if not based on wealth then based on location , natural abilities , skills , etc ? You misunderstand the meaning of class . Wealth is irrelevant to the Marxist understanding of class , not to mention location or skills wealth is about your relationship to the means of production . <| sep |> Andy should have retired just like Megatron did <| sep |> What are you gonna send the screen caps to your girlfriend from Canada who you swear exists yet only have pictures that also mysteriously appear on softcore porn sites ? <| sep |> She probably has a team of Gumshoos <| sep |> Well I think you can define your sexually however you want to ! That ' s the point . You define the label , to an extent . At least imo . And no I ' m not into guys , it ' s the penis I just can ' t get past . I ' ve tried inCREDIBLY hard lol . But I do find them attractive and safe in a way , and I ' m attracted to femininity yes . But I don ' t think I could date a man , which is why I ' d keep identifying as lesbian . Even though I can find a few men attractive , it ' s not the same or enough . But I think , outside of what you feel defines you best , think of what you want that to day to others . When you identify as lesbian to mean femininity instead of exclusively dating women , it might be confusing for everyone if you date a man . You can define it how you want , it ' s just what these terms have been used for forever . Because to me , being a guy is a deal breaker . If I ' m consistently into introverts , I don ' t think being an extrovert would necessarily be a deal breaker . So that ' s what I keep in mind when defining it , it ' s more for everyone ' s benefit than my own to make things easier . Not everyone needs to know right away exactly what I ' m into , and I ' m much more likely to date a girl who isn ' t my type than a guy who is aside from being a guy .