other’s motivation was and why would we care, really? Can a person really be said to be being used for sex if they also are using the other person just for sex as well? Or I supposed it could be termed as mutually using each other- but where’s the real harm in that if it’s consensual?

    Again, disclosure of the nature of the arrangment is key, in my mind. Many people would not mind a bit being “used for sex”, as they also desire a similar outcome towards the other party. In fact, it can be a huge relief to find out the other person is on the same page as you as to the level of casualness. Also, full disclosure provides the opportunity to “opt out” of this arrangement. Therefore, those individuals who desire only a deeper connection, a more meaningful encounter, or only wish to engage in sex with someone who with a similar desire for a long term relationship can say “no thanks!” to the offer to be “used for sex”.

    I do “get” where some commenters are coming from, I guess, in that the original poster just sort of came right out and said this in a very blunt, almost offensive, way. I will say that in my experience with autistic people (my best friend whom I live with is one), they are frequently very blunt and sometimes unintentionally offend others because they dont take the time to hide what they are saying under a ton of verbal floweriness.

    The original poster is of course welcomed to clarify- perhaps it is I who is mistaken and she is out their seducing men into falling in love with her using deception and then smashing their hearts and laughing in their crying faces after they propose marriage, all willy-nilly like, but I really see no reason to assume that.

    My point is that if all parties to a sexual encounter are up-front about their casual intentions towards its meaning, then really the deep-seated motivations behind those intentions are irrelevant to their fellow casual sex partners who have no intention of exploring what those motivations are or why they have them. Is it better, in a perfect world, if everyone only ever wants to have no-strings attached sex with another out of a manifestation of their universal respect and love for all persons? Sure. Will most people who are just out looking to get laid care if that’s why the other person just wants to get laid? Nope.

    Jessica replied:

    Quote from John Brunner’s Shockwave Rider: Beyond and doubt or argument, evil in the modern world is the treating of a human being as a thing.

    Games, including sex games? Sure, no problem. But the value and worth of another human being should never be reduced to that of an article of utility — this is unhealthy for both parties thereto. It is a destroying sickness. It may be seen to have been the proximate cause of our failure, as a species, to survive.

    shaedofblue replied:

    It is heavily implied by the language used (“Men that I can use as the male population used me.”) that the person is not talking about mutually desired no-strings-attached sex and is speaking in a negative manner.

    Chuck replied:

    Whereas my point is that her negative manner is basically irrelevant if the end result is mutually desired no-strings-attached sex. If the end result is something else- where she is out there “conning” people into doing something and then harming them in some way, then shame on her, of course- but why assume that?

    If I enter knowingly into a sexual arrangement with another person (or persons) with all parties involved having agreed that it is to be just for meaningless one-time-only recreational sex, then really- their deep-seated motivations for doing so are none of my business- just as mine are none of theirs, if none of us intend to stick around long enough to even find out much about what those motivations are. If this was a different type of scenario- say for example an on-going “friends with benefits” situation, then that would be a different story, as the participants would be agreeing to take the time to get to know each other on some level and therefore motives would come into play.

    Put another way- a vast majority of the straight male population, if advised that an attracted “homoflexible” lesbian wanted to use them for sex, would wonder if it was Christmas, or their birthday, or maybe they’d won some type of raffle…and if you told them that it was because she didnt have a high regard for men in general and therefore when it was over was going to ask them to get up and leave and not call them the next day, lots of them would be like “whoo-hoo! that means I dont have to call her either! today must be my lucky day!” They probably wouldnt give a crap that it was because she didnt truly respect them in the deepest regions of her heart, or whatever. So if they’re thrilled for this to happen, and it gets her off too, then who’s really being used? Or at least, if they are being used, it’s in a way that is mutually advantageous and consensual.

    As long as she is not lying about her intentions, so as to deceive the minority of males who would be hurt by her behaviour- which would be very wrong of her to do- then I just dont see the problem with it.

    Anonymous replied:

    I’m wondering what the statistic for your “vast majority of the straight male population” stereotype really is. As a person with male sex organs who likes people with female sex organs, I’m quite sternly offended by your reduction of straight males to the starved, sex-mad chariacture the media frequently propagates.

    Your assumption is that only a “minority” of straight males would suffer from knowingly being used sexually as objects of revenge. The original poster never actually states that their exploitation is of a sexual manner, however I have to say that I don’t know anyone who would feel happy knowing they were being used for any act of hatred against a social group to which they happen to be designated.

