7. we're "consciously uncoupling"*

[lesbotronic]

Just like Gwyneth Paltrow!*  Because we're exactly Gwyneth Paltrow!  

(We're absolutely not.)

. . .

At this point, we are referring to lesbotronic's coupling with absolutely anyone with the postmodern pornographic personality (PPPs) and/or category FOUR.  

We don't think this indicates social sea change for lesbians (as some "progressive activists" now suggest), but a bifurcation.  

We'd like to reduce the signal to noise ratio so all lesbians that might sign up can meet who they'd like without everyone getting upset and feeling disturbed.

Which really means we can only serve non-PPPs.

"But that's unkind!"

"Even though it's really awkward for everyone, how dare you not be inclusive and diverse enough to include them anyway?"

When we've previously admitted PPPs (before screening for that), they tended to generate numerous complaints, first complaining themselves there's no porn . . . 

. . . then next, complaints from other members, to whom they'd messaged mostly mishmashes of what sounded like dialogue in some random porn too?  

Because no one they've ever messaged actually wanted to audition for that?

. . . 

 

Here's some advice for you:  Our experiences, especially lately, suggest women will probably have to optimize for attracting women over men, IF that's truly who they want for their next partners (for whatever).

Not saying it should be anyone's goal to attract women over men.  Nope!

But many women have arrived to lesbotronic seemingly defining themselves like, fairytale creatures of infinite sexual possibility?

Like their appeal is almost universal and all "fetishes" or relationship styles of almost any conceivable kind are equally considered as well?

It's not just sex positivity, it's . . . aggressively past that, somehow.

Some thing where as a woman, everything that could conceivably be appealing to you, already should be.

Not just equally acceptable for others in their lives, no discrimination there or anywhere else she's not involved, obviously . . . 
. . . but equally appealing to her, for herself in her own life, TOO?

That's lovely on some level, and we've never been here to tell anyone how to define herself.

Except if what's wanted are more relationships with women IRL, your achievable material reality may not respond as well.

 
. . . 

 

And here's a little more advice:  This'll seem obvious to some, a rude overreach to others . . . but many remember this same sort of thing discussed on the forum previously, here's one example.  In today's "queer community" if you identify yourself some kinda sexy, aggressively open-minded, ready-for-anything-with-anyone kinda way that almost always attracts male attention and validation?

It's super likely you'll actually succeed!

Then you'll probably find it more difficult to attract any lesbian would who now have to elbow her way through the men who've formed an enthusiastic circle around you.

We've seen some come out as their own personal sexual brands with their own flag corp majestically signaling postmodern virtues and twirling orientations while the rockets' red glare illuminates their multiple genders through the dawn's early light of all their fetishes.

They're like neon kaleidoscopes of extreme stimulation.

If who you'd like to mesmerize are paraphiliac males, you better keep that flag corp fed . . .

. . . but women occasionally find the flag corp offputting.

She might be in the mood for something less baroque?

Or she may prefer you getting more into HER instead.