    Chuck replied:

    I will freely admit that I am not going based on any actual statistic- only personal observation. Based on all of the straight males I’ve personally known well enough to speak about this sort of thing with, I would guesstimate it at approximately 85%. I will say, I would not be surprised in any way if the actual figure of straight men in general (not just the ones I know, lol) were as low as 60% or as high as 90%. I will also state that I was basing this on straight cis-gendered males, as that seemed to me to be what the OP was refering to…I would readily agree that trans males or male-bodied genderqueers would probably be very different as to how many felt which way about this issue. It’s been my observation that having to self-examine to the extent that most people who are trans or genderqueer do causes us to frequently feel differently about things than average straght vanilla cis people do. However, even if the group of straight cis-gendered males who wouldnt be bothered by meaningless “use each other for sex” sex were only a teeny tiny minority- one in a million, even, as long as someone is being honest about their intentions, all of the others who are not interested still have the same opportunity to decline said offer.

    Anon, I never meant to offend you or anyone else here by my responses to this post. Actually, I just felt bad -and I’ve noticed this happening with several of these profiles that people post- that it seems people are very quick to interpret what the person says in the most negative way possible and then jump on them for it. I can only imagine that trying to sum yourself up in a profile, explaining all the nuances of your gender situation and your feelings about who you are and who you are attracted to, is an very exposing process. It must feel pretty bad to do that on a blog for and by other genderqueers, only to be attacked in unison by them. I guess I just felt like jumping in to play “devil’s advocate” and just state how I had interpreted what she’d said and my point of view on the matter. I certainly dont know her and who knows, she could have meant any number of things by what she posted, and unless she jumps in to clarify, I guess we’ll never know.

    Personally, I can only state that for myself (a female-bodied genderqueer who is attracted to females, males, and other genderqueers), I dont have a problem with being “used for sex” IF the person is up front about it. In the lesbian community, which I typically get included in as a sort of honorary member- assumably because I have a female body with a “butch” presentation and mostly date women- and associate greatly with, the vast majority of lesbians that I know have a huge problem with bi-curious straight females interacting sexually with the lesbian community. I am in the minority as having the opinion that as long as they tell me they’re just looking for a one-time “experiment”, I’m totally fine with it. Everyone gets what they want. It’s when deceipt is used and people get strung along that heartbreak results…and that is definitely not cool at all. But when a bi-curious girl is looking to try sex with another woman, all my majority of lesbian friends have the opportunity to decline her offer, just as I do to accept it.

    shaedofblue replied:

    You are not considering the extent to which the “player” stereotype is one that straight, cis men are expected to emulate. Of course a lot of guys are going to say they’d be fine with being used. That is what social scripts tell them to say, just like trans people are always supposed to say they knew who they were since birth and always preferred toys and activities atypical for their assigned gender.

    And you are wrong that motives do not matter. Some of us do not want bigotry taking root in our community, no matter how it is expressed. That is the main thing being called out here.

    Stuart replied:

    @Chuck: you said, “I feel I must point out that a great many males and quite a few females… would not mind at all being used for sex! I know many (most?) of my straight male friends chuckle lecherously with delight at that notion, lol”…This comment is just offensive. What’s more painful to me than being harassed or abused are the prevailing social attitudes that the harassment/abuse is something I should welcome because “other people would like it”, or “it’s a compliment!” C’mon.

    Chuck replied:

    @Stuart – I apologize for the misunderstanding…no, I never meant to imply that you should welcome anything you dont like because other people like it or for any other reason. My entire point is that if disclosure is given up front, then the person has the CHOICE whether to welcome the offer or not. If this is something you would not like, then by all means it would be very bad for you to accept such an offer for any reason. However, just because you would not like this offer, doesnt mean that someone else who would should be prevented from accepting it.

    I also did not mean to offend with my comment about how some of my straight male friends have reacted to this type of discussion, but that was their reaction. I certainly never meant to imply that you or anyone else should try to emulate their reaction. I would be saddened by the thought of anyone trying to emulate someone else’s reaction to something when it is not according to their own nature. Just in this way, I will not pretend that I’d mind being “used for sex” IF the person was up front about it, just because other people seem to find the idea of the word “used” to be unpleasant. In my mind, the word “used”, like most words, depends entirely on the context.

  5. Clare

    Splendid drama and imagination!


  6. Jessica

    That’s a question I always had: autistic people, especially those who are face blind, do they have difficulty ascertaining a person’s gender identification from their presentation?


Leave a Reply

Can I show your picture? If you have a Gravatar associated with this email address, it will be displayed as your photo. If not, I'll just put a picture of a fork next to your comment. Everybody likes forks.

Be nice. Judgmental comments will be quietly deleted and blacklisted. There's plenty of room for those elsewhere on the web.

For legal reasons, you must be age 13 or older to post a comment on Genderfork.

You can use some HTML tags for formatting, e.g. <em>...</em> for emphasis (italics) or <strong>...</strong> for strong emphasis (bold) or <a href="http://(url)">...</a> for links.

Back to